BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

133 results for “depreciation”+ Unexplained Investmentclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai475Delhi320Chennai133Bangalore120Jaipur116Kolkata77Ahmedabad75Hyderabad53Chandigarh34Pune33Indore28Raipur27Cochin24Surat21Lucknow18Nagpur17Visakhapatnam14Rajkot12Guwahati12Ranchi8Agra7Amritsar7Varanasi7Jodhpur6Cuttack6Allahabad5Telangana5Karnataka3SC3Dehradun2Jabalpur2Patna2

Key Topics

Addition to Income84Section 153A70Section 143(3)52Section 14839Section 13238Disallowance35Section 6829Depreciation21Search & Seizure19Section 143(2)

DEPUTY COMMISSINER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-1, TRICHY vs. R. GEETHA, PUDUKOTTAI

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 982/CHNY/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Aug 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri. Y. Sridhar (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)

unexplained investment was as under: - Addition as un-explained investment: Rs. 3,16,46.929/- The learned Assessing officer has held that the appellant failed to prove theidentity, genuineness and credit worthiness of the debtors, creditors and also explain thesource of the investments made and has made an addition of Rs.3,16,46,929/- holdingthat the expenses/investments are more than

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI vs. M/S HILL MAX EXPORT, COIMBATORE

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Showing 1–20 of 133 · Page 1 of 7

18
Reopening of Assessment18
Survey u/s 133A17
ITA 742/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.: 742/Chny/2023 & Co No.: 39/Chny/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Hill Max Export, Tax, V. No. 149/1, Central Circle 2(1), Pollachi Main Road, Room No. B3, Ground Floor, Kattampatti, Investigation Building, Jakkarpalayam-Vaipollachi, Chennai – 34. Coimbatore – 642 202. [Pan:Aahfh-2574-B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. V. Nanda Kumar, Cit Respondent/Cross Objector By : Shri. M. V. Prasad, Fca सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28.12.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24.01.2024

For Appellant: Shri. V. Nanda Kumar, CIT
Section 132Section 133ASection 139Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 69B

unexplained investment u/s. 69B of the Act. In response, the assessee filed a copy of reconstitution deed of partnership dated 27.02.2018, along with one excel sheet containing a revised statement of income and depreciation

V.V. TTITANIUM PIGMENTS PVT. LTD.,,TIRUNELVELI vs. ACIT, CC-2,, MADURAI

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1301/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1301/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1302/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1303/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1304/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1305/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S V.V. Titanium Pigments Pvt.Ltd Acit बनाम/ Mahadevankulam, Keeraikaranthattu Central Circle-2 Vs. Tisayanvillai, Tirunelveli-627 657. Madurai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcv-7723-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1316/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1312/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 8. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1313/Chny/2024

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baram Som (CIT) -Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 37

unexplained investment for AY 2018-19 alleged to be paid on purchase of 1.83 acres of land at Tuticorin District. The Ld. CIT(A) observed that this addition was not based on any incriminating material found during the course of search but purely based on statement recorded from Shri J. Thangadurai. In the absence of any incriminating material, no such

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MADURAI vs. VV TITANIUM PIGMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED, TISAIYANVILAI

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1316/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1301/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1302/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1303/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1304/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1305/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S V.V. Titanium Pigments Pvt.Ltd Acit बनाम/ Mahadevankulam, Keeraikaranthattu Central Circle-2 Vs. Tisayanvillai, Tirunelveli-627 657. Madurai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcv-7723-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1316/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1312/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 8. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1313/Chny/2024

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baram Som (CIT) -Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 37

unexplained investment for AY 2018-19 alleged to be paid on purchase of 1.83 acres of land at Tuticorin District. The Ld. CIT(A) observed that this addition was not based on any incriminating material found during the course of search but purely based on statement recorded from Shri J. Thangadurai. In the absence of any incriminating material, no such

V.V. TTITANIUM PIGMENTS PVT. LTD.,,TIRUNELVELI vs. ACIT, CC-2., MADURAI

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1305/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1301/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1302/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1303/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1304/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1305/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S V.V. Titanium Pigments Pvt.Ltd Acit बनाम/ Mahadevankulam, Keeraikaranthattu Central Circle-2 Vs. Tisayanvillai, Tirunelveli-627 657. Madurai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcv-7723-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1316/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1312/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 8. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1313/Chny/2024

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baram Som (CIT) -Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 37

unexplained investment for AY 2018-19 alleged to be paid on purchase of 1.83 acres of land at Tuticorin District. The Ld. CIT(A) observed that this addition was not based on any incriminating material found during the course of search but purely based on statement recorded from Shri J. Thangadurai. In the absence of any incriminating material, no such

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MADURAI vs. VV TITANIUM PIGMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED, TISAIYANVILAI

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1315/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1301/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1302/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1303/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1304/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1305/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S V.V. Titanium Pigments Pvt.Ltd Acit बनाम/ Mahadevankulam, Keeraikaranthattu Central Circle-2 Vs. Tisayanvillai, Tirunelveli-627 657. Madurai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcv-7723-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1316/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1312/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 8. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1313/Chny/2024

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baram Som (CIT) -Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 37

unexplained investment for AY 2018-19 alleged to be paid on purchase of 1.83 acres of land at Tuticorin District. The Ld. CIT(A) observed that this addition was not based on any incriminating material found during the course of search but purely based on statement recorded from Shri J. Thangadurai. In the absence of any incriminating material, no such

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MADURAI vs. VV TITANIUM PIGMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED, TISAIYANVILAI

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1314/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1301/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1302/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1303/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1304/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1305/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S V.V. Titanium Pigments Pvt.Ltd Acit बनाम/ Mahadevankulam, Keeraikaranthattu Central Circle-2 Vs. Tisayanvillai, Tirunelveli-627 657. Madurai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcv-7723-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1316/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1312/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 8. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1313/Chny/2024

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baram Som (CIT) -Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 37

unexplained investment for AY 2018-19 alleged to be paid on purchase of 1.83 acres of land at Tuticorin District. The Ld. CIT(A) observed that this addition was not based on any incriminating material found during the course of search but purely based on statement recorded from Shri J. Thangadurai. In the absence of any incriminating material, no such

V.V. TTITANIUM PIGMENTS PVT. LTD.,,TIRUNELVELI vs. ACIT, CC-2., MADURAI

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1303/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1301/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1302/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1303/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1304/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1305/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S V.V. Titanium Pigments Pvt.Ltd Acit बनाम/ Mahadevankulam, Keeraikaranthattu Central Circle-2 Vs. Tisayanvillai, Tirunelveli-627 657. Madurai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcv-7723-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1316/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1312/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 8. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1313/Chny/2024

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baram Som (CIT) -Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 37

unexplained investment for AY 2018-19 alleged to be paid on purchase of 1.83 acres of land at Tuticorin District. The Ld. CIT(A) observed that this addition was not based on any incriminating material found during the course of search but purely based on statement recorded from Shri J. Thangadurai. In the absence of any incriminating material, no such

V.V. TTITANIUM PIGMENTS PVT. LTD.,,TIRUNELVELI vs. ACIT, CC-2, MADURAI

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1304/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1301/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1302/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1303/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1304/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1305/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S V.V. Titanium Pigments Pvt.Ltd Acit बनाम/ Mahadevankulam, Keeraikaranthattu Central Circle-2 Vs. Tisayanvillai, Tirunelveli-627 657. Madurai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcv-7723-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1316/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1312/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 8. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1313/Chny/2024

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baram Som (CIT) -Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 37

unexplained investment for AY 2018-19 alleged to be paid on purchase of 1.83 acres of land at Tuticorin District. The Ld. CIT(A) observed that this addition was not based on any incriminating material found during the course of search but purely based on statement recorded from Shri J. Thangadurai. In the absence of any incriminating material, no such

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MADURAI vs. VV TITANIUM PIGMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED, TISAIYANVILAI

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1312/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1301/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1302/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1303/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1304/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1305/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S V.V. Titanium Pigments Pvt.Ltd Acit बनाम/ Mahadevankulam, Keeraikaranthattu Central Circle-2 Vs. Tisayanvillai, Tirunelveli-627 657. Madurai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcv-7723-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1316/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1312/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 8. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1313/Chny/2024

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baram Som (CIT) -Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 37

unexplained investment for AY 2018-19 alleged to be paid on purchase of 1.83 acres of land at Tuticorin District. The Ld. CIT(A) observed that this addition was not based on any incriminating material found during the course of search but purely based on statement recorded from Shri J. Thangadurai. In the absence of any incriminating material, no such

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MADURAI vs. VV TITANIUM PIGMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED, TISAIYANVILAI

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1313/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1301/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1302/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1303/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1304/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1305/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S V.V. Titanium Pigments Pvt.Ltd Acit बनाम/ Mahadevankulam, Keeraikaranthattu Central Circle-2 Vs. Tisayanvillai, Tirunelveli-627 657. Madurai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcv-7723-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1316/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1312/Chny/2024 (िनधा+रण वष+ / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 8. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1313/Chny/2024

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baram Som (CIT) -Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 37

unexplained investment for AY 2018-19 alleged to be paid on purchase of 1.83 acres of land at Tuticorin District. The Ld. CIT(A) observed that this addition was not based on any incriminating material found during the course of search but purely based on statement recorded from Shri J. Thangadurai. In the absence of any incriminating material, no such

V.V. TTITANIUM PIGMENTS PVT. LTD.,,TIRUNELVELI vs. ACIT, CC-2,, MADURAI

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1302/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2024AY 2016-17
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 37

unexplained investment for AY\n2018-19 alleged to be paid on purchase of 1.83 acres of land at Tuticorin\nDistrict. The Ld. CIT(A) observed that this addition was not based on any\nincriminating material found during the course of search but purely based\non statement recorded from Shri J. Thangadurai. In the absence of any\nincriminating material, no such

ANNADURAI BALAKRISHNAN,ERODE vs. ITO, WARD-2(5), ERODE

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 499/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.499/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-2014) Annadurai Balakrishnan Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 5/95, Periathottam, Ward 2(5) Oricherry Pudur P.O., Erode Bhavani, Erode 638 315. [Pan: Anipa 8909M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. M. Karunakaran, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. K. Karthikeyan, Irs, Addl. Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 15.10.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04.11.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri. M. Karunakaran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. Karthikeyan, IRS, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 69

investment u/s 69 of the Act. 18. The appellant therefore prays that the addition of Rs. 17,59,504/- made under section 69 may be deleted and justice rendered. As is evident, the sole issue that arises for our consideration is addition made by Ld. AO as unexplained asset for Rs.17.96 Lacs. 3. Brief facts are that the assessee

K.SURESH,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 571/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jun 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT
Section 148

depreciation allowance or any other allowance under this Act has been computed, then the Assessing Officer would have valid cognizance u/s 147 of the 15 - - ITA 568 to 572/M/17 Act. The reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer clearly speak for the under assessment of tax hence, the conditions laid above stand fulfilled in so far as re-assessment proceedings

K.SURESH,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 572/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jun 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT
Section 148

depreciation allowance or any other allowance under this Act has been computed, then the Assessing Officer would have valid cognizance u/s 147 of the 15 - - ITA 568 to 572/M/17 Act. The reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer clearly speak for the under assessment of tax hence, the conditions laid above stand fulfilled in so far as re-assessment proceedings

K.SURESH,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 570/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jun 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT
Section 148

depreciation allowance or any other allowance under this Act has been computed, then the Assessing Officer would have valid cognizance u/s 147 of the 15 - - ITA 568 to 572/M/17 Act. The reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer clearly speak for the under assessment of tax hence, the conditions laid above stand fulfilled in so far as re-assessment proceedings

K.SURESH,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 568/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jun 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT
Section 148

depreciation allowance or any other allowance under this Act has been computed, then the Assessing Officer would have valid cognizance u/s 147 of the 15 - - ITA 568 to 572/M/17 Act. The reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer clearly speak for the under assessment of tax hence, the conditions laid above stand fulfilled in so far as re-assessment proceedings

K.SURESH,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 569/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jun 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT
Section 148

depreciation allowance or any other allowance under this Act has been computed, then the Assessing Officer would have valid cognizance u/s 147 of the 15 - - ITA 568 to 572/M/17 Act. The reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer clearly speak for the under assessment of tax hence, the conditions laid above stand fulfilled in so far as re-assessment proceedings

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

In the result, the assessee’s appeal ITA No

ITA 390/CHNY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 May 2025AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj (Advocate) – Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (CIT) -Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 69B

unexplained investment u/s 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

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

In the result, the assessee’s appeal ITA No

ITA 529/CHNY/2023[2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 May 2025

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

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj (Advocate) – Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (CIT) -Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 69B

unexplained investment u/s 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