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

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 as income of the appellant. The AR the appellant. The AR contended that if the disallowance of alleged bogus purchases made by the AO contended that

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

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 as income of the appellant. The AR the appellant. The AR contended that if the disallowance of alleged bogus purchases made by the AO contended that

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

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 as income of the appellant. The AR the appellant. The AR contended that if the disallowance of alleged bogus purchases made by the AO contended that

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

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

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

bogus purchases, amounting to Rs. 53,25,720, representing the income component of such purchases totaling Rs. 4,43,81,000/-. 36. The assessee further stated that the seized records also reflected other inflows and outflows unrelated to the aforementioned items. A portion of this related to on-money received from the sale of land at Palakol, amounting

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

bogus purchases, amounting to Rs. 53,25,720, representing the income component of such purchases totaling Rs. 4,43,81,000/-. 36. The assessee further stated that the seized records also reflected other inflows and outflows unrelated to the aforementioned items. A portion of this related to on-money received from the sale of land at Palakol, amounting

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 services. The assessee explicitly requested\nthat the deposition of Shri Stanley Babu be disregarded in light of\nthese inconsistencies. These facts are undisputed.\n:- 41 -:\nITA Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025\nITA Nos.1874, 1876 & 1879/Chny/2025\nIntegrated Service Point Ltd.\n90. Further, Shri Stanley Babu, upon leaving the employment of the\nassessee company in January 2024, submitted an affidavit reiterating\nthe inconsistencies

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 services. The assessee explicitly requested\nthat the deposition of Shri Stanley Babu be disregarded in light of\nthese inconsistencies. These facts are undisputed.\n:- 41 -:\nITA Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025\nITA Nos.1874, 1876 & 1879/Chny/2025\nIntegrated Service Point Ltd.\n90. Further, Shri Stanley Babu, upon leaving the employment of the\nassessee company in January 2024, submitted an affidavit reiterating\nthe inconsistencies

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

bogus purchases from 12% to 20% by the Id. CIT(A) was\nwithout any rational basis. Accordingly, the assessee sought deletion\nof the resultant addition of Rs.35,39,166/-.\n- : 38 -:\nITA Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025\nITA Nos.1874, 1876 & 1879/Chny/2025\nIntegrated Service Point Ltd.\n78. Aggrieved by the relief granted by the Id. CIT(A), the Revenue\nraised nine grounds

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX OFFICE, TRICHY vs. RAMASAMY SIVAPRAKASAM, KARUR

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 69C of the Act which deals with nature and source of payment of expenditure, whereas in the instant case, the source of payment made towards purchase was not in question and rather the disallowance was made u/s 37(1) of the Act which deals with the allowability of expenditure for which business purpose test is applicable

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, TRICHY, INCOME TAX OFFICE, TRICHY vs. RAMASAMY SIVAPRAKASAM, KARUR

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 69C of the Act which deals with nature and source of payment of expenditure, whereas in the instant case, the source of payment made towards purchase was not in question and rather the disallowance was made u/s 37(1) of the Act which deals with the allowability of expenditure for which business purpose test is applicable

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

In the result, both the both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Revenue and the

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

bogus purchases is Rs.4,41,70,464/- for the F.Y 2017-18 (From July 18 (From July 2017), Rs. 5,69,70,130/ 2017), Rs. 5,69,70,130/- for the F.Y 2018-19 and Rs. 2,95,16,955/ 95,16,955/- for the F.Y. 2019-20 (up 20 (up to 4.8.2019). The above seized materials were handed over

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

In the result, both the both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Revenue and the

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

bogus purchases is Rs.4,41,70,464/- for the F.Y 2017-18 (From July 18 (From July 2017), Rs. 5,69,70,130/ 2017), Rs. 5,69,70,130/- for the F.Y 2018-19 and Rs. 2,95,16,955/ 95,16,955/- for the F.Y. 2019-20 (up 20 (up to 4.8.2019). The above seized materials were handed over

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

Bogus purchase as stated by you, I\nrequest you to provide me 15 days time to reconcile the same.\"\n\n4.6\nIn light of the above seized electronic material, depositions of the\nemployees, CFO, CEO & the Managing Director, the AO is noted to have\nreopened the income-tax assessments of the assessee by issue of notices\nu/s