SRI THILA SILKS,TRICHY vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, TRICHY

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

demonetization period. Subsequently, the PCIT issued show-cause notice for revising the assessment u/s.263 of the Act dated 10.03.2022 stating that (i) the assessee has paid rent of shop and godown amounting to Rs.25,43,400/- but not deducted TDS

KOTHANDAN RAVI ,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, NON CORPORATE CIRCLE-7(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1534/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Kothandan Ravi, Deputy Commissioner Of 199, Nehru Bazaar, Avadi, V. Income-Tax, Chennai – 600 054. Non-Corporate Circle -7(1), [Pan: Asrpr-5427-M] Chennai. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. S. Sree Lakshmi Valli, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.02.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21.02.2024

demonetization period and thus, made additions of Rs. 32,06,500/- u/s. 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). The Assessing Officer, had also made additions of Rs. 10,32,691/-, being 30% of expenditure debited under the head ‘interest for non-deduction of TDS

GANESAN KADIRVEL,SALEM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), SALEM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Shri Manomohan Das

TDS Reconciliation as per Form 16/16A & 26AS statement etc. for verification. The details sought from the assessee were as under:- (i) the details of sources of cash deposits made into the bank account along with reconciliation of bank account entries and cash book. (ii) Explanation regarding the sources for cash deposit made during the period of demonetization

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MADURAI vs. S R TRUST, MADURAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1549/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Assistant Commissioner Of S R Trust, Income Tax, Vs. 1, Melur Road, Lake Area, Central Circle -1, Madurai – 625 107. Madurai. [Pan: Aacts-0376-F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

demonetization period and hence, made an addition of Rs.1,75,14,608/- as unexplained cash credit by passing an order u/s.143(3) of the Act dated 31.12.2019. 3.2 Further, the AO found that the assessee has incurred foreign as well as domestic travel expenses of Shri. S.Gurushankar, Smt.Kamini, Shri. K. Subramanian and Shri. Sachithanantha to the extent of Rs.54

JAYANTHI RAJAGOUNDER,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-19(4), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George George K, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 3146/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Smt. Jayanthi Rajagounder, The Income Tax Officer, No.F-1, First Floor, V. Non-Corporate Ward 19(4), Seenivasam Flat No.9, Chennai - 34. Durairaj Street, Palavanthangal, Chennai – 600 061. [Pan:Ahspj 9904F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri K.B. Muralidharan, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 26.02.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17.04.2025 आदेश /O R D E R

demonetized currencies in the appellant's account as Rs.11,13,750 as against the actual amount of Rs.1,61,000. 4. The Assessing Officer failed to appreciate that the bank account was joint account of appellant with her husband, Mr.M.SENTHILKUMAR and cannot constitute as appellant's books. 5. The CIT(A) had erred in upholding the action of Assessing Officer

M/S. SRI BALAJI EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE PUBLIC TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee and that of the Department are dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1249/Chny/2025 िनधा$रण वष$ / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Sri Balaji Educational & Acit, Charitable Public Trust, Vs. Central Circle 3(4), No. 60, First Avenue, Chennai. Jai Durga Complex, Ashok Nagar, Chennai – 600 083. Tamil Nadu. (&'थ"/Respondent) [Pan: Aacts-1386-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1471/Chny/2025 िनधा$रण वष$ / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Acit, M/S. Sri Balaji Educational & Central Circle 3(4), Vs. Charitable Public Trust, Chennai. No. 60, First Avenue, Jai Durga Complex, Ashok Nagar, Chennai – 600 083. Tamil Nadu. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) [Pan: Aacts-1386-D] (&'थ"/Respondent) िनधा$)रती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri. Y.Sridhar, Fca राज4 की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 01.12.2025

demonetization period which is already accounted in the books of accounts as sales. Since the source has been reasonably explained by the appellant, the addition of Rs.5,31,39,462/- is to be deleted. Accordingly, this ground of appeal is allowed. --------- 6.4.2. Firstly, it is noticed that the total additions made by the AO based on the discussion

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. SRI BALAJI EDUCATIONAL AMD TRUST CHARITABLE PUBLIC TRUST , CHENNA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee and that of the Department are dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1249/Chny/2025 िनधा$रण वष$ / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Sri Balaji Educational & Acit, Charitable Public Trust, Vs. Central Circle 3(4), No. 60, First Avenue, Chennai. Jai Durga Complex, Ashok Nagar, Chennai – 600 083. Tamil Nadu. (&'थ"/Respondent) [Pan: Aacts-1386-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1471/Chny/2025 िनधा$रण वष$ / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Acit, M/S. Sri Balaji Educational & Central Circle 3(4), Vs. Charitable Public Trust, Chennai. No. 60, First Avenue, Jai Durga Complex, Ashok Nagar, Chennai – 600 083. Tamil Nadu. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) [Pan: Aacts-1386-D] (&'थ"/Respondent) िनधा$)रती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri. Y.Sridhar, Fca राज4 की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 01.12.2025

demonetization period which is already accounted in the books of accounts as sales. Since the source has been reasonably explained by the appellant, the addition of Rs.5,31,39,462/- is to be deleted. Accordingly, this ground of appeal is allowed. --------- 6.4.2. Firstly, it is noticed that the total additions made by the AO based on the discussion

SREE BALAJI BULLIONS,SALEM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), SALEM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George George K, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2302/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sree Balaji Bullions, Dy. Commissioner Of 22/43, Vasagasalai, Income Tax, Shevapet, V. Circle 1(1), Salem– 636002. Salem. [Pan: Aasfs-5947-E] (""यथ"/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : Shri.S.Sridhar, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By & N.Arjun Raj, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms.T.M.Suganthamala, Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.02.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17.04.2025 आदेश /O R D E R

demonetization period as unexplained money. Accordingly, the addition of Rs. 3,73,28,680 made by the Assessing Officer u/s.69A of the Act is confirmed.” Aggrieved by the impugned order of the ld.CIT(A), the assessee preferred an appeal before us. 6. The Ld.AR, assailed that the ld.CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition made u/s.69A r.w.s. 115BBE

M/S. LALITHA JEWELLERY MART LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), CHENNAI

TDS were deducted accordingly. The promissory notes / blank\ncheque/ papers were signed and given while taking those accounted\nloans.”\n8.21 The AO however is noted to have doubted the above statement of\nShri Kiran Kumar because of electronic data later on found in a database\nin the post search enquiries which inter alia contained entries of\ntransactions with Shri Anbu

THE INDIA CEMENTS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1) CHENNAI, CHENNAI

TDS is allowed as deduction while assessing book profit u/s\n115JB of the Act. This ground is accordingly allowed.\nITA No.2174/Chny/2024 (AY 2017-18)\nM/s. The India Cements Ltd.\n:: 25 ::\n10. Ground No.9 raised by the assessee is against the disallowance of\ndeduction u/s. 80IA of the Act. The facts concerning this issue are that,\nthe assessee owns

T.RAJARAJESWARI,KOVILPATTI vs. PCIT , BIBIKULAM

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

demonetization period. The assessee explained that cash deposits were sourced out of sales made in cash. The cash so deposited was utilized to purchase the goods from Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (BPCL). Accepting the same, Ld. AO framed the assessment. 3.2 Subsequently, Ld. Pr. CIT flagged 4 issues in the revisionary proceedings viz. (i) Salary paid for Rs.11 Lacs

SRI ARUMUGA COTTSPIN PVT. LTD.,COIMBATORE vs. THE ACIT, CC-I,, COIMBATORE

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1098/Chny/2024 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S. Sri Arumuga Cottspin Pvt. Ltd. Acit बनाम Sf No.919/6, No.2, Pollachi Road, Central Circle-1, / Vs. Ramanathapuram, Coimbatore-642 104. Coimbatore. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aajcs-5065-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Venkata Raman (Ca) - Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (Cit) - Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-09-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10-12-2024

demonetization period. During survey, it was explained that the assessee made cash sale which justifies availability of adequate cash balances with the assessee- company. The sales proceeds were backed by adequate stock which was duly verified during assessment proceedings. During survey, the survey team did not bring out any difference in stock. The assessee also tabulated figures of closing stock

SRI MAHASAKTHI MILLS LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. THE ACIT, CC-I,, COIMBATORE

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1059/Chny/2024 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Sri Mahasakthi Mills Limited Acit बनाम/ No.95/13, Vyshnav Building, Central Circle-1, Opp. Kg Cinemas, Race Course Road Coimbatore. Vs. Coimbatore-641 018. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcs-2111-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Venkata Raman (Ca) - Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (Cit) -Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-09-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10-12-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

demonetization period. The assessee also made cash advances of Rs.1267.55 Lacs to its sister concerns viz. M/s Imperial Spirits Ltd., M/s Overseas Beverages Ltd. and M/s Arumuga Cottspin Ltd. In recorded statement, Shri G. Ganesh, Assistant General Manager, explained that the source of cash deposits and the said advances was out of cash sales of yarn and clothes. 3.2 Shri

ANS JEWELLERY,SALEM vs. DCIT, NON CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1) , SALEM

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.160 & 161/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 & 2021-22 V. M/S.Ans Jewelry, The Dcit, 284, Omalur Main Road, Non-Corporate Circle-19(1), Swarnapuri, Salem. Salem-636 004. [Pan: Aahfa 8980 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

demonetization period. The demand of Ld. AO to produce CCTV recording after lapse of considerable period of time could not be said to be reasonable particularly when all the other evidences supports the case of the assessee. There is no finding by Ld. AO that any particular sales affected by the assessee exceeded threshold limit which would require collection

ANS JEWELRY,SALEM vs. DCIT, NON CORPORATE CIRCLE-19(1), SALEM

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.160 & 161/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 & 2021-22 V. M/S.Ans Jewelry, The Dcit, 284, Omalur Main Road, Non-Corporate Circle-19(1), Swarnapuri, Salem. Salem-636 004. [Pan: Aahfa 8980 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

demonetization period. The demand of Ld. AO to produce CCTV recording after lapse of considerable period of time could not be said to be reasonable particularly when all the other evidences supports the case of the assessee. There is no finding by Ld. AO that any particular sales affected by the assessee exceeded threshold limit which would require collection

DCIT,NON CORPORATE CIRCLE-2,, COIMBATORE vs. M/S D GEM MOUNT, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.782/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. D. Gem Mount, Income Tax, No. 19, Vedapatti Road, Non-Corporate Circle 2, Aayakar Telungupalayam, Bhavan, 63, Race Course Road, Coimbatore 641 039. Coimbatore 641 018. [Pan:Aaffd8890G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 27.03.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10.04.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi Dated 30.03.2023 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Delayed By 32 Days, For Which, The Dcit, Non Corporate Circle-2, Coimbatore Has Filed A Petition In The Form Of An Affidavit For Condonation Of The Delay Explaining The Cause For The Delay In Filing The Appeal & Prayed That 2

demonetization being receipts of cash sales. However, the Assessing Officer has doubted the cash sales by comparing with the cash sale in the preceding as well as succeeding 7 I.T.A. No. 782/Chny/23 year for relevant month, the cash sale made during the month of October and the first week of November, 2016 being substantially high for the reason that

SENNIAPPAN KARUPPANA GOUNDER,NAMAKKAL vs. ITO WARD 2, THIRUCHENGODU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1464/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-2018) Senniappan Karuppana Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Gounder, Ward 2, No.22, Pallipalayam Village, Tiruchengode. Kandipudur, Thiruchengodu Taluk, Namakkal Dist 638 006. [Pan: Amypk 7871R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. Raghav Rejeev Menon, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. R. Bhoopathi, Addl. Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03.02.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

demonetization. 4.1 Regarding cash deposits of Rs.45,00,000 the appellant submitted that the source for the same is withdrawal from his son's NRE account. Since his son insisted for purchase of property at Erode and since suitable properties could not be located, the said amount withdrawn has been kept as cash on hand. The assessing officer verified

SHOBIKA,K.P.COMPLEX, TUTICORIN vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-4, INCOME TAX OFFICE, TUTICORIN

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

demonetization period and abnormal increase in sale with decrease in profitability as compared to preceding year. It is noted that notice u/s.143(2) was issued on 24.09.2018, and thereafter, a letter was issued to the assessee through e-processing portal on 14.01.2019 calling for certain documents, and in response, assessee filed a letter dated 16.04.2019 which fact the AO acknowledges