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

purchase items from the unorganized sector at competitive rates and for part of speed money was not accepted. Based on the sworn statements of Shri Stanley Babu and Shri K. Srikanth Apparao, the gross payment of Rs. 4,43,24,430/- was treated as bogus expenditure. The income already disclosed in the return under section 148

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

purchase items from the unorganized sector at competitive rates and for part of speed money was not accepted. Based on the sworn statements of Shri Stanley Babu and Shri K. Srikanth Apparao, the gross payment of Rs. 4,43,24,430/- was treated as bogus expenditure. The income already disclosed in the return under section 148

DCIT CC 2 2 , CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT LTD, CHENNAI

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

148 of the Act under the new regime.\n26. As noted earlier, Section 153A of the Act lays down the manner and\nprocedure for reopening the assessments in cases of search. Section\n153A(1) of the Act provides that, the assessments can be reopened for a\nblock of six years preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous\nyear

DCIT CC 2 2 , CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT LTD, CHENNAI

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

148 of the Act under the new regime.\n26. As noted earlier, Section 153A of the Act lays down the manner and\nprocedure for reopening the assessments in cases of search. Section\n153A(1) of the Act provides that, the assessments can be reopened for a\nblock of six years preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous\nyear

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

148 of the Act under the new regime.\n26. As noted earlier, Section 153A of the Act lays down the manner and\nprocedure for reopening the assessments in cases of search. Section\n153A(1) of the Act provides that, the assessments can be reopened for a\nblock of six years preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous\nyear

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

148 of the Act under the new regime.\n26. As noted earlier, Section 153A of the Act lays down the manner and\nprocedure for reopening the assessments in cases of search. Section\n153A(1) of the Act provides that, the assessments can be reopened for a\nblock of six years preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous\nyear

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

148 of the Act under the new regime.\n26. As noted earlier, Section 153A of the Act lays down the manner and\nprocedure for reopening the assessments in cases of search. Section\n153A(1) of the Act provides that, the assessments can be reopened for a\nblock of six years preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous\nyear

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

bogus purchases: Rs.4,43,24,430/-\nc. Unexplained money under section 69A: Rs.39,22,000/- on account of\namounts received from Shri B.S. Prasad\nd. Unexplained expenditure under section 69C: Rs.42,30,000/- being interest\npaid to Shri B.S. Prasad\ne. Addition on account of sale proceeds of land at Palakol: Rs.1,97,03,000/-\nf. Miscellaneous receipts: Rs.11

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

bogus\npurchases as against appellant's voluntary disallowance of 12% in\nROI u/s 148.\n3.1 On facts and under the circumstances of the case, the learned\nCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai erred in\nadjudicating the disallowances at 20% of the alleged bogus\npurchases, which is over and above the disallowances of 12% on\nalleged bogus purchases voluntarily returned

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

bogus purchases: Rs.4,43,24,430/-\nc. Unexplained money under section 69A: Rs.39,22,000/- on account of\namounts received from Shri B.S. Prasad\nd. Unexplained expenditure under section 69C: Rs.42,30,000/- being interest\npaid to Shri B.S. Prasad\ne. Addition on account of sale proceeds of land at Palakol: Rs.1,97,03,000/-\nf. Miscellaneous receipts: Rs.11

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

bogus purchases: Rs.4,43,24,430/-\nc. Unexplained money under section 69A: Rs.39,22,000/- on account of\namounts received from Shri B.S. Prasad\nd. Unexplained expenditure under section 69C: Rs.42,30,000/- being interest\npaid to Shri B.S. Prasad\ne. Addition on account of sale proceeds of land at Palakol: Rs.1,97,03,000/-\nf. Miscellaneous receipts: Rs.11

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

148 of the Act under the new regime.\n26. As noted earlier, Section 153A of the Act lays down the manner and\nprocedure for reopening the assessments in cases of search. Section\n153A(1) of the Act provides that, the assessments can be reopened for a\nblock of six years preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous\nyear

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) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent/Cross\nObjector)\n\nITA Nos.2971 - 2972/Chny/2024\nनिर्धारणवर्ष/A

148 of the Act is found to have, out of caution, admitted to\n15% of the bogus purchases by way of the profit element embedded\ntherein, but it contested the allegation of bogus purchases in its entirety\nlevelled by the Revenue.\n\n8.3\nThe AO, in the course of assessment, is noted to have show caused\nthe assessee

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/

148 of the Act is found to have, out of caution, admitted to\n15% of the bogus purchases by way of the profit element embedded\ntherein, but it contested the allegation of bogus purchases in its entirety\nlevelled by the Revenue.\n\n8.3\nThe AO, in the course of assessment, is noted to have show caused\nthe assessee

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/

148 of the Act is found to have, out of caution, admitted to\n15% of the bogus purchases by way of the profit element embedded\ntherein, but it contested the allegation of bogus purchases in its entirety\nlevelled by the Revenue.\n\n8.3\nThe AO, in the course of assessment, is noted to have show caused\nthe assessee

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/

148 of the Act is found to have, out of caution, admitted to\n15% of the bogus purchases by way of the profit element embedded\ntherein, but it contested the allegation of bogus purchases in its entirety\nlevelled by the Revenue.\n\n8.3\nThe AO, in the course of assessment, is noted to have show caused\nthe assessee

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/

148 of the Act is found to have, out of caution, admitted to\n15% of the bogus purchases by way of the profit element embedded\ntherein, but it contested the allegation of bogus purchases in its entirety\nlevelled by the Revenue.\n\n8.3 The AO, in the course of assessment, is noted to have show caused\nthe assessee

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/

148 of the Act is found to have, out of caution, admitted to\n15% of the bogus purchases by way of the profit element embedded\ntherein, but it contested the allegation of bogus purchases in its entirety\nlevelled by the Revenue.\n\n8.3 The AO, in the course of assessment, is noted to have show caused\nthe assessee