M/S. ERODE ANNAI SPINNING MILLS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee and the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

Section 68 of the Act to the extent of `20 lakhs. Ground No.3 raised before the CIT(Appeals) is only in respect of adjustment of cash credit of `20 lakhs against the unabsorbed depreciation

DCIT, SALEM vs. M/S. ERODE ANNAI SPINNING MILLS PVT. LTD., ERODE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee and the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

Section 68 of the Act to the extent of `20 lakhs. Ground No.3 raised before the CIT(Appeals) is only in respect of adjustment of cash credit of `20 lakhs against the unabsorbed depreciation

TRIVITRON HEALTHCARE P LTD.,CHENNAI vs. PCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

section 32(1) of the Act. 7. The PCIT failed to appreciate that the claim and acceptance of the depreciation on goodwill was in accordance with the prescription of law, thereby vitiating the decision rendered from para 6 of the impugned order. 8. The PCIT failed to appreciate that the decisions cited both on technical issue on the assumption

M/S. BAY FORGE PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CO, CIRCLE-1(3), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

Section 115JB of the Act as under: Year Depreciation Business Business Adjustment Remarks cumulative Ending Loss Loss without business loss Depreciation as per books 31.03.1997 (2,848,288) (1,78,66,281) (15,017,993) (1,78,66,281) (2,848,288) (1,78,66,281) (15,017,993) 31.03.1998 (14,872,413) (28,351,317) 5,912,166 Prior

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

Section 68) are solely based on information already available in the return filed by the assessee and are not supported by any incriminating documents ITA Nos.1535 & 1801/Chny/2024 (AYs 2016-17 & 2015-16) Varadappan Natarajan/ V. Natarajan (Individual) :: 16 :: unearthed during the search. The CBDT Circular No. 24/2015 also clarifies that assessments u/s 153A should be based on seized material. Respectfully

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

Section 68) are solely based on information already available in the return filed by the assessee and are not supported by any incriminating documents ITA Nos.1535 & 1801/Chny/2024 (AYs 2016-17 & 2015-16) Varadappan Natarajan/ V. Natarajan (Individual) :: 16 :: unearthed during the search. The CBDT Circular No. 24/2015 also clarifies that assessments u/s 153A should be based on seized material. Respectfully

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

depreciation benefit on the above. However, due to lack of sanction from the statutory authorities to run the school within the factory premises, being an industrial area, the school was shifted to other place. Even now, the said premises is under the occupation of the company and it is used as godown for 50 I.T.A. Nos.2275-2281/Chny/2019 & the business

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

depreciation benefit on the above. However, due to lack of sanction from the statutory authorities to run the school within the factory premises, being an industrial area, the school was shifted to other place. Even now, the said premises is under the occupation of the company and it is used as godown for 50 I.T.A. Nos.2275-2281/Chny/2019 & the business

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

depreciation benefit on the above. However, due to lack of sanction from the statutory authorities to run the school within the factory premises, being an industrial area, the school was shifted to other place. Even now, the said premises is under the occupation of the company and it is used as godown for 50 I.T.A. Nos.2275-2281/Chny/2019 & the business

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

depreciation benefit on the above. However, due to lack of sanction from the statutory authorities to run the school within the factory premises, being an industrial area, the school was shifted to other place. Even now, the said premises is under the occupation of the company and it is used as godown for 50 I.T.A. Nos.2275-2281/Chny/2019 & the business

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

depreciation benefit on the above. However, due to lack of sanction from the statutory authorities to run the school within the factory premises, being an industrial area, the school was shifted to other place. Even now, the said premises is under the occupation of the company and it is used as godown for 50 I.T.A. Nos.2275-2281/Chny/2019 & the business

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

depreciation benefit on the above. However, due to lack of sanction from the statutory authorities to run the school within the factory premises, being an industrial area, the school was shifted to other place. Even now, the said premises is under the occupation of the company and it is used as godown for 50 I.T.A. Nos.2275-2281/Chny/2019 & the business

M/S. V.V.VANNIAPERUMAL & SONS,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. PCIT-2, CHENNAI, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

depreciation benefit on the above. However, due to lack of sanction from the statutory authorities to run the school within the factory premises, being an industrial area, the school was shifted to other place. Even now, the said premises is under the occupation of the company and it is used as godown for 50 I.T.A. Nos.2275-2281/Chny/2019 & the business

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

depreciation benefit on the above. However, due to lack of sanction from the statutory authorities to run the school within the factory premises, being an industrial area, the school was shifted to other place. Even now, the said premises is under the occupation of the company and it is used as godown for 50 I.T.A. Nos.2275-2281/Chny/2019 & the business

SMT. DEVAKUMARI,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NCC-11, , CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.Corrigendum To I.T.A. No.3066/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Smt. Devakumari, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 48, Venkata Maistry Street, Income Tax, Mannady, Chennai 600 001. Non Corporate Circle 11, [Pan:Aagpd0150L] Chennai. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) शु""प" आदेश /Corrignendum Order Per V. Durga Rao: The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No. 3066/Chny/2019 As Well As The Appeal Filed By The Revenue In Ita No. 3181/Chny/2019 For The Assessment Year 2014-15 Were Disposed Off By The Division Bench ‘B’, Chennai Benches, Chennai Vide Common Order Dated 13.09.2023. The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Has Brought To The Notice That There Is A Typographical Error In Last Sentence In Para 9 Of The Order, Wherein, The Bench Has Observed That The Element Of Personal Usage Cannot Be Ruled Out In The Absence Of Production Of Electricity Bills & Thereby, The Addition To The Extent Of ₹.2,00,000/- Has Been Sustained Out Of Addition Confirmed By The Ld. Cit(A). However, It Was Also Mentioned That The “Balance Addition Of ₹.3,00,000/- Stands Sustained” Is A Typographical Error.

68 of the Act as well as disallowance of interest relating thereon of ₹.1,01,050/-. 7.1 Before us, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that both the minors have received gifts in the previous assessment year and the amounts were lying in the bank accounts of the minors unused. Thus, the 14 I.T.A. Nos.3066 & 3181/Chny/19 minors offered

ACIT, NCC-11,, CHENNAI vs. SMT. DEVAKUMARI,, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3066/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Smt. Devakumari, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 48, Venkata Maistry Street, Income Tax, Mannady, Chennai 600 001. Non Corporate Circle 11, Chennai. [Pan:Aagpd0150L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3181/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Smt. Devakumari, Income Tax, No. 48, Venkata Maistry Street, Non Corporate Circle 11(1), Mannady, Chennai 600 001. Chennai.

68 of the Act as well as disallowance of interest relating thereon of ₹.1,01,050/-. 7.1 Before us, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that both the minors have received gifts in the previous assessment year and the amounts were lying in the bank accounts of the minors unused. Thus, the 11 I.T.A. Nos.3066 & 3181/Chny/19 minors offered

JCIT (OSD), CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI vs. INDIA PISTON LTD., CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1615/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Joint Commissioner Of Income M/S. India Piston Ltd., Tax (Osd), Corporate Circle 2(2), Vs. Huzur Gardens, Room No. 512, 5Th Floor, Wanaparthy Madhavaram High Road, Block, No. 121, M.G. Road, Sembiam, Chennai 600 011. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aaaci1439E] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit Assessee By : Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.03.2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.04.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

68,97,816/- as carry forward depreciation in the last previous year. In the assessment order, the Assessing Officer has noticed that the claim of the assessee relates to assets acquired in the preceding assessment year, wherein, the assets were used for less than 180 days and only 10% of depreciation was claimed in earlier year. Thus, in the present

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NUNGAMBAKKAM vs. R K M POWERGEN PRIVATE LIMITED, T NAGAR

In the result the appeal of the revenue for the both the

68.\n7.5.12 The appellant further stated that the AO made the addition of the share premium u/s 56(1) on the reason that that the share premium of Rs.240 was huge and inflated. In other words, the AO has concluded that the fair value of the share was only Rs.10 without any valuation by him and that he has come

ERODE ANNAI SPINNING MILLS LIMITED,ERODE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunatha

depreciation against the income brought to tax in invoking section 68 of the Act while computing the taxable total income