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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

41,82,236 58,23,45,992 2 Disallowance of data center expenses Disallowance of data center expenses 55,64,877 61,36,677 61,36,677 1,29,61,697 3 Addition on a/c of unaccounted sale of Addition on a/c of unaccounted sale of NA 42,94,341 42,94,341 42,94,341 scrap 4 Addition

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

bogus purchases and the item escaping assessment\nwas 'expenditure' and not any 'asset'. According to us, the allegation\nconcerning the assessee's income which had escaped assessment was\nregarding the genuineness of the expenses claimed in the accounts. The\nITA Nos.1163, 1256, 1257 & 1259/Chny/2025 &\nITA Nos.1231, 1232, 1234 & 1236/Chny/2025\n(AYs 2013-14 to 2016-17)\nM/s. Southern Agrifurane Industries

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

bogus purchases and the item escaping assessment\nwas 'expenditure' and not any 'asset'. According to us, the allegation\nconcerning the assessee's income which had escaped assessment was\nregarding the genuineness of the expenses claimed in the accounts. The\nITA Nos.1163, 1256, 1257 & 1259/Chny/2025 &\nITA Nos.1231, 1232, 1234 & 1236/Chny/2025\n(AYs 2013-14 to 2016-17)\nM/s. Southern Agrifurane Industries

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 purchases and the item escaping assessment\nwas 'expenditure' and not any 'asset'. According to us, the allegation\nconcerning the assessee's income which had escaped assessment was\nregarding the genuineness of the expenses claimed in the accounts. The\nITA Nos.1163, 1256, 1257 & 1259/Chny/2025 &\nITA Nos.1231, 1232, 1234 & 1236/Chny/2025\n(AYs 2013-14 to 2016-17)\nM/s. Southern Agrifurane Industries

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 purchases and the item escaping assessment\nwas 'expenditure' and not any 'asset'. According to us, the allegation\nconcerning the assessee's income which had escaped assessment was\nregarding the genuineness of the expenses claimed in the accounts. The\nITA Nos.1163, 1256, 1257 & 1259/Chny/2025 &\nITA Nos.1231, 1232, 1234 & 1236/Chny/2025\n(AYs 2013-14 to 2016-17)\nM/s. Southern Agrifurane Industries

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

bogus purchases and the item escaping assessment\nwas 'expenditure' and not any 'asset'. According to us, the allegation\nconcerning the assessee's income which had escaped assessment was\nregarding the genuineness of the expenses claimed in the accounts. The\nITA Nos.1163, 1256, 1257 & 1259/Chny/2025 &\nITA Nos.1231, 1232, 1234 & 1236/Chny/2025\n(AYs 2013-14 to 2016-17)\nM/s. Southern Agrifurane Industries

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

bogus purchases and the item escaping assessment\nwas 'expenditure' and not any 'asset'. According to us, the allegation\nconcerning the assessee's income which had escaped assessment was\nregarding the genuineness of the expenses claimed in the accounts. The\nITA Nos.1163, 1256, 1257 & 1259/Chny/2025 &\nITA Nos.1231, 1232, 1234 & 1236/Chny/2025\n(AYs 2013-14 to 2016-17)\nM/s. Southern Agrifurane Industries

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

1 to 66. It is noted that, this excel file excel file comprised of five(5) Sheets which comprised of data relating to purchase which comprised of data relating to purchase which comprised of data relating to purchase of old bottles for three-month period in the year 2020 month period in the year 2020. The AO is noted

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

1 to 66. It is noted that, this excel file excel file comprised of five(5) Sheets which comprised of data relating to purchase which comprised of data relating to purchase which comprised of data relating to purchase of old bottles for three-month period in the year 2020 month period in the year 2020. The AO is noted

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

1 to 66. It is noted that, this excel file excel file comprised of five(5) Sheets which comprised of data relating to purchase which comprised of data relating to purchase which comprised of data relating to purchase of old bottles for three-month period in the year 2020 month period in the year 2020. The AO is noted

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

1 to 66. It is noted that, this excel file excel file comprised of five(5) Sheets which comprised of data relating to purchase which comprised of data relating to purchase which comprised of data relating to purchase of old bottles for three-month period in the year 2020 month period in the year 2020. The AO is noted

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

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

bogus purchases is Rs.4,41,70,464/- for the F.Y 2017-18 (From July\n2017), Rs.5,69,70,130/- for the F.Y 2018-19 and Rs.2,95,16,955/- for\nthe F.Y. 2019-20 (up to 4.8.2019).\nThe above seized materials were handed over to the undersigned on\n18.06.2021. On perusal of the seized material I am satisfied that

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

bogus purchases is Rs.4,41,70,464/- for the F.Y 2017-18 (From July\n2017), Rs.5,69,70,130/- for the F.Y 2018-19 and Rs.2,95,16,955/- for\nthe F.Y. 2019-20 (up to 4.8.2019).\nThe above seized materials were handed over to the undersigned on\n18.06.2021. On perusal of the seized material I am satisfied 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

41,82,236/- & Rs.\n58,23,45,992/-for the AY(s) 2021-22 & 2022-23 being the bogus\npurchases as income of the appellant. The AR contended that if the\ndisallowance of alleged bogus purchases made by the AO is considered,\nthe resultant net profit would be an unreasonable net profit which\ncannot be achieved in the kind

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

41,82,236/- & Rs.\n58,23,45,992/-for the AY(s) 2021-22 & 2022-23 being the bogus\npurchases as income of the appellant. The AR contended that if the\ndisallowance of alleged bogus purchases made by the AO is considered,\nthe resultant net profit would be an unreasonable net profit which\ncannot be achieved in the kind

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

41,82,236/- & Rs.\n58,23,45,992/-for the AY(s) 2021-22 & 2022-23 being the bogus\npurchases as income of the appellant. The AR contended that if the\ndisallowance of alleged bogus purchases made by the AO is considered,\nthe resultant net profit would be an unreasonable net profit which\ncannot be achieved in the kind