DCIT, CHENNAI vs. JAGATHRAKSHAKAN SRINISHA, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

condone the delay and the\nappeal is admitted for adjudication on merits.\nAppeal in respect of the assessment order dated 01.03.2019 in ITA\nNo.:1271/Chny/2025:\n3.\nThe brief facts of the case are as follows:\nThe assessee is an individual and is the daughter of Shri. S.Jagathrakshakan.\nA search was conducted u/s.132 of the Act, in the premises of Shri.Jagathrakshakan

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. JAGATHRAKSHAKAN SRINISHA, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

condone the delay and the\nappeal is admitted for adjudication on merits.\nAppeal in respect of the assessment order dated 01.03.2019 in ITA\nNo.:1271/Chny/2025:\n3. The brief facts of the case are as follows:\nThe assessee is an individual and is the daughter of Shri. S.Jagathrakshakan.\nA search was conducted u/s.132 of the Act, in the premises of Shri.Jagathrakshakan

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. JAGATHRAKSKAN SRINISHA, CHENNAI

condone the delay and the\nappeal is admitted for adjudication on merits.\nAppeal in respect of the assessment order dated 01.03.2019 in ITA\nNo.:1271/Chny/2025:\n3.\nThe brief facts of the case are as follows:\nThe assessee is an individual and is the daughter of Shri. S.Jagathrakshakan.\nA search was conducted u/s.132 of the Act, in the premises of Shri.Jagathrakshakan

V. GANESH,ARNI vs. PCIT (CENTRAL)1, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2039 /Chny/2024 निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2019-20 V.Ganesh, Pcit(Central), Chennai-1, No.65/Ia & Ib Sirumoor Road, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Rattinamangalam, Chennai Arni, Tamil Nadu-632316 [Pan: Agmpg7554M] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Smt.G.Vardhini Karthick, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.R.Anita, Adll.Cit सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.11.2024 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

section 115BBE r.w.s 69B. 4.0 We have heard the rival submissions in the light of material available on records. It is an admitted fact of the case that the delay of 75 days have occurred in this case. It is also an undisputed fact of the case that the present appeal has been filed after passage

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) , CIRCLE-, CUDDALORE vs. M. RAMESH JEWELLERS, TIRUKOYILURE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed, and the cross- appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

condone delay in filing of appeal and admit appeal filed by the assessee for adjudication. ITA No.587/chny/2025 – Revenue’s Appeal : 3. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. “The order of the ld.CIT(A) is contrary to the facts and findings of the Assessing Officer, which were made in the assessment order. 2. The ld.CIT(A) erred

M RAMESH JEWELLERS,TIRUKOILUR vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VILLUPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed, and the cross- appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

condone delay in filing of appeal and admit appeal filed by the assessee for adjudication. ITA No.587/chny/2025 – Revenue’s Appeal : 3. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. “The order of the ld.CIT(A) is contrary to the facts and findings of the Assessing Officer, which were made in the assessment order. 2. The ld.CIT(A) erred

JAGANNATHAN KRISHNAVENI,THANJAVUR vs. ITO,, WARD-1,, KUMBAKONAM

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Ms. Padmavathy.Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3617/Chny/2025 िनधा$रण वष$ /Assessment Year: 2019-20

section 69B of the act as unexplained investments. Aggrieved, the assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A). There was a delay of 201 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) did not condone

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MADURAI vs. THEVANESAM ERUDHAYA AMMAL EDUCATIONAL TRUST, TUTICORIN

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

69B of the 2 I.T.A. Nos. 228-231/Chny/18 Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] in the order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Act in all the above assessment years. 2. All the appeals filed by the Revenue are delayed by three days, for which, the Revenue has filed petition for condonation

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MADURAI vs. THEVANESAM ERUDHAYA AMMAL EDUCATIONAL TRUST, TUTICORIN

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

69B of the 2 I.T.A. Nos. 228-231/Chny/18 Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] in the order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Act in all the above assessment years. 2. All the appeals filed by the Revenue are delayed by three days, for which, the Revenue has filed petition for condonation

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MADURAI vs. THEVANESAM ERUDHAYA AMMAL EDUCATIONAL TRUST, TUTICORIN

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

69B of the 2 I.T.A. Nos. 228-231/Chny/18 Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] in the order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Act in all the above assessment years. 2. All the appeals filed by the Revenue are delayed by three days, for which, the Revenue has filed petition for condonation

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MADURAI vs. THEVANESAM ERUDHAYA AMMAL EDUCATIONAL TRUST, TUTICORIN

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

69B of the 2 I.T.A. Nos. 228-231/Chny/18 Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] in the order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Act in all the above assessment years. 2. All the appeals filed by the Revenue are delayed by three days, for which, the Revenue has filed petition for condonation

SHANMUGAM DHANALAKSHMI,RASIPURAM vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, SALEM

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

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1533/Chny/2024 िनधा9रण वष9 /Assessment Year: 2018-19

delay is condoned accordingly. 3. The only effective ground of appeal in this appeal of assessee is against the order of Ld. PCIT holding the order passed by the A.O erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue and directing the A.O to modify the assessment order u/s. 263 of the Act . 4. The brief facts of the case

THIRUVENGADAMUDALIAR RAMALINGAM,ARNI vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1830/Chny/2024 िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Year: 2020-21 Thiruvengadamudaliar Ramalingam The Principal Commissioner Of No.4, Big Sayakara Street, Vs. Income Tax (Central), Kosapalayam, Chennai-1. Arni – 632 301. [Pan: Aacpr 1690P]

delay is hereby condoned. 3. The effective ground of appeal in this appeal of assessee is against order passed by Ld. PCIT holding the order passed by the A.O u/s. 143(3) of the Act erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue and directing the A.O to add back the amount of Rs. 57,40,430/-. 4. The assessee

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. SHRI JAYA PRADEEP, CHENNAI

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

condone delay\nin filing of appeal and admit the appeal filed by the revenue for adjudication.\n2. The facts, as emanating from the record, are that the assessee is an\nindividual engaged in the business of real estate development and property\nletting, and has also derived income from salary during the year under\nconsideration. For the A.Y.2020-21, the assessee filed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, MADURAI vs. M/S INDUSTRIAL MINERAL CO., 100% EOU, TUTICORIN

In the result, the assessee’s appeal ITA No

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.390/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रण वष( / Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S. Industrial Mineral Co. 100% Eou Acit बनाम/ 1/1C, Harbour Express Highway, Central Circle-(1), Vs. Thermal Nagar So, Tuticorin-628 006. Madurai "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Tan No. Aaafi-9714-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.529/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रण वष( / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Acit M/S. Industrial Mineral Co. 100% Eou बनाम/ Central Circle-(1), 1/1C, Harbour Express Highway, Vs. Madurai Thermal Nagar So, Tuticorin 628006 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Tan No. Aaafi-9714-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri N. Arjun Raj (Advocate) – Ld.Ar ""थ" की ओर से/Revenue By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (Cit) -Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21-05-2025 आदेश / O R D E R

69B. 2.2 Disallowance of purchases and other expenses etc. This addition was made on the basis of Page Nos.34 & 35 of bunch of loose sheets seized vide Annexure-132/S&S/IMC/CHE/RR-4 dated 27- 10-2018. The same allegedly contained Profit & Loss Account of the assessee for financial year 2011-12. The profit as per this Profit & Loss Account was Rs.17.25

INDUSTRIAL MINERAL CO, 100%EOU,TUTICORIN vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MADURAI, MADURAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal ITA No

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.390/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रण वष( / Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S. Industrial Mineral Co. 100% Eou Acit बनाम/ 1/1C, Harbour Express Highway, Central Circle-(1), Vs. Thermal Nagar So, Tuticorin-628 006. Madurai "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Tan No. Aaafi-9714-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.529/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रण वष( / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Acit M/S. Industrial Mineral Co. 100% Eou बनाम/ Central Circle-(1), 1/1C, Harbour Express Highway, Vs. Madurai Thermal Nagar So, Tuticorin 628006 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Tan No. Aaafi-9714-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri N. Arjun Raj (Advocate) – Ld.Ar ""थ" की ओर से/Revenue By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (Cit) -Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21-05-2025 आदेश / O R D E R

69B. 2.2 Disallowance of purchases and other expenses etc. This addition was made on the basis of Page Nos.34 & 35 of bunch of loose sheets seized vide Annexure-132/S&S/IMC/CHE/RR-4 dated 27- 10-2018. The same allegedly contained Profit & Loss Account of the assessee for financial year 2011-12. The profit as per this Profit & Loss Account was Rs.17.25