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

bogus purchases were identical in both the AYs 2018-19 & 2019 19 & 2019-20 impugned before us. Both the parties have Both the parties have also argued these appeals together. eals together. Hence, for the sake of convenience, Hence, for the sake of convenience, ITA Nos.1613 to 1615 1613 to 1615 /Chny/2025 & ITA Nos.1547 & 1548/Chny/2025 ITA Nos.1547 & 1548/Chny/2025

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

bogus purchases were identical in both the AYs 2018-19 & 2019 19 & 2019-20 impugned before us. Both the parties have Both the parties have also argued these appeals together. eals together. Hence, for the sake of convenience, Hence, for the sake of convenience, ITA Nos.1613 to 1615 1613 to 1615 /Chny/2025 & ITA Nos.1547 & 1548/Chny/2025 ITA Nos.1547 & 1548/Chny/2025

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

bogus purchases were identical in both the AYs 2018-19 & 2019 19 & 2019-20 impugned before us. Both the parties have Both the parties have also argued these appeals together. eals together. Hence, for the sake of convenience, Hence, for the sake of convenience, ITA Nos.1613 to 1615 1613 to 1615 /Chny/2025 & ITA Nos.1547 & 1548/Chny/2025 ITA Nos.1547 & 1548/Chny/2025

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

7 ::\nITA Nos.1817 to 1819/Chny/2025 &\nITA Nos.1550 to 1552 /Chny/2025\n(AYs 2020-21 to 2022-23)\nM/s.Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd.\nthat, Shri Austine Paulraj had identified eight (8) regular suppliers who\nwere inter alia providing these bogus invoices to the assessee, apart from\nactual supply of old bottles and quantified the bogus transactions at\nRs.390 crores

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

7 ::\nITA Nos.1817 to 1819/Chny/2025 &\nITA Nos.1550 to 1552 /Chny/2025\n(AYs 2020-21 to 2022-23)\nM/s.Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd.\nthat, Shri Austine Paulraj had identified eight (8) regular suppliers who\nwere inter alia providing these bogus invoices to the assessee, apart from\nactual supply of old bottles and quantified the bogus transactions at\nRs.390 crores

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

7 ::\nITA Nos.1817 to 1819/Chny/2025 &\nITA Nos.1550 to 1552 /Chny/2025\n(AYs 2020-21 to 2022-23)\nM/s.Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd.\nthat, Shri Austine Paulraj had identified eight (8) regular suppliers who\nwere inter alia providing these bogus invoices to the assessee, apart from\nactual supply of old bottles and quantified the bogus transactions at\nRs.390 crores

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

7 ::\nITA Nos.1817 to 1819/Chny/2025 &\nITA Nos.1550 to 1552 /Chny/2025\n(AYs 2020-21 to 2022-23)\nM/s.Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd.\n\nthat, Shri Austine Paulraj had identified eight (8) regular suppliers who\nwere inter alia providing these bogus invoices to the assessee, apart from\nactual supply of old bottles and quantified the bogus transactions at\nRs.390 crores

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

7 ::\nITA Nos.1817 to 1819/Chny/2025 &\nITA Nos.1550 to 1552 /Chny/2025\n(AYs 2020-21 to 2022-23)\nM/s.Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd.\ntwo-week time to arrive that M/s SAFL had paid 8% commission on\nbasic value of invoice, le without GST and TDS/TCS, to the old bottle\nsuppliers for raising bogus old purchase invoices.\nb) Shri. Augustine Paulraj Vice

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 & held in favour of revenue. 6. The Ld. LD.CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made on account of disallowances for Expenses without taking into consideration the fact that the expenses per se were bogus in nature 7. The Ld. LD.CIT(A) has not taken cognizance of the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case

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 & held in favour of revenue. 6. The Ld. LD.CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made on account of disallowances for Expenses without taking into consideration the fact that the expenses per se were bogus in nature 7. The Ld. LD.CIT(A) has not taken cognizance of the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case

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

7 -:\nBabu, Deputy Manager (Accounts) of the assessee company, wherein\nhe stated that certain transactions reflected in the Excel sheet\npertained to activities outside the books of account. He further\ndeposed u/s.132(4) that bills raised by certain transport providers\nwere inflated and that some purchases recorded were bogus in nature.\nThis statement was partly affirmed by the Director, Shri

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

section 69A,\nthe addition of unexplained expenditure of Rs.42,30,000/- under\nsection 69C, and the minor addition of Rs.81,230/-, all of which were\nmade in the assessment order.\n77. Simultaneously, the assessee also preferred an appeal, raising a\nsolitary ground that the enhancement of estimated income on the\nalleged bogus purchases from

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 expenditure.\nThe income already disclosed in the return under section 148 of Rs.\n53,25,720/- was considered, and the remaining balance of Rs.\n3,89,98,710/- was brought to tax under section 37(1).\n45. The seized Excel sheet also reflected a cash transaction of Rs.\n39,22,000/- in the name of Shri B. Sivaprasad

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

section 69A,\nthe addition of unexplained expenditure of Rs.42,30,000/- under\nsection 69C, and the minor addition of Rs.81,230/-, all of which were\nmade in the assessment order.\n77. Simultaneously, the assessee also preferred an appeal, raising a\nsolitary ground that the enhancement of estimated income on the\nalleged bogus purchases from

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

7. Per contra, the Ld. AR for the assessee argued that, the AO had not disputed the sales of Rs.9.63 crores made out of the purchases of Rs.2.23 crores. He showed us that majority of these sales were exports and therefore its genuineness could not be doubted. He further took us through the quantitative details of the purchases and sales

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

7. Per contra, the Ld. AR for the assessee argued that, the AO had not disputed the sales of Rs.9.63 crores made out of the purchases of Rs.2.23 crores. He showed us that majority of these sales were exports and therefore its genuineness could not be doubted. He further took us through the quantitative details of the purchases and sales

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 purchases was upheld, by observing\nas under:-\n\n\"10. Considering the submissions made by learned advocate\nMr.Sanghani as well as the finding of facts recorded by the CIT(A) and\nthe Tribunal, it appears that so far as the Question No.1 is concerned,\nthe CIT(A) has noted the fact that the Assessing Officer while making\naddition

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/

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