LATE S. YOGARATHINAM, REP. BY L/H Y. SHANMUGA DURAI,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:626/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 Shri Y. Shanmuga Durai, L/H Of Acit Late S.Yogarathinam Vs. Circle -1(2) Old No.24, No.14, Chennai. 17/24, Ramanathan Street, T.Nagar, Chennai-600 017. Pan: Aakpy-9845-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Mr. Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06.03.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17.03.2025

capital gains on the account of transfer of properties between the two, if any, the consequential order passed by them should be reckoned as bad in law.] 11. The CIT (Appeals) -18, Chennai failed to appreciate that order of search assessment under Section 153C of the Act was passed out of time, invalid, passed without jurisdiction and not sustainable both

M.KIRAN KUMAR,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

capital gain. Similarly, the ld.CIT(A) confirmed addition made towards excess jewellery found during the course of search on the ground that the assessee did not offer any explanation / documents or evidences in support of his claim even during appellate proceedings. Aggrieved by the CIT(A)’s order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 12 I.T.A. No.3374/CHNY/2019

S.SATHYANARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao]

seizure operations conducted in the case of Shri. K. Sundarraj, who is the father of the appellant on 21.09.2005 and during the course of search, certain alleged incriminating materials were stated to have been seized. Consequently, notice u/s.153C of the Act was issued to the assessee on 28.08.2006. In response to such notice, the return of income for ITA Nos.754

S.SATHYANARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao]

seizure operations conducted in the case of Shri. K. Sundarraj, who is the father of the appellant on 21.09.2005 and during the course of search, certain alleged incriminating materials were stated to have been seized. Consequently, notice u/s.153C of the Act was issued to the assessee on 28.08.2006. In response to such notice, the return of income for ITA Nos.754

S.SATHYANARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao]

seizure operations conducted in the case of Shri. K. Sundarraj, who is the father of the appellant on 21.09.2005 and during the course of search, certain alleged incriminating materials were stated to have been seized. Consequently, notice u/s.153C of the Act was issued to the assessee on 28.08.2006. In response to such notice, the return of income for ITA Nos.754

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), CHENNAI vs. M. MAHADEVAN, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are decided as under:-\nITA Nos\nAssessment\nResult\nYear\nPartly allowed

capital gains in regard to the transfer made\nto Badr Unissa.\n3.9 The Id. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the assessee is not a\nparty to the slumpp sale and the understated value of the property is\nonly to be assessed in the hands of transacting parties without\nconsidering that all connected transactions are integrated one with\nrelated

ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE -3(1), CHENNAI vs. CHENNAI PROPERTIES AND INVESTMENTS LTD , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

capital gains for the AY 2016-17 based on the events that happened subsequent to the assessment year 2016-17. 3. Brief facts are that the assessee Chennai Properties and Investments Ltd., (hereinafter ‘CPIL’) is engaged in the business of I.T.A. Nos.222 & 310/Chny/2022 4 renting out of immovable properties and in real estate business. The assessee filed its return

PADAM J CHALLANI,CHENNAI vs. ACIT , CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3 (4) , CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1096/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Padam J Challani, Assistant Commissioner Of 23/1, Habibullah Road, V. Income Tax, T.Nagar, Chennai. Central Circle -3(4), [Pan: Aekpc-1816-N] Chennai – 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. D. Anand, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14.06.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28.06.2023

seizure action u/s. 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) was conducted in the Challani Group of Companies on 19.04.2012. During the course of search, gold jewellery of 8611.100 gms, silver articles of 75.805 kgs and diamond of 207.65 carats were found and seized from the bedrooms of Padham Challani, the appellant and Shri

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

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

Capital Gain as returned Rs. 7,13,052/-\nD. Income from Other Sources Rs. 12,29,325/-\nas returned\nE. Unexplained money (as in paras 12.1 to 12.5) Rs. 3,00,000/-\nE. Foreign travel expenditure added Rs. 1,50,000/-\nu/s 69C (as in para 13.1 to 13.6)\nGross Total income Rs. 1,35,62,191/-\nLess: Deduction under

VARADAPPAN NATARAJAN,RASIPURAM vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, SALEM

In the result, both the appeals of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1535 & 1801/Chny/2024 ननिाारण वर्ा/Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2015-16 V. Varadappan Natarajan/ The Acit, V. Natarajan (Individual), Central Circle, No.64-C, Rotary Nagar, Salem. Rasipuram Tamil Nadu-637 408. [Pan: Acgpn1477Q] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, Fca (Virtual) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Shiva Srinivas, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2025 घोर्णाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2025

Capital Gains of Rs.1,32,78,187/- admitted by the assessee has been modified by the AO at an figure of Rs.1,88,57,487/-. 8. In view of the above grounds and other submissions to be made at the time of Appeal hearing, the order U/S 250(6) passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) may be cancelled

SHRI V. NATARAJAN (INDIVIDUAL),RASIPURAM vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, SALEM

In the result, both the appeals of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1535 & 1801/Chny/2024 ननिाारण वर्ा/Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2015-16 V. Varadappan Natarajan/ The Acit, V. Natarajan (Individual), Central Circle, No.64-C, Rotary Nagar, Salem. Rasipuram Tamil Nadu-637 408. [Pan: Acgpn1477Q] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, Fca (Virtual) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Shiva Srinivas, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2025 घोर्णाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2025

Capital Gains of Rs.1,32,78,187/- admitted by the assessee has been modified by the AO at an figure of Rs.1,88,57,487/-. 8. In view of the above grounds and other submissions to be made at the time of Appeal hearing, the order U/S 250(6) passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) may be cancelled

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

Capital Gain as returned\nD. Income from Other Sources Rs. 12,29,325/-\nas returned\nE. Unexplained money (as in paras 12.1 to 12.5) Rs. 3,00,000/-\nE. Foreign travel expenditure added Rs. 1,50,000/-\nu/s 69C (as in para 13.1 to 13.6)\nGross Total income Rs. 1,35,62,191/-\nLess: Deduction under Chapter

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. SMT. SUCHITRA MOHANLAL, CHENNAI

In the result appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A.Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2960/Chny/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) The Acit, Vs Smt. Suchitra Mohanlal, Central Circle 1(1), No.16, Casa Major Road, Chennai – 34. Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. Pan: Aaups8228G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

capital gains arising out of sale of property at Manohar Avenue, Egmore, Chennai. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual earning income from business and other sources. A search and seizure

DCIT, CEN CIR 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. ANBEZHIL SURYARAJ KUMAR, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1676/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Anbezhil Suryaraj Kumar, Flat No. G.2, Aarudhira Flats, 4Th Street, Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Anna Nagar, Chennai 600 040. Chennai. [Pan:Aetpa4862K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Shiva Srinivas, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 10.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.10.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 04.03.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 19, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 9 Days. The Dcit Central Circle 2(2), Chennai Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons. Upon Hearing Both The Parties & On Examination Of The Said Affidavit, We Find The Reasons Stated By The Appellant-

search and seizure operations were conducted in the case of M/s. Khazana Jewellery Pvt. Ltd. and others on 21.04.2016, as the assessee sold immovable property to key person in the said group, her residence was also covered. A notice under section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] was issued on 10.08.2017. In response to the notice

M/S. V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS LTD.,,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

search and seizure operation. The span of the years involved did give the assessing officer a vantage point for examining the design of the appellant in making a wrong claim of depreciation. However as examined in the light of legal provisions it has been seen that the transfer of goodwill in case of 17 I.T.A. Nos.2275-2281/Chny/2019 & appellant is not entitled

M/S. V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS LTD.,,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

search and seizure operation. The span of the years involved did give the assessing officer a vantage point for examining the design of the appellant in making a wrong claim of depreciation. However as examined in the light of legal provisions it has been seen that the transfer of goodwill in case of 17 I.T.A. Nos.2275-2281/Chny/2019 & appellant is not entitled

M/S. V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS LTD.,,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

search and seizure operation. The span of the years involved did give the assessing officer a vantage point for examining the design of the appellant in making a wrong claim of depreciation. However as examined in the light of legal provisions it has been seen that the transfer of goodwill in case of 17 I.T.A. Nos.2275-2281/Chny/2019 & appellant is not entitled

M/S. V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS LTD.,,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

search and seizure operation. The span of the years involved did give the assessing officer a vantage point for examining the design of the appellant in making a wrong claim of depreciation. However as examined in the light of legal provisions it has been seen that the transfer of goodwill in case of 17 I.T.A. Nos.2275-2281/Chny/2019 & appellant is not entitled