DR DEEPAK ARJUNDAS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT , CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for all the assessment

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.924 To 929/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2016-17 Dr.Deepak Arjundas, V. The Asst. Commissioner- No.228-A, Kilpauk Garden Road, Of Income Tax, Chennai-600 010. Non-Corporate Circle-10(1), Chennai. [Pan: Aafpd 1050 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.S.Sundaraman, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.P.Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.03.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 15.03.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: This Bunch Of Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against

search and seizure operations of a third party in which the Appellant was never a part of. 3. The AO presumed that the data received from the Investigation Wing is correct and complete - even though the person from whom the information was obtained did not authenticate it as correct and complete. 4. The AO erred in not appreciating the fact

DR DEEPAK ARJUNDAS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT , CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for all the assessment

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.924 To 929/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2016-17 Dr.Deepak Arjundas, V. The Asst. Commissioner- No.228-A, Kilpauk Garden Road, Of Income Tax, Chennai-600 010. Non-Corporate Circle-10(1), Chennai. [Pan: Aafpd 1050 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.S.Sundaraman, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.P.Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.03.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 15.03.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: This Bunch Of Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against

search and seizure operations of a third party in which the Appellant was never a part of. 3. The AO presumed that the data received from the Investigation Wing is correct and complete - even though the person from whom the information was obtained did not authenticate it as correct and complete. 4. The AO erred in not appreciating the fact

DR DEEPAK ARJUNDAS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT , CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for all the assessment

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.924 To 929/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2016-17 Dr.Deepak Arjundas, V. The Asst. Commissioner- No.228-A, Kilpauk Garden Road, Of Income Tax, Chennai-600 010. Non-Corporate Circle-10(1), Chennai. [Pan: Aafpd 1050 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.S.Sundaraman, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.P.Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.03.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 15.03.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: This Bunch Of Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against

search and seizure operations of a third party in which the Appellant was never a part of. 3. The AO presumed that the data received from the Investigation Wing is correct and complete - even though the person from whom the information was obtained did not authenticate it as correct and complete. 4. The AO erred in not appreciating the fact

DR DEEPAK ARJUNDAS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT , CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for all the assessment

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.924 To 929/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2016-17 Dr.Deepak Arjundas, V. The Asst. Commissioner- No.228-A, Kilpauk Garden Road, Of Income Tax, Chennai-600 010. Non-Corporate Circle-10(1), Chennai. [Pan: Aafpd 1050 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.S.Sundaraman, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.P.Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.03.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 15.03.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: This Bunch Of Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against

search and seizure operations of a third party in which the Appellant was never a part of. 3. The AO presumed that the data received from the Investigation Wing is correct and complete - even though the person from whom the information was obtained did not authenticate it as correct and complete. 4. The AO erred in not appreciating the fact

DR DEEPAK ARJUNDAS ,CHENNAI vs. ACIT , CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for all the assessment

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.924 To 929/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2016-17 Dr.Deepak Arjundas, V. The Asst. Commissioner- No.228-A, Kilpauk Garden Road, Of Income Tax, Chennai-600 010. Non-Corporate Circle-10(1), Chennai. [Pan: Aafpd 1050 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.S.Sundaraman, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.P.Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.03.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 15.03.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: This Bunch Of Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against

search and seizure operations of a third party in which the Appellant was never a part of. 3. The AO presumed that the data received from the Investigation Wing is correct and complete - even though the person from whom the information was obtained did not authenticate it as correct and complete. 4. The AO erred in not appreciating the fact

PERFECT STONE LTD. ,CHENNAI vs. ACITCORPORATE CIRCLE 5(1) , CHENNAI

In the results, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615 & 1616 /Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

search and seizure :-3-: I.T.A. N0s. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1430, 1431, 1432, 1433 & 1434/Mds/2017 action. The seized materials and other records were forwarded to the A O. At the time of assessments, the assessee was unable to provide any convincing reply for the said receipts. The A O held that the assessee’s reply that

ITO, CHENNAI vs. PERFECT STONE LTD., CHENNAI

In the results, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615 & 1616 /Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

search and seizure :-3-: I.T.A. N0s. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1430, 1431, 1432, 1433 & 1434/Mds/2017 action. The seized materials and other records were forwarded to the A O. At the time of assessments, the assessee was unable to provide any convincing reply for the said receipts. The A O held that the assessee’s reply that

ITO, CHENNAI vs. PERFECT STONE LTD., CHENNAI

In the results, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615 & 1616 /Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

search and seizure :-3-: I.T.A. N0s. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1430, 1431, 1432, 1433 & 1434/Mds/2017 action. The seized materials and other records were forwarded to the A O. At the time of assessments, the assessee was unable to provide any convincing reply for the said receipts. The A O held that the assessee’s reply that

ITO, CHENNAI vs. PERFECT STONE LTD., CHENNAI

In the results, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615 & 1616 /Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

search and seizure :-3-: I.T.A. N0s. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1430, 1431, 1432, 1433 & 1434/Mds/2017 action. The seized materials and other records were forwarded to the A O. At the time of assessments, the assessee was unable to provide any convincing reply for the said receipts. The A O held that the assessee’s reply that

ITO, CHENNAI vs. PERFECT STONE LTD., CHENNAI

In the results, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615 & 1616 /Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

search and seizure :-3-: I.T.A. N0s. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1430, 1431, 1432, 1433 & 1434/Mds/2017 action. The seized materials and other records were forwarded to the A O. At the time of assessments, the assessee was unable to provide any convincing reply for the said receipts. The A O held that the assessee’s reply that

PERFECT STONE LTD. ,CHENNAI vs. ACITCORPORATE CIRCLE 5(1) , CHENNAI

In the results, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615 & 1616 /Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

search and seizure :-3-: I.T.A. N0s. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1430, 1431, 1432, 1433 & 1434/Mds/2017 action. The seized materials and other records were forwarded to the A O. At the time of assessments, the assessee was unable to provide any convincing reply for the said receipts. The A O held that the assessee’s reply that

PERFECT STONE LTD. ,CHENNAI vs. ACITCORPORATE CIRCLE 5(1) , CHENNAI

In the results, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615 & 1616 /Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

search and seizure :-3-: I.T.A. N0s. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1430, 1431, 1432, 1433 & 1434/Mds/2017 action. The seized materials and other records were forwarded to the A O. At the time of assessments, the assessee was unable to provide any convincing reply for the said receipts. The A O held that the assessee’s reply that

PERFECT STONE LTD. ,CHENNAI vs. ACITCORPORATE CIRCLE 5(1) , CHENNAI

In the results, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615 & 1616 /Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

search and seizure :-3-: I.T.A. N0s. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1430, 1431, 1432, 1433 & 1434/Mds/2017 action. The seized materials and other records were forwarded to the A O. At the time of assessments, the assessee was unable to provide any convincing reply for the said receipts. The A O held that the assessee’s reply that

PERFECT STONE LTD. ,CHENNAI vs. ACITCORPORATE CIRCLE 5(1) , CHENNAI

In the results, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615 & 1616 /Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

search and seizure :-3-: I.T.A. N0s. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1430, 1431, 1432, 1433 & 1434/Mds/2017 action. The seized materials and other records were forwarded to the A O. At the time of assessments, the assessee was unable to provide any convincing reply for the said receipts. The A O held that the assessee’s reply that

PERFECT STONE LTD. ,CHENNAI vs. ACITCORPORATE CIRCLE 5(1) , CHENNAI

In the results, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615 & 1616 /Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

search and seizure :-3-: I.T.A. N0s. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1430, 1431, 1432, 1433 & 1434/Mds/2017 action. The seized materials and other records were forwarded to the A O. At the time of assessments, the assessee was unable to provide any convincing reply for the said receipts. The A O held that the assessee’s reply that

ITO, CHENNAI vs. PERFECT STONE LTD., CHENNAI

In the results, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615 & 1616 /Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

search and seizure :-3-: I.T.A. N0s. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1430, 1431, 1432, 1433 & 1434/Mds/2017 action. The seized materials and other records were forwarded to the A O. At the time of assessments, the assessee was unable to provide any convincing reply for the said receipts. The A O held that the assessee’s reply that

PERFECT STONE LTD. ,CHENNAI vs. ACITCORPORATE CIRCLE 5(1) , CHENNAI

In the results, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615 & 1616 /Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

search and seizure :-3-: I.T.A. N0s. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1430, 1431, 1432, 1433 & 1434/Mds/2017 action. The seized materials and other records were forwarded to the A O. At the time of assessments, the assessee was unable to provide any convincing reply for the said receipts. The A O held that the assessee’s reply that

NEELARAJ VINOTH,PERAMBALUR vs. ACIT, CC-2, , TRICHY

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1982/Chny/2024 & C.O.No. 60/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Assistant Commissioner Of Neelaraj Vinoth, Income Tax, V. 274-C, Thuraiyur Road, Central Circle -2, Perambalur – 621 212, Trichy. Tamilnadu. [Pan: Ajupv-3588-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respondent/Cross Objector) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2119/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Neelaraj Vinoth, Assistant Commissioner Of 274-C, Thuraiyur Road, V. Income Tax, Perambalur – 621 212, Central Circle -2, Tamilnadu. Trichy. [Pan: Ajupv-3588-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

TDS @ 1% of Rs.17,01,000/- in accordance with section 194IA of IT Act. This assessee had even approached the Dy CIT, CPC vide his communication dated 21.02.2018. 8.3 The ld.AR further submitted that the information in this seized letter is not something that came to the knowledge of the Department only due to the search and seizure

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, TRICHY, TRICHY vs. NEELARAJ VINOTH, PERAMBALUR

Bench: Shri George George K, Hon'Ble & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Hon'Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1982/Chny/2024 & C.O.No. 60/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle -2, Trichy. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. Neelaraj Vinoth, 274-C, Thuraiyur Road, Perambalur – 621 212, Tamilnadu. [Pan: Ajupv-3588-M] (Respondent/Cross Objector) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2119/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Neelaraj Vinoth, 274-C, Thuraiyur Road, Perambalur – 621 212, Tamilnadu. [Pan: Ajupv-3588-M] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle -2, Trichy. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. G. Baskar, Advocate & Shri. P.M. Kathir, Advocate Department By : Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.02.2025 आदेश / Order Per S.R.Raghunatha, Am: :-2-:

TDS @ 1% of Rs.17,01,000/- in accordance with section 194IA of IT Act. This assessee had even approached the Dy CIT, CPC vide his communication dated 21.02.2018. 8.3 The Id.AR further submitted that the information in this seized letter is not something that came to the knowledge of the Department only due to the search and seizure