ACIT, CIRCLE-1, TIRUNELVELI vs. ESAKKIMUTHU MUTHUVEL IYAPPAN, TIRUNELVELI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.794/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-2018) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Shri Esakkimuthu Muthuvel Iyappan, Income Tax, No.4, Highways Road, Circle 1, Tisayanvilai, Tirunelveli 627 011. Tirunelveli 627 657. [Pan : Arupm 4796J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. T. Vasudevan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Arv Srinivasan, Irs, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 19.06.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.07.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

5. Before us, the Ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) is right in deleting the addition on account of cash deposits during demonetization period, wherein, the assessee has filed written submission alongwith relevant clarificatory evidence viz. VAT Return, Sales and Purchase Registers etc just to clarify source for cash deposits. The Ld.Counsel for the assessee further submitted

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1, COIMBATORE, COIMBATORE vs. MS DAR PARADISE PVT. LTD., COIMBATORE

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1106/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Dar Paradise Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, V. 599, Raja Street, Corporate Circle -1, Coimbatore – 641 001. Coimbatore. [Pan: Aafcd-3066-P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. N. Arjun Raj, Ca सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05.03.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21.03.2024

120, 133 (Jharkhand)}. 6.15 As per the provisions of Section 68 of the Act, before invocation of the said section, proper enquiry is needed. In the case of the appellant, no proper enquiries were conducted by the AO, which is clearly evident from the assessment records. Section 68 empowers the Assessing Officer to make enquiry specifically to be satisfied regarding

ARVIND NANDAGOPAL,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CC-3(1),, CHENNAI

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

5 objecting to the merits of the\naddition(s) made u/s 56(2)(vii) of the Act by the AO. Ground No.6 is\nagainst the merits of the addition made by way of long-term capital gain.\nWe are inclined to first adjudicate the legal issues raised by the assessee,\nwhich if found valid, goes to the root

ARVIND NANDAGOPAL,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CC-3(1), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

120 crores on-money received in cash) from M/s KLP Projects Private Ltd and others (formerly known as M/s Landmark Barracks Projects Pvt. Ltd towards sale of its land in Barracks road, Perambur, Chennai. The agreement for the deal was signed on 17.10.2013 and the funds were received during the period FY 2013-14 to FY 2016-17. Further, Binny

ARVIND NANDAGOPAL,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CC-3(1), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

120 crores on-money received in cash) from M/s KLP Projects Private Ltd and others (formerly known as M/s Landmark Barracks Projects Pvt. Ltd towards sale of its land in Barracks road, Perambur, Chennai. The agreement for the deal was signed on 17.10.2013 and the funds were received during the period FY 2013-14 to FY 2016-17. Further, Binny

ARVIND NANDAGOPAL,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CC-3(1),, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

120 crores on-money received in cash) from M/s KLP Projects Private Ltd and others (formerly known as M/s Landmark Barracks Projects Pvt. Ltd towards sale of its land in Barracks road, Perambur, Chennai. The agreement for the deal was signed on 17.10.2013 and the funds were received during the period FY 2013-14 to FY 2016-17. Further, Binny

ARVIND NANDAGOPAL,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CC-3(1),, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

120 crores on-money received in cash) from M/s KLP Projects Private Ltd and others (formerly known as M/s Landmark Barracks Projects Pvt. Ltd towards sale of its land in Barracks road, Perambur, Chennai. The agreement for the deal was signed on 17.10.2013 and the funds were received during the period FY 2013-14 to FY 2016-17. Further, Binny

V SATHYAMOORTHY&CO,ERODE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, COIMBATORE

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.1023/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S. V. Sathyamoorthy & Co. Dcit बनाम/ 41, Patel Road, Central Circle-2 Vs. Near Blood Bank, Erode-638 001. Coimbatore. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacfv-0222-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)- Ld.Ar " थ" की ओर से/Revenue By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (Cit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29-07-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-10-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

Section 69C of the Act was not satisfied in the present case thereby vitiating the disputed addition. 21. The CIT (Appeals) - 20, Chennai failed to appreciate that the excel sheet relied upon by the Assessing Officer should not be construed as 'incriminating seized material' and further ought to have appreciated that the contents of the seized material reflecting the actual

V SATHYAMOORTHY&CO,ERODE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, COIMBATORE

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.1022/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2018-19) M/S. V. Sathyamoorthy & Co. Dcit बनाम/ 41, Patel Road, Central Circle-2 Vs. Near Blood Bank, Erode-638 001. Coimbatore. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacfv-0222-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)- Ld.Ar " थ" की ओर से/Revenue By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (Cit)-Ld. Dr

Section 69 of the Act. 24. The CIT (Appeals)- 20, Chennai failed to appreciate that the explanation offered by the Appellant were not considered in proper perspective while dealing with the grounds raised and further ought to have appreciated that the factual position was further clarified by the Partner of the Appellant firm during the post search proceedings there

MASILAMANI NANDAGOPAL,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CC-3(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee(s) are allowed

120 crores on-\nmoney received in cash) from M/s KLP Projects Private Ltd and others (formerly known as M/s\nLandmark Barracks Projects Pvt. Ltd towards sale of its land at Barracks Road, Perambur,\nChennai. The agreement for the deal was signed on 17.10.2013 and the funds were received\nduring the period FY 2013-14 to FY 2016-17. Further, Binny

MASILAMANI NANDAGOPAL,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CC-3(1),, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee(s) are allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

120 crores on-money received in cash) from M/s KLP Projects Private Ltd and others (formerly known as M/s Landmark Barracks Projects Pvt. Ltd towards sale of its land in Barracks road, Perambur, Chennai. The agreement for the deal was signed on 17.10.2013 and the funds were received during the period FY 2013- 14 to FY 2016-17. Further, Binny

MASILAMANI NANDAGOPAL,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CC-3(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee(s) are allowed

120 crores on-\nmoney received in cash) from M/s KLP Projects Private Ltd and others (formerly known as M/s\nLandmark Barracks Projects Pvt. Ltd towards sale of its land at Barracks Road, Perambur,\nChennai. The agreement for the deal was signed on 17.10.2013 and the funds were received\nduring the period FY 2013-14 to FY 2016-17. Further, Binny

MASILAMANI NANDAGOPAL,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CC-3(1),, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee(s) are allowed

120 crores on-\nmoney received in cash) from M/s KLP Projects Private Ltd and others (formerly known as M/s\nLandmark Barracks Projects Pvt. Ltd towards sale of its land at Barracks Road, Perambur,\nChennai. The agreement for the deal was signed on 17.10.2013 and the funds were received\nduring the period FY 2013-14 to FY 2016-17. Further, Binny

MASILAMANI NANDAGOPAL,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CC-3(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee(s) are allowed

120 crores on-\nmoney received in cash) from M/s KLP Projects Private Ltd and others (formerly known as M/s\nLandmark Barracks Projects Pvt. Ltd towards sale of its land at Barracks Road, Perambur,\nChennai. The agreement for the deal was signed on 17.10.2013 and the funds were received\nduring the period FY 2013-14 to FY 2016-17. Further, Binny

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. RAMANATHAN VISWANATHAN, CHENNAI

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

5 put to Shri CPA in his statement dated 03.04.2017, wherein he was asked to give proof that the transactions recorded in the account book(s) happened at the instructions of the assessee. It is seen by us that, his answer was completely vague and lacked any specific proof or details. He was unable to provide any proof of linkage

R.VISWANATHAN,CHENNAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), CHENNAI

5 put to Shri CPA\nin his statement dated 03.04.2017, wherein he was asked to give proof\nthat the transactions recorded in the account book(s) happened at the\ninstructions of the assessee. It is seen by us that, his answer was\ncompletely vague and lacked any specific proof or details. He was unable\nto provide any proof of linkage

R.VISWANATHAN,CHENNAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4),, CHENNAI

5 put to Shri CPA\nin his statement dated 03.04.2017, wherein he was asked to give proof\nthat the transactions recorded in the account book(s) happened at the\ninstructions of the assessee. It is seen by us that, his answer was\ncompletely vague and lacked any specific proof or details. He was unable\nto provide any proof of linkage

MOHANLAL JEWELLERS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), CHENNAI

120\n2018-19\n153A\n32,99,63,510\n2019-20\n153A\n33,24,62,890\n2020-21\n153A\n32,43,15,690\n2021-22\n139(1)\n53,75,18,770\n\n3. The summary of the additions/disallowances in Rupees made by the \nAO in the assessments which were completed u/s 153A/143(3) of the Act \nfor