ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 4(1), CHENNAI vs. MANGAL TIRTH ESTATE LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1965/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Mangal Tirth Estate Ltd., Income-Tax, V. No. 769, Spencer Plaza, Corporate Circle-4(1), Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002. Chennai. [Pan: Aaacm-4614-R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. N.V. Balaji, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29.11.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.01.2023

section 50C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) and adopted deemed consideration for computation of long term capital gains. The relevant findings of the AO are as under: From the above noting the following points emerged : 1. As on 31.03.1999, Out of 1,50,000 sq.ft. the assessee company had handed over

INCOME TAX OFFICER, CHENNAI vs. RAJKUMARI , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

920 iii. Capital Gain 12,52,750 iv. Other Sources 3,28,080 v. Loss to be set-off against Capital Gain 12,52,750 (-) Gross Total Income 4,75,000 Less: Chapter VIA 1,50,000 Total Income 3,25,000 He further submitted that the computation sheet dated 20.12.2019 issued in the present case correctly shows the income

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. THIYAGARAJAN RAVINDRAN, CHENNAI

In the result the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:2054/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Thiyagarajan Ravindran, No.53/54, 2Nd Lane, Central Circle 1(2), Vs. Chennai Madhavaram High Road (North), Perambur, Chennai – 600 011. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) [Pan: Aaepr-1108-E] (""थ"/Respondent)

capital gains tax' even if the same is not taxable as unexplained investment u/s.69 as may be erroneously held by the AO in the assessment order and the Id. CIT(A) ought to have exercised his powers conferred u/s.251(1)(a) of the Act as in an assessment order under appeal, the powers of ld. CIT(A) are co-terminus

CHARLES MOPUR ,CHENNAI vs. ITO , INTERNATIONAL TAXATION WARD - 1 (1) , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Dasआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1000/Chny/2022 िनधा(रण वष( /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Charles Mopur, The Income Tax Officer Old No.9, New No.27, Vs. (International Taxation), Lourdes Cottage, Railway Colony, Ward-I(1), Chennai. Chennai – 600 029. [Pan: Akjpc-6627-L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07.11.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.12.2023

920/-. Notice u/s 143(2) of the Act dated 29-05-2019 served upon the assessee and the assessee in compliance attended and filed the details such as copy of purchase deed, copy of sale deed, copy of bank account. The ld. AO noticed that, during the FY 2011-12, the assessee sold an immovable property situated

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

920/- u/s.14A of the Act. The AO in his reasons recorded for reopening the assessment for AY 2013-14, takes notes of certain events of subsequent assessment year i.e. AY 2014-15, wherein the assessee had admitted Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) of Rs.1,72,99,576/- in respect of sale of land at Puzhal, Red Hills, Chennai, [herein after

ACIT, NON-CORPORATE CIRCLE 7(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. LATE SHRI MAHAVEER BHANDARI, LEGAL HEIR- SMT. LALITHA BHANDARI, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2785/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2016-17 The Asst. Commissioner Of Late Shri Mahaveer Bhandari, Income Tax, Rep. By Legal Heir Smt. Lalitha Non-Corporate Circle 7(1), Vs. Bhandari, Chennai. 9, Athipattan Street, Mount Road, Chennai – 600 002. Pan: Aadpb 877A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. Anitha, Addl.Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ajith Kumar Chordia, Ca (Through Virtual Mode) सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.07.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.10.2025

920/- by adding an amount of Rs.7,85,10,196/- being difference on account of LTCG and amount of Rs. 99,39,998/- u/s.28(va) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the total income of the appellant. Being aggrieved by the same the assessee preferred the instant appeal. The AO stated that the case was selected for scrutiny under

DCIT, CC2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. JAYAPRIYA COMPANY, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

920 1,64,84,811 62,86,626 2018-19 1,73,70,240 60,21,575 2,15,16,

DCIT, CEN CIR 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. JAYAPRIYA COMPANY, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

920 1,64,84,811 62,86,626 2018-19 1,73,70,240 60,21,575 2,15,16,

MANGAL & MANGAL,TRICHY vs. ACIT, TRICHY

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.: 2207/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14

capital gain, professional or business income out of money lending, source of the money etc). Unless such facts are mentioned with some specificity, it cannot be said that the assessee has fulfilled the requirement that she, in her statement (under Section 132 (4))-substantiates the manner in which the undisclosed income was derived. Such being the case, this court

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. MRF LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

920/- vide order u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act‘) dated 29.12.2016. The AO thereafter in order to reopen the assessment issued notice u/s.148 of the Act dated 23.04.2019, which action was objected to by assessee, which was disposed by the AO and has reassessed the income of the assessee vide order dated

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CHENNAI vs. MRF LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

920/- vide order u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act‘) dated 29.12.2016. The AO thereafter in order to reopen the assessment issued notice u/s.148 of the Act dated 23.04.2019, which action was objected to by assessee, which was disposed by the AO and has reassessed the income of the assessee vide order dated

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. MRF LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

920/- vide order u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act‘) dated 29.12.2016. The AO thereafter in order to reopen the assessment issued notice u/s.148 of the Act dated 23.04.2019, which action was objected to by assessee, which was disposed by the AO and has reassessed the income of the assessee vide order dated

BANNARIAMMAN EDUCATIONAL TRUST,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(2), CHENNAI

920 1,48,67,688 8,42,50,232 1,51,65,042 9,94,15,274 1,29,28,424\n\n8.21 From the above, it is seen that, the assessee had from time to time \nagreed for a rate increase, as and when proposed by CBPL, whose \napproximate value for the period

BANNARIAMMAN EDUCATIONAL TRUST,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(2), CHENNAI

920\n1,48,67,688\n8,42,50,232\n1,51,65,042\n9,94,15,274\n1,29,28,424\n8.21 From the above, it is seen that, the assessee had from time to time\nagreed for a rate increase, as and when proposed by CBPL, whose\napproximate value for the period FYs 2016-17 to 2019-20 (leaving