ST. JOSEPHS INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY TRUST,CHENNAI vs. DCOT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

capitation fees, failed to disclose them, and did not meet the conditions for a reduced penalty under Section 271AAB(1A)(a). • The 60% penalty under Section 271AAB(IA)(b) is appropriate. Invalidating the notice on a technicality would defeat the legislative intent to deter tax evasion in search cases. e. Holistic Interpretation of the Notice • The notice should be interpreted

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. MANIKANDAN, CHENNAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

sections [***] [54, [54B, [***], [54D, [54E, [54EA,\n54EB,] 54F [, 54G and 54H]]]]], be chargeable to income tax\nunder the head \"Capital gains\", and shall be deemed to be the\nincome of the previous year in which the transfer took place.\n[(1A

ST. JOSHEPHS INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY TRUST,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-193), CHENNAI

capitation fees,\nfailed to disclose them, and did not meet the conditions for a reduced\npenalty under Section 271AAB(1A)(a).\n• The 60% penalty under Section 271AAB(IA)(b) is appropriate.\nInvalidating the notice on a technicality would defeat the legislative\nintent to deter tax evasion in search cases.\ne. Holistic Interpretation of the Notice\n• The notice should

ST. JOSEPHS EDUCATIONAL TRUST,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-193), CHENNAI

capitation fees,\nfailed to disclose them, and did not meet the conditions for a reduced\npenalty under Section 271AAB(1A)(a).\n•\nThe 60% penalty under Section 271AAB(IA)(b) is appropriate.\nInvalidating the notice on a technicality would defeat the legislative\nintent to deter tax evasion in search cases.\ne. Holistic Interpretation of the Notice\n•\nThe notice should

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

1A).\nExplanation.-For the purposes of this section, the expression “income from\nforeign sources” means income which accrues or arises outside India (except\nincome derived from a business controlled in or a profession set up in\nIndia)] [and which is not deemed to accrue or arise in India] .....\"\n4.5 The first and foremost condition to be satisfied by a person

VENKEDAPATHY VENUGOPAL,COIMBATORE vs. ITO, NON CORP WE 2(1) COIMBATORE, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

1A) of the Act. On a plain reading of the statutory provisions, there exists no express bar either in section 87A or section 111A for denial of rebate in respect of tax payable on short-term capital gains

MOHIT GUPTA,CHENNAI vs. ITO,NON- CORP WARD 17(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly- allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1847/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Mohit Gupta, The Income Tax Officer, T45, Old No.T11, Vs. Non-Corporate Ward 17(2), Vi Avenue, Chennai. Besant Nagar, Chennai – 600 090. Pan: Aoqpg 5419R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri N. Arjun Raj, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.11.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25.11.2025

1A at page 166 of the paper-book demonstrates the purchase of the new asset comprising of land and building, which is captured below:- :- 8 -: 10. The sole reason for denial of exemption u/s 54 of the Act for the assessment year under consideration is on the ground that the assessee had not deposited the sale proceeds into the capital

RAMAKRISHNAN PRABHU JYOTHI,,COIMBATORE vs. ACOT, NCC-5, , COIMBATORE

In the result the appeal is dismissed

gains. The second limb of the statute e.i “purchase”\nhas not been fulfilled. The assesse is consistently harping on the issue that\nas it has purchased the impugned immovable property from Jeypore Sugar\nCompany Limited(JSC) and has paid the whole amount of consideration\namounting to Rs.141 Crores app. and has obtained the possession, there\nmay not be any doubt

SINDYA SECURITIES AND INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT,CORP.CIRCLE-6[2], CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.438/Chny/2022 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S. Sindya Securities & Investments Pvt. Ltd. Acit बनाम/ No.609, Lakshi Bavan, V Floor Corporate Circle 6(2) Sundaram Avenue, Mount Road Chennai Vs. Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 006. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aalcs-3297-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri T. Banusekar (Ca) & Shri Vishwa Padmanabhan,(Ca) - Ld.Ars " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. S. Senthil Kumaran (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03-08-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08-09-2023 आदेश / O R D E R

section 263 are not invocable in the facts and circumstances of the case. Chargeability of proceeds received on termination of call option agreement: 4. For that the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax erred in not appreciating that the proceeds received on termination of call option agreement were to be treated as capital gains. 5. For 'that the Principal Commissioner

GANESAN KANNAN,THOOTHUKUDI vs. ITI, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION WARD, THOOTHUKUDI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.: 698/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19

Gain on sale of 1,34,63,935 1,43,14,139 property I & II Total Assessed Income 1,43,66,879 :-6-: ITA. No:698/Chny/2024 Aggrieved by the final assessment order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 5. The learned AR for the assessee submitted that legal grounds are purely issues concerning the limitation prescribed u/s.153

DCIT , CHENNAI vs. M/S BRITISH AGRO PRODUCTS (INDIA) PVT LTD , CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2017-18 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkery, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 969 & 970/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. British Agro Products Income Tax, V. (India) Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Circle -1(1), No. 9, State Bank Officers Chennai – 600 034. Colony, Shastri Nagar, Adyar, Chennai – 600 020. [Pan: Aafcb-8238-H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. M. Rajan, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Y. Sridhar, Fca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.03.2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05.04.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

gains, or Rs. 10,000, whichever is less. However section 80JJA of Income tax Act is omitted by the Finance Act 1983, the condition on which deduction had been denied is still prevailing and relevant to the facts of the case. V) However assessee has claimed vide letter filed on 23.12.2019 that the company is dealing in button mushroom only

DCIT , CHENNAI vs. M/S BRITISH AGRO PRODUCTS (INDIA) PVT LTD , CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2017-18 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkery, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 969 & 970/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. British Agro Products Income Tax, V. (India) Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Circle -1(1), No. 9, State Bank Officers Chennai – 600 034. Colony, Shastri Nagar, Adyar, Chennai – 600 020. [Pan: Aafcb-8238-H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. M. Rajan, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Y. Sridhar, Fca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.03.2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05.04.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

gains, or Rs. 10,000, whichever is less. However section 80JJA of Income tax Act is omitted by the Finance Act 1983, the condition on which deduction had been denied is still prevailing and relevant to the facts of the case. V) However assessee has claimed vide letter filed on 23.12.2019 that the company is dealing in button mushroom only

ALTHI VENKATA NARENDRA RAJU,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Capital Gain for the AY 2014-15.\n\n4.0\nThe Ld. Counsel for the assessee has vehemently argued that the\norder dated 28.09.2021 passed by the Ld.AO is barred by limitation within\nthe meanings of section 153(3). It has been argued inviting reference to\nthe statutory provisions of section 153(3) as well as judicial precedents\ncovering the subject

SMT. JAYANTHI SEEMAN,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW - 1 (2),, CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Capital Gain on\nsale of immovable property at T Nagar, Chennai\"\nThe assessment was completed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Income\nTax Act, 1961, wherein the following additions were made for the\nΑ.Υ. 2013-14:\nSl.No Details\nAmount Rs.\nIncome admitted in return of income\n2,57,140\nAdditions:\n1\nUnexplained cash deposits u/s.69

SMT. JAYANTHI SEEMAN,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW - 1 (2),, CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Section 36 of\nIncome Tax Act, 1961,\n“if any interest paid for the business purpose, the same has to\nbe allowed as business expenditure " as held in the cases of -\nThe DCIT, Cir. 1(1(1), Ahmedabad v. Applitech Solution Ltd. (/TAT\nAhmedabad B Bench) in ITA no.248/4hd/2020 pronounced on\n19/05/2023; and Vodafone India Ltd. vs. Additional Commissioner

ABAN OFFSHORE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, INTL, TAX 1(1), CHENNAI

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

Capital gains\") for-\n(i)\n(iva) the use or right to use any industrial, commercial or scientific\nequipment but not including the amounts referred to in section 44BB;\n(v)\n(vi)......\nFees for technical services:\n“Explanation 2.—For the purposes of this clause, \"fees for technical\nservices\" means any consideration (including any lump sum consideration)\nfor

NISHANK SAKARIYA,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CC-4(1),, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Capital Gain (LTCG) on the transfer of the same land at Puzhal/ scheduled land (which Mr. Nishank Sakariya :: 4 :: was offered by assessee in AY 2014-15) at Rs.1,29,40,706/-. The AO taking note that assessee had disclosed LTCG of Rs.1,15,33,051 in its RoI for AY 2014-15; So, he gave credit

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. M. MAHADEVAN, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are decided as under:-

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1824/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2013-14 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1825/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1826/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2019-20

1A). Explanation.-For the purposes of this section, the expression “income from foreign sources” means income which accrues or arises outside India (except income derived from a business controlled in or a profession set up in India)] 83[and which is not deemed to accrue or arise in India]…..” 4.5 The first and foremost condition to be satisfied

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

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are decided as under:-

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1824/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2013-14 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1825/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1826/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2019-20

1A). Explanation.-For the purposes of this section, the expression “income from foreign sources” means income which accrues or arises outside India (except income derived from a business controlled in or a profession set up in India)] 83[and which is not deemed to accrue or arise in India]…..” 4.5 The first and foremost condition to be satisfied