DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI vs. RADIANCE REALTY DEVELOPERS INDIA LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and the assessee as\nwell as the Cross-Objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND\nSHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nITA Nos.2978 - 2984/Chny/2024\n&\nCO Nos.11-17/Chny/2025\nनिर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2016-17 to 2022-23\n\nThe DCIT,\nCentral Circle-2(1),\nChennai.\nM/s Radiance Realty-\nDevelopers India Ltd.,\nRadiance Towers, 1st Floor,\n33 Feet Road, Anna Salai,\nGuindy, Chennai – 600 032.\n[PAN: AACCN5152H]\n(अपीलार्थी/Appellant)\n(प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent/Cross\nObjector)\n\nITA Nos.2971 - 2972/Chny/2024\nनिर्धारणवर्ष/

revised computation. Therefore, the undersigned is constrained to\nsustain 20% of24,95,02,394/- of the addition amounting Rs.\n4,99,00,478/- and the AO is directed to delete the balance amount of\nRs.19,96,01,916/- for the AY 2022-23.\"\n\n4.24\nThe Ld. CIT, DR appearing before us was unable to controvert the\nabove estimation exercise

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI vs. RADIANCE REALTY DEVELOPERS INDIA LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and the assessee as\nwell as the Cross-Objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND\nSHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nITA Nos.2978 - 2984/Chny/2024\n&\nCO Nos.11-17/Chny/2025\nनिर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2016-17 to 2022-23\n\nThe DCIT,\nCentral Circle-2(1),\nChennai.\n(अपीलार्थी/Appellant)\nM/s Radiance Realty-\nDevelopers India Ltd.,\nRadiance Towers, 1st Floor,\n33 Feet Road, Anna Salai,\nGuindy, Chennai – 600 032.\n[PAN: AACCN5152H]\n(प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent/Cross\nObjector)\n\nITA Nos.2971 - 2972/Chny/2024\nनिर्धारणवर्ष/

revised computation. Therefore, the undersigned is constrained to\nsustain 20% of24,95,02,394/- of the addition amounting Rs.\n4,99,00,478/- and the AO is directed to delete the balance amount of\nRs.19,96,01,916/- for the AY 2022-23.\"\n\n4.24\nThe Ld. CIT, DR appearing before us was unable to controvert the\nabove estimation exercise

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI vs. RADIANCE REALTY DEVELOPERS INDIA LTD., CHENNAI

Bench: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND\nSHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nITA Nos.2978 - 2984/Chny/2024\n&\nCO Nos.11-17/Chny/2025\nनिर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2016-17 to 2022-23\n\nThe DCIT,\nCentral Circle-2(1),\nChennai.\nM/s Radiance Realty-\nDevelopers India Ltd.,\nRadiance Towers, 1st Floor,\n33 Feet Road, Anna Salai,\nGuindy, Chennai – 600 032.\n[PAN: AACCN5152H]\n(अपीलार्थी/Appellant)\n(प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent/Cross\nObjector)\n\nITA Nos.2971 - 2972/Chny/2024\nनिर्धारणवर्ष/

revised computation. Therefore, the undersigned is constrained to\nsustain 20% of24,95,02,394/- of the addition amounting Rs.\n4,99,00,478/- and the AO is directed to delete the balance amount of\nRs.19,96,01,916/- for the AY 2022-23.\"\n\n4.24\nThe Ld. CIT, DR appearing before us was unable to controvert the\nabove estimation exercise

RADIANCE REALTY DEVELOPERS INDIA LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), CHENNAI

Bench: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND\nSHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nITA Nos.2978 - 2984/Chny/2024\n&\nCO Nos.11-17/Chny/2025\nनिर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2016-17 to 2022-23\n\nThe DCIT,\nCentral Circle-2(1),\nChennai.\nM/s Radiance Realty-\nDevelopers India Ltd.,\nRadiance Towers, 1st Floor,\n33 Feet Road, Anna Salai,\nGuindy, Chennai – 600 032.\n[PAN: AACCN5152H]\n(अपीलार्थी/Appellant)\n(प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent/Cross\nObjector)\n\nITA Nos.2971 - 2972/Chny/2024\nनिर्धारणवर्ष/

revised computation. Therefore, the undersigned is constrained to\nsustain 20% of24,95,02,394/- of the addition amounting Rs.\n4,99,00,478/- and the AO is directed to delete the balance amount of\nRs.19,96,01,916/- for the AY 2022-23.\"\n\n4.24 The Ld. CIT, DR appearing before us was unable to controvert the\nabove estimation exercise

RADIANCE REALTY DEVELOPERS INDIA LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), CHENNAI

Bench: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND\nSHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nITA Nos.2978 - 2984/Chny/2024\n&\nCO Nos.11-17/Chny/2025\nनिर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2016-17 to 2022-23\n\nThe DCIT,\nCentral Circle-2(1),\nChennai.\nM/s Radiance Realty-\nDevelopers India Ltd.,\nRadiance Towers, 1st Floor,\n33 Feet Road, Anna Salai,\nGuindy, Chennai – 600 032.\n[PAN: AACCN5152H]\n(अपीलार्थी/Appellant)\n(प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent/Cross\nObjector)\n\nITA Nos.2971 - 2972/Chny/2024\nनिर्धारणवर्ष/

revised computation. Therefore, the undersigned is constrained to\nsustain 20% of24,95,02,394/- of the addition amounting Rs.\n4,99,00,478/- and the AO is directed to delete the balance amount of\nRs.19,96,01,916/- for the AY 2022-23.\"\n\n4.24 The Ld. CIT, DR appearing before us was unable to controvert the\nabove estimation exercise

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI vs. RADIANCE REALTY DEVELOPERS INDIA LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and the assessee as\nwell as the Cross-Objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND\nSHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nITA Nos.2978 - 2984/Chny/2024\n&\nCO Nos.11-17/Chny/2025\nनिर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2016-17 to 2022-23\n\nThe DCIT,\nCentral Circle-2(1),\nChennai.\nM/s Radiance Realty-\nDevelopers India Ltd.,\nRadiance Towers, 1st Floor,\n33 Feet Road, Anna Salai,\nGuindy, Chennai – 600 032.\n[PAN: AACCN5152H]\n(अपीलार्थी/Appellant)\n(प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent/Cross\nObjector)\n\nITA Nos.2971 - 2972/Chny/2024\nनिर्धारणवर्ष/

revised computation. Therefore, the undersigned is constrained to\nsustain 20% of24,95,02,394/- of the addition amounting Rs.\n4,99,00,478/- and the AO is directed to delete the balance amount of\nRs.19,96,01,916/- for the AY 2022-23.\"\n\n4.24\nThe Ld. CIT, DR appearing before us was unable to controvert the\nabove estimation exercise

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI vs. RADIANCE REALTY DEVELOPERS INDIA LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and the assessee as\nwell as the Cross-Objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND\nSHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nITA Nos.2978 - 2984/Chny/2024\n&\nCO Nos.11-17/Chny/2025\nनिर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2016-17 to 2022-23\n\nThe DCIT,\nCentral Circle-2(1),\nChennai.\nM/s Radiance Realty-\nDevelopers India Ltd.,\nRadiance Towers, 1st Floor,\n33 Feet Road, Anna Salai,\nGuindy, Chennai – 600 032.\n[PAN: AACCN5152H]\n(अपीलार्थी/Appellant)\n(प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent/Cross\nObjector)\n\nITA Nos.2971 - 2972/Chny/2024\nनिर्धारणवर्ष/

revised computation. Therefore, the undersigned is constrained to\nsustain 20% of24,95,02,394/- of the addition amounting Rs.\n4,99,00,478/- and the AO is directed to delete the balance amount of\nRs.19,96,01,916/- for the AY 2022-23.\"\n\n4.24 The Ld. CIT, DR appearing before us was unable to controvert the\nabove estimation exercise

VINOD KUMAR KUNDANMAL ,CHENNAI vs. PCIT-8, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A No.:307/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013 - 2014

Revision proceedings u/s 263 of the Income tax Act 1961 in A.Y.2013-14 dated 11.03.2021 was issued and the assessee was given an opportunity of being heard on 19.03.2021 at 12.10 PM. The assessee submitted his response electronically, stating as under: a) Off Market purchase of shares is not illegal. The said proposition is affirmed by the Hon ‘ble Mumbai High

VINOD KUMAR KUNDANMALJI JAIN,CHENNAI vs. PCIT-8, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the Assessees in I

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A No.:307/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013 - 2014

Revision proceedings u/s 263 of the Income tax Act 1961 in A.Y.2013-14 dated 11.03.2021 was issued and the assessee was given an opportunity of being heard on 19.03.2021 at 12.10 PM. The assessee submitted his response electronically, stating as under: a) Off Market purchase of shares is not illegal. The said proposition is affirmed by the Hon ‘ble Mumbai High

TARUN KUMAR KUNDANMALJI JAIN,CHENNAI vs. PCIT-8, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the Assessees in I

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A No.:307/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013 - 2014

Revision proceedings u/s 263 of the Income tax Act 1961 in A.Y.2013-14 dated 11.03.2021 was issued and the assessee was given an opportunity of being heard on 19.03.2021 at 12.10 PM. The assessee submitted his response electronically, stating as under: a) Off Market purchase of shares is not illegal. The said proposition is affirmed by the Hon ‘ble Mumbai High

TARUN KUNDANMAL HUF,CHENNAI vs. PCIT-8, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the Assessees in I

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A No.:307/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013 - 2014

Revision proceedings u/s 263 of the Income tax Act 1961 in A.Y.2013-14 dated 11.03.2021 was issued and the assessee was given an opportunity of being heard on 19.03.2021 at 12.10 PM. The assessee submitted his response electronically, stating as under: a) Off Market purchase of shares is not illegal. The said proposition is affirmed by the Hon ‘ble Mumbai High

V.S. NATARAJAN,THANJAVUR vs. ACIT, CC-3(2), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1603 & 1604/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21 Valikaramuthu Subramanian Assistant Commissioner Of Natarajan, V. Income-Tax, No. 104-B, 3Rd Street, Central Circle -3(2), Mangalapuram, Medical College Chennai. Road, Voc Nagar, Thanjavur – 613 007. [Pan: Acypn-0616-R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Y. Sridhar, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26.09.2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.10.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha:

bogus purchases proposed to be added Rs.30,33,48,099 You are requested to show cause why the addition should not be made in your hands considering Kals Group of concerns is denying having resorted to any inflation of purchases from Devi Bottles group of concerns. 8. Unaccounted commission income earned from over invoicing of sale of empty

V.S. NATARAJAN,THANJAVUR vs. ACIT, CC-3(2), , CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1603 & 1604/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21 Valikaramuthu Subramanian Assistant Commissioner Of Natarajan, V. Income-Tax, No. 104-B, 3Rd Street, Central Circle -3(2), Mangalapuram, Medical College Chennai. Road, Voc Nagar, Thanjavur – 613 007. [Pan: Acypn-0616-R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Y. Sridhar, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26.09.2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.10.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha:

bogus purchases proposed to be added Rs.30,33,48,099 You are requested to show cause why the addition should not be made in your hands considering Kals Group of concerns is denying having resorted to any inflation of purchases from Devi Bottles group of concerns. 8. Unaccounted commission income earned from over invoicing of sale of empty

SULEKHA.COM NEW MEDIA P. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

revision orders, after giving opportunity to the assessee.” 4.1 Thereafter, the DR submitted that it is clear from the order u/s. 263 that the assessee has not laid any material to say that the payment of Rs. 11.81 crores made to M/s. Mercado Online P. Ltd., a non-traceable company, was ever examined by the A O and the assessee

ARIHANT RETAIL PVT. LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. PCIT-1,, CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1308/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Arihant Retail Private Limited, Principal Commissioner Of 29, Namachivaya Chetty Street, V. Income Tax -1, Old Washermanpet, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 021. [Pan: Aaics-3648-F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. T. Banusekar, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07.08.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024

bogus, and it had been stated that the entire amount of Rs.102,43,73,377/- could not be disallowed, hence to protect the interest of revenue, a moderate disallowance of business purchases the extent of 10% i.e., Rs.10,24,37,338/- was treated as unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the I.T. Act. 3.2 As per Section

R.SRINIVASAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, COIMBATORE

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.1466/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 1996-97) Mr.R.Srinivasan Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of 103, Ashok Nagar Main Road Income Tax, Kodambakkam, Corporate Circle-I(2) Chennai-600 024. Chennai. Pan : Aaips 8386H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 30.03.1999 and additions were made towards unexplained investments in bank deposits amounting to `13,25,642/- , estimated interest income on said unexplained deposit of ` 10,00,000/- and salary income not disclosed in the return of 6 income amounting to `1,00,000/-. Besides the above

SHEIKH KUTBUDDIN HABIB,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT, COIMBATORE

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 263 & 264/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12

u/s 271(1)(c) has been held as justified by a number of Courts. 4.1 In the case of DCIT vs. R.Padmanabhan [2015] 371 ITR 211, High Court of Madras held as below after considering the facts and circumstances of that case: "It is seen from the order of the assessing officer that after the survey being conducted

SHEIKH KUTBUDDIN HABIB,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT, COIMBATORE

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 263 & 264/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12

u/s 271(1)(c) has been held as justified by a number of Courts. 4.1 In the case of DCIT vs. R.Padmanabhan [2015] 371 ITR 211, High Court of Madras held as below after considering the facts and circumstances of that case: "It is seen from the order of the assessing officer that after the survey being conducted

DCIT, VILLUPURAM vs. D.SANTHA, KALLAKURICHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

revised return on 05.03.2010 admitting a total income of Rs. 7,25,460/- and an agricultural income of Rs. 1,24,000/-. The AO completed the assessment u/s. 143(3) on 13.12.2010 determining the :-3-: ITA Nos. 1593, 1828 & 1829& 1803/Mds/2016 total income at Rs. 19,52,590/-. The assessee did not file any appeal against this assessment order