SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos. 1613 To 1615/Chny/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20

3, 13,75,315/- & Rs. 37,97,84,300/ & Rs. 37,97,84,300/- for the AY 2020-21 and Rs.56,41,82,236/ 21 and Rs.56,41,82,236/- & Rs. 58,23,45,992/-for the AY(s) 2021 for the AY(s) 2021-22 & 2022-23 being the bogus purchases as income of being the bogus purchases

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT LTD, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos. 1613 To 1615/Chny/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20

3, 13,75,315/- & Rs. 37,97,84,300/ & Rs. 37,97,84,300/- for the AY 2020-21 and Rs.56,41,82,236/ 21 and Rs.56,41,82,236/- & Rs. 58,23,45,992/-for the AY(s) 2021 for the AY(s) 2021-22 & 2022-23 being the bogus purchases as income of being the bogus purchases

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT LTD, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos. 1613 To 1615/Chny/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20

3, 13,75,315/- & Rs. 37,97,84,300/ & Rs. 37,97,84,300/- for the AY 2020-21 and Rs.56,41,82,236/ 21 and Rs.56,41,82,236/- & Rs. 58,23,45,992/-for the AY(s) 2021 for the AY(s) 2021-22 & 2022-23 being the bogus purchases as income of being the bogus purchases

SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the\nassessee are dismissed

section of SAP.\nd) Based on the clarifications provided by Shri.S.Varatharaj on the\nevidences found, vide his sworn statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the\nAct at the business premises of M/s SAFL, it is gathered that there were\nno purchase orders raised for bogus purchases and as per the direction\nof Shri. Augustine Paulraj, the bogus invoices were directly

SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the\nassessee are dismissed

section of SAP.\nd) Based on the clarifications provided by Shri.S.Varatharaj on the\nevidences found, vide his sworn statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the\nAct at the business premises of M/s SAFL, it is gathered that there were\nno purchase orders raised for bogus purchases and as per the direction\nof Shri. Augustine Paulraj, the bogus invoices were directly

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the\nassessee are dismissed

section of SAP.\n\nd) Based on the clarifications provided by Shri.S.Varatharaj on the\nevidences found, vide his sworn statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the\nAct at the business premises of M/s SAFL, it is gathered that there were\nno purchase orders raised for bogus purchases and as per the direction\nof Shri. Augustine Paulraj, the bogus invoices were

SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the\nassessee are dismissed

section of SAP.\nd) Based on the clarifications provided by Shri.S.Varatharaj on the\nevidences found, vide his sworn statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the\nAct at the business premises of M/s SAFL, it is gathered that there were\nno purchase orders raised for bogus purchases and as per the direction\nof Shri. Augustine Paulraj, the bogus invoices were directly

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the\nassessee are dismissed

section of SAP.\nd) Based on the clarifications provided by Shri.S.Varatharaj on the\nevidences found, vide his sworn statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the\nAct at the business premises of M/s SAFL, it is gathered that there were\nno purchase orders raised for bogus purchases and as per the direction\nof Shri. Augustine Paulraj, the bogus invoices were directly

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. INTEGRATED SERVICE POINT LIMITED, ANNA NAGAR

Accordingly, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos. 1881, 1882, and 1883/Chny/2025 for A.Ys. 2016-17, 2019-20, and 2022-23 are allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2019-20 & 2022-23

purchases are wholly bogus and should be disallowed is rejected. Additions under Sections 69A and 69C: 133. Regarding the additions made under sections 69A and 69C, the assessee has demonstrated that all such amounts are fully explained in the cash flow statement. All heads of income, other than the :- 55 -: ITA Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025 ITA Nos.1874, 1876 & 1879/Chny/2025 Integrated Service

INTEGRATED SERVICE POINT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), CHENNAI

Accordingly, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos. 1881, 1882, and 1883/Chny/2025 for A.Ys. 2016-17, 2019-20, and 2022-23 are allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2019-20 & 2022-23

purchases are wholly bogus and should be disallowed is rejected. Additions under Sections 69A and 69C: 133. Regarding the additions made under sections 69A and 69C, the assessee has demonstrated that all such amounts are fully explained in the cash flow statement. All heads of income, other than the :- 55 -: ITA Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025 ITA Nos.1874, 1876 & 1879/Chny/2025 Integrated Service

INTEGRATED SERVICE POINT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), CHENNAI

Accordingly, the assessee's appeals in ITA Nos.1881, 1882,\nand 1883/Chny/2025 for A.Ys.2016-17, 2019-20, and 2022-23 are\nallowed

purchases are wholly bogus and should be\ndisallowed is rejected.\nAdditions under Sections 69A and 69C:\n133. Regarding the additions made under sections 69A and 69C, the\nassessee has demonstrated that all such amounts are fully explained\nin the cash flow statement. All heads of income, other than the\nestimated profits offered for taxation, which surfaced as a result

ACIT, NUNGAMBAKKAM vs. INTEGRATED SERVICE POINT LIMITED, ANNA NAGAR

Accordingly, the assessee's appeals in ITA Nos.1881, 1882,\nand 1883/Chny/2025 for A.Ys.2016-17, 2019-20, and 2022-23 are\nallowed

purchases are wholly bogus and should be\ndisallowed is rejected.\nAdditions under Sections 69A and 69C:\n133. Regarding the additions made under sections 69A and 69C, the\nassessee has demonstrated that all such amounts are fully explained\nin the cash flow statement. All heads of income, other than the\n:- 54 -:\nITA Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025\nITA Nos.1874, 1876 & 1879/Chny/2025\nIntegrated

INTEGRATED SERVICE POINT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CC-2(4), CHENNAI

Accordingly, the assessee's appeals in ITA Nos.1881, 1882,\nand 1883/Chny/2025 for A.Ys.2016-17, 2019-20, and 2022-23 are\nallowed

purchases are wholly bogus and should be\ndisallowed is rejected.\nAdditions under Sections 69A and 69C:\n133. Regarding the additions made under sections 69A and 69C, the\nassessee has demonstrated that all such amounts are fully explained\nin the cash flow statement. All heads of income, other than the\n:- 54 -:\nITA Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025\nITA Nos.1874, 1876 & 1879/Chny/2025\nIntegrated

ACIT, NUNAGAMBAKKAM vs. INTEGRATED SERVICE POINT LIMITED, ANNA NAGAR

purchases are wholly bogus and should be\ndisallowed is rejected.\nAdditions under Sections 69A and 69C:\n133. Regarding the additions made under sections 69A and 69C, the\nassessee has demonstrated that all such amounts are fully explained\nin the cash flow statement. All heads of income, other than the\n- : 55 -:\nITA Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025\nITA Nos.1874, 1876 & 1879/Chny/2025\nIntegrated

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. VELLORE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, VELLORE

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas that of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

3 to 3.3 payments made for acquiring property at Chamiers Road, Chennai was not for the benefit of the trustees and the firm GIE in which they were partners, though the property was acquired by GIE and this constituted violation of a nature specified in Sec. 13(1) (c) of the Act. 19 CIT(A) erroneously held that

VELLORE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,VELLORE vs. DCIT, CC IV(1), CHENNAI

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas that of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

3 to 3.3 payments made for acquiring property at Chamiers Road, Chennai was not for the benefit of the trustees and the firm GIE in which they were partners, though the property was acquired by GIE and this constituted violation of a nature specified in Sec. 13(1) (c) of the Act. 19 CIT(A) erroneously held that

VELLORE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,VELLORE vs. DCIT, CC IV(1), CHENNAI

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas that of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

3 to 3.3 payments made for acquiring property at Chamiers Road, Chennai was not for the benefit of the trustees and the firm GIE in which they were partners, though the property was acquired by GIE and this constituted violation of a nature specified in Sec. 13(1) (c) of the Act. 19 CIT(A) erroneously held that

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. VELLORE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, VELLORE

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas that of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

3 to 3.3 payments made for acquiring property at Chamiers Road, Chennai was not for the benefit of the trustees and the firm GIE in which they were partners, though the property was acquired by GIE and this constituted violation of a nature specified in Sec. 13(1) (c) of the Act. 19 CIT(A) erroneously held that