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

bogus old\nbottle purchases. (In\nRs.)\nAmount sustained\nas per the\ndiscussions\n(in Rs.)\nAmount to be\ndeleted\n(in Rs.)\n1\n2020-21\nRs.41,11,59,615\n(Rs.37,97,84,300 /-\n+\nRs.3,13,75,315/-)\nRs.11,43,16,602/-\nRs.29,68,43,013/-\n2\n2021-22\nRs.56,41,82,236/-\nRs.10,65,46,645/-\nRs.45

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

bogus old\nbottle purchases. (In\nRs.)\nAmount sustained\nas per the\ndiscussions\n(in Rs.)\nAmount to be\ndeleted\n(in Rs.)\n1\n2020-21\nRs.41,11,59,615\nRs.11,43,16,602/-\nRs.29,68,43,013/-\n(Rs.37,97,84,300 /-\n+\nRs.3,13,75,315/-)\n2\n2021-22\nRs.56,41,82,236/-\nRs.10,65,46,645/-\nRs.45

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

bogus old\nbottle purchases. (\nIn Rs.)\n| Amount sustained\nas per the\ndiscussions\n(in Rs.)\n| Amount to be\ndeleted\n(in Rs.)\n1\n| 2020-21\n| Rs.41,11,59,615\n| Rs.11,43,16,602/-\n| Rs.29,68,43,013/-\n(Rs.37,97,84,300 /-\n+ Rs.3,13,75,315/-)\n2\n| 2021-22\n| Rs.56

M/S ENRICA ENTERPRISES PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Das

271(l)(c). The learned 1st appellate authority failed to see that the penalty proceedings are independent of assessment proceedings and therefore penalty is not leviable merely on the ground that certain additions have been made in the assessment proceedings. 10. The learned Commissioner ought to have seen that penalty cannot be levied merely because an amount taxed as income

M/S.ENRICA ENTERPRISES PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Das

271(l)(c). The learned 1st appellate authority failed to see that the penalty proceedings are independent of assessment proceedings and therefore penalty is not leviable merely on the ground that certain additions have been made in the assessment proceedings. 10. The learned Commissioner ought to have seen that penalty cannot be levied merely because an amount taxed as income

R. G. SUNDAR & CO,ERODE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1599 & 1600/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S. R.G. Sundar & Co., The Deputy Commissioner Erode Feeds Producers, Vs. Of Income Tax, 82, Perundurai Road, Central Circle-2, Perundurai – 638 001. Coimbatore Pan: Aaffr 3771C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri T. Banusekar, Advocate Shri Suraj Nahar, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25.04.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30.04.2024

section 271(1)(c) of the Act on ‘amount of tax on income sought to be evaded’. He noted that the assessee has nowhere disputed the bogus purchases

R. G. SUNDAR & CO,ERODE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 , COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1599 & 1600/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S. R.G. Sundar & Co., The Deputy Commissioner Erode Feeds Producers, Vs. Of Income Tax, 82, Perundurai Road, Central Circle-2, Perundurai – 638 001. Coimbatore Pan: Aaffr 3771C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri T. Banusekar, Advocate Shri Suraj Nahar, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25.04.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30.04.2024

section 271(1)(c) of the Act on ‘amount of tax on income sought to be evaded’. He noted that the assessee has nowhere disputed the bogus purchases

SELVA GOLD COVERING P LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

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

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3262/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S Selva Gold Covering Pvt. Ltd., C/O Shri S. Sridhar, The Deputy Commissioner Of Sh. A.S. Sriraman, Advocate , V. Income Tax, New No.14, Old No.82, Flat No.5, Corporate Circle – 2, 1St Avenue, Indira Nagar, Adyar, Coimbatore. Chennai - 600 020. Pan : Aadcs 0688 Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

bogus purchase in its accounts and suppressed sales, according to the Ld. D.R., the Assessing Officer has rightly levied penalty under Section 271

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1) , CHENNAI vs. C.V.SUNISH, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 1518/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2008-09 The Assistant Commissioner Of Shri C.V. Sunish, Income Tax, Central Circle 3(1), Vs. C/O Aditya Trading Solutions (P) Ltd., 6Th & 7Th Floor, Npl Towers, L.B. Road, 46, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai – 600 034. Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai 600 041. [Pan:Apfps3125J] (Appellant) (Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri T. Banusekar, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.10.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.10.2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai Dated 15.03.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2008-09. The Only Effective Ground Raised In The Appeal Of The Revenue Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Penalty Of ₹.22,38,721/- Levied Inadvertently Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

bogus loses to be set off against actual profit and spread profit to various entities to reduce the tax liability of several clients. The residence of the assessee, Shri C. V. Sunish, Managing Director of this group was also searched. Consequent to search, notice under section 153A of the Act was issued and the assessment was completed

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

purchasing peace, by itself, would not exonerate the assessee from the culpability. Having regard to the fact that the asses see had not disclosed any reason for the omission in the original return and that the revised return was filed only after the search, this court held that penalty was leviable" The facts herein are no different from the abovesaid

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

purchasing peace, by itself, would not exonerate the assessee from the culpability. Having regard to the fact that the asses see had not disclosed any reason for the omission in the original return and that the revised return was filed only after the search, this court held that penalty was leviable" The facts herein are no different from the abovesaid

ITO NON CORPORATE WARD-3(3), CHENNAI vs. BARAI HITENDRA SUNITA, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3457/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ms. Barai Hitendra Sunita, Non Corporate Ward 3(3), No. 35, Poes Garden, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai 600 086. Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Bkops4159K] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit : ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 11.01.2023 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.01.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 4, Chennai, Dated 23.10.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Only Issue Involved In This Appeal Is Relating To Deletion Of Penalty Levied Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

bogus claim and therefore, the penalty has to be levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act and strongly supported the order passed by the Assessing Officer. 5. On the other hand, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that once the details of company in which the assessee has purchased

M/S ENRICE ENTERPRISES PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Das

271 AAB failed to follow the specific definition of undisclosed income provided in Section 271AAB, being penal provision and that the same is required to be strictly construed in light of satisfaction of conditions specified therein. 10. The learned CIT(A) ought to have seen that appellant has admitted a consolidated sum of Rs. 113.99 Crores over the Financial Years

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. SRI BALAJI EDUCATIONAL AMD TRUST CHARITABLE PUBLIC TRUST , CHENNA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee and that of the Department are dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1249/Chny/2025 िनधा$रण वष$ / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Sri Balaji Educational & Acit, Charitable Public Trust, Vs. Central Circle 3(4), No. 60, First Avenue, Chennai. Jai Durga Complex, Ashok Nagar, Chennai – 600 083. Tamil Nadu. (&'थ"/Respondent) [Pan: Aacts-1386-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1471/Chny/2025 िनधा$रण वष$ / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Acit, M/S. Sri Balaji Educational & Central Circle 3(4), Vs. Charitable Public Trust, Chennai. No. 60, First Avenue, Jai Durga Complex, Ashok Nagar, Chennai – 600 083. Tamil Nadu. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) [Pan: Aacts-1386-D] (&'थ"/Respondent) िनधा$)रती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri. Y.Sridhar, Fca राज4 की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 01.12.2025

271,69,63,296 M.K. Rajagopal 1. 2013-14 Additional Income offered as per Final 13,87,12,778 Order dt. 13.03.2017 u/s.245D(4) of the 2. 2014-15 6,42,45,569 Act by ITSC, Chennai 3. 2015-16 12,98,65,498 4. 2016-17 55,13,19,650 Total 88,41,43,495 Total Disclosure

M/S. SRI BALAJI EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE PUBLIC TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee and that of the Department are dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1249/Chny/2025 िनधा$रण वष$ / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Sri Balaji Educational & Acit, Charitable Public Trust, Vs. Central Circle 3(4), No. 60, First Avenue, Chennai. Jai Durga Complex, Ashok Nagar, Chennai – 600 083. Tamil Nadu. (&'थ"/Respondent) [Pan: Aacts-1386-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1471/Chny/2025 िनधा$रण वष$ / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Acit, M/S. Sri Balaji Educational & Central Circle 3(4), Vs. Charitable Public Trust, Chennai. No. 60, First Avenue, Jai Durga Complex, Ashok Nagar, Chennai – 600 083. Tamil Nadu. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) [Pan: Aacts-1386-D] (&'थ"/Respondent) िनधा$)रती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri. Y.Sridhar, Fca राज4 की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 01.12.2025

271,69,63,296 M.K. Rajagopal 1. 2013-14 Additional Income offered as per Final 13,87,12,778 Order dt. 13.03.2017 u/s.245D(4) of the 2. 2014-15 6,42,45,569 Act by ITSC, Chennai 3. 2015-16 12,98,65,498 4. 2016-17 55,13,19,650 Total 88,41,43,495 Total Disclosure

M/S. ICICI BANK LTD. (ERSTWHILE BANK OF MADURA LTD.),CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1589/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 1996-97

Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') by an order dated 28.03.2006 on the ground that the assessee has failed to make true and correct statement of income and concealed the particulars of its income by claiming bogus depreciation. The Ld.counsel further submitted that the assessee claimed for depreciation to the extent

PRAMILA PATEL,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW - 10 (3),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1827/Chny/2019. "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2009-2010. Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Pramila Patel, No.27, Gnt Road, Non Corporate Ward 10(3) Puzhal, Chennai. Chennai 600 066. [Pan Aeipp 1044H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

purchase of shares by cash, on similar facts of that of appellant, ITAT Mumbai in the case of ITO vs Shamim M.Bharwoni 69 Taxmann.com 65(2016) held that AO rightly rejected assessee’s claim and added amount in question to his taxable income under section 68. Cases of such accommodation entries have been examined by High Court of Allahabad while

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SIVA VENTURES LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA No 1392/2016 for the

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

purchaser and developer of the land of 196.97 Acres. However, the assessee accepted the receipts of interest for Rs35 Crores as per the agreement made dated 29.12.2006 which was calculated on pro rata basis. But in connection with this interest income, the assessee claimed it as a capital receipt and hence it should not be treated as revenue receipt