DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. JAYA EDUCATIONAL TRUST, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1552/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 V. The Dcit, Jaya Educational Trust, Chennai. No.8, Krishnapuram, Ii Main Road, Thiruninravur, Thiruvallur-602 024. [Pan:Aaatj 0369 D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

disallowed the entire receipt/claim of exemption u/s.11 of the Act to the tune of Rs.19,37,51,000/- and further charged interest of Rs.11,50,57,620/- on interest free loan given to two persons (supra) and thus determined taxable income at Rs.30,88,08,620/-. 3. Aggrieved by the aforesaid action of the AO, the assessee filed an appeal

SREE RAGHAVENDRA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,CHENNAI vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS) WARD 4, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for both the assessment years are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 834 & 835/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2015-16

3. The NFAC erred in denying exemption u/s.11 to the appellant trust by invoking the provisions of section 13(1)(C) rws 13(2)(a) of the Income Tax Act without looking into the substance of the transaction and without ascertaining the real nature of the transaction. 4. The NFAC erred in confirming the disallowance

SREE RAGHAVENDRA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,CHENNAI vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS) WARD 1, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for both the assessment years are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 834 & 835/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2015-16

3. The NFAC erred in denying exemption u/s.11 to the appellant trust by invoking the provisions of section 13(1)(C) rws 13(2)(a) of the Income Tax Act without looking into the substance of the transaction and without ascertaining the real nature of the transaction. 4. The NFAC erred in confirming the disallowance

ADIT, CHENNAI vs. S A A ISPAHANI TRUST, CHENNAI

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

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

disallowed as application during the assessment for A.Y.2001-02. The Tribunal in its order in ITA Nos.2124 & 2125/Mds/2007 for the Asst Years 2001-02 and 2003-04 dated 12.09.2008 relied on the Apex court order in the case of Kapurchand Srimal v.CIT Andhra Pradesh 131 ITR 451 and directed for further investigation on the violation of the Section 13(1)(c

INCOME TAX OFFICER, BIBIKULAM MADURAI vs. D N PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST, ARASARADI MADURAI TAMIL NADU

section 164(2) of the I.T. Act.\nAnd thereafter, the AO estimated the compensation for using/utilizing the\nCT Scanner at Rs.2,14,25,713/- and added it to the income of the\nassessee-Trust for AY 2015-16.\n10. Further, the AO was pleased to hold that since there was a violation\nof sec.13(1)(c

T.RAJENDRAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 20, CHENNAI

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.: 2032/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

13. In case of A. Daga Royal Arts Vs. ITO (supra), the Coordinate Bench while dealing with identical issue has observed that even after amendment of Rule 6DD(j), the legal exposition propounded by the Hon’ble Supreme Court regarding consideration of expediency and other relevant factors cannot be considered to be diluted as the rules framed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE, CHENNAI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT vs. THE INDIAN INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY, CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.679/Chny/2024 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Dy. Commissioner Of The Indian Institute Of Engineering Income Tax, Vs. Technology, Exemptions Circle, 363, Arcot Road, Kodambakkam, Chennai. Chennai – 600 024. [Pan: Aaatt 2768C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथH की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate JkथH की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N. Sanjay Gandhi, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.06.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.08.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per S.R. Raghunatha, A.M : This Appeal By The Revenue Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter “Cit(A)] In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1059500064(1), Dated 09.01.2024. The Assessment Was Framed By The Assessing Officer For The Assessment Year 2012-13 U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Vide Order Dated 20.03.2015. :- 2 -: 2. There Is A Delay Of 06 Days In Filing The Appeal By The Revenue.

Disallowance of payments made to Ms.Meenakashi Soundararajan U/s.11 of the Act as violation of Section 13(1)( c) Per contra, the A.R submitted that, on identical issue the ITAT, Chennai in the case of instant appellant itself has ruled in its favour on the issue for the Asst. Year 2010-11, in ITA No.318/Mds/2014 dated 27.5.14, relevant parts of which

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, TRICHY, TRICHY vs. KUMARASAMY RAMAKRISHNAN, KARUR

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं/.Ita Nos.:3315, 3316 & 3321/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2019-20, 2020-21 & 2018-19

13. The ld.DR for the Revenue reiterated the grounds raised by the Revenue and supported the order of the AO and pleaded for setting aside the order of CIT(A). 14. Per contra, the ld.AR for the assessee supported order of the ld.CIT(A) and pleaded for rejection of grounds raised by the Revenue. 15. We have heard rival submissions

INCOME TAX OFFICER, BIBIKULAM MADURAI vs. D N PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST, ARASARADI MADURAI TAMIL NADU

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed\nand Cross Objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed

section 164(2) of the I.T. Act.\nAnd thereafter, the AO estimated the compensation for using/utilizing the\nCT Scanner at Rs.2,14,25,713/- and added it to the income of the\nassessee-Trust for AY 2015-16.\n10. Further, the AO was pleased to hold that since there was a violation\nof sec.13(1)(c

JEPPIAR EDUCATIONAL TRUST,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for all four assessment years are allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 480, 481, 482 & 483/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 Jeppiaar Educational Trust, The Deputy/Assistant 29A, Ganapathy Street, V. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Royapettah, Central Circle -1(3), Chennai – 600 014. Chennai. [Pan: Aaatj-0562-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.07.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.08.2023

3. In pursuant to search, the case was selected for scrutiny and during the course of assessment proceedings, the AO called upon the assessee to explain as to why unaccounted cash receipts should not be brought to tax. In response, the assessee submitted that, refund money from its employees which has not been recorded in the books of accounts

JEPPIAR EDUCATIONAL TRUST,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for all four assessment years are allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 480, 481, 482 & 483/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 Jeppiaar Educational Trust, The Deputy/Assistant 29A, Ganapathy Street, V. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Royapettah, Central Circle -1(3), Chennai – 600 014. Chennai. [Pan: Aaatj-0562-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.07.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.08.2023

3. In pursuant to search, the case was selected for scrutiny and during the course of assessment proceedings, the AO called upon the assessee to explain as to why unaccounted cash receipts should not be brought to tax. In response, the assessee submitted that, refund money from its employees which has not been recorded in the books of accounts

JEPPIAR EDUCATIONAL TRUST,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for all four assessment years are allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 480, 481, 482 & 483/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 Jeppiaar Educational Trust, The Deputy/Assistant 29A, Ganapathy Street, V. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Royapettah, Central Circle -1(3), Chennai – 600 014. Chennai. [Pan: Aaatj-0562-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.07.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.08.2023

3. In pursuant to search, the case was selected for scrutiny and during the course of assessment proceedings, the AO called upon the assessee to explain as to why unaccounted cash receipts should not be brought to tax. In response, the assessee submitted that, refund money from its employees which has not been recorded in the books of accounts

JEPPIAR EDUCATIONAL TRUST,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for all four assessment years are allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 480, 481, 482 & 483/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 Jeppiaar Educational Trust, The Deputy/Assistant 29A, Ganapathy Street, V. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Royapettah, Central Circle -1(3), Chennai – 600 014. Chennai. [Pan: Aaatj-0562-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.07.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.08.2023

3. In pursuant to search, the case was selected for scrutiny and during the course of assessment proceedings, the AO called upon the assessee to explain as to why unaccounted cash receipts should not be brought to tax. In response, the assessee submitted that, refund money from its employees which has not been recorded in the books of accounts

DCIT, OOTY vs. N.PURUSHOTHAMAN, COIMBATORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is party allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.76/Chny/2017 & C.O. No.34/Chny/2017 [In Ita No.76/Chny/2017] ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

c) According to the appellant's AR, the land in question was not a business asset that of at the time of purchase and the payment was made to agriculturists at the time of purchase. It became a business asset only in the subsequent financial year, when the concerned authority gave permission for converting the land and selling in plots

N.PURUSHOTHAMAN,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is party allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.76/Chny/2017 & C.O. No.34/Chny/2017 [In Ita No.76/Chny/2017] ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

c) According to the appellant's AR, the land in question was not a business asset that of at the time of purchase and the payment was made to agriculturists at the time of purchase. It became a business asset only in the subsequent financial year, when the concerned authority gave permission for converting the land and selling in plots

INCOME TAX OFFICER , BIBIKULAM MADURAI vs. D N PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST, ARASARADI MADURAI TAMIL NADU

In the result, Cross Objections filed by the assessee are partly

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

3,500/- for Chest, Rs. 5,000/- for Abdomen, Rs. 750/- for Sinusitis, etc and if the average charges for taking a scan is taken as Rs. 2500/ then the machinery Siemens Somatom Definition AS Excel Edition 128 Slice Spiral CT Scanner average revenue could generate Rs. 7 Crore to Rs. 8 Crore per year. (2500 average cost per scan

M/S.ENRICA ENTERPRISES PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Das

3) r.w.s.153A of the Act on 26.07.2021, accepting the additional income voluntarily offered by the assessee towards inflated expenditure under the head ‘gift articles’. While completing the assessment, the AO observed that after considering relevant submissions of the assessee, the income offered by the assessee, including estimated disallowance of portion of marketing expenses, is ITA Nos.1164 & 1165/Chny/2023 :: 6 :: found

M/S ENRICA ENTERPRISES PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Das

3) r.w.s.153A of the Act on 26.07.2021, accepting the additional income voluntarily offered by the assessee towards inflated expenditure under the head ‘gift articles’. While completing the assessment, the AO observed that after considering relevant submissions of the assessee, the income offered by the assessee, including estimated disallowance of portion of marketing expenses, is ITA Nos.1164 & 1165/Chny/2023 :: 6 :: found

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MADURAI, MADURAI vs. TRANSWORLD GARNET INDIA PVT LTD.,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the five appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

C) of the\nIncome tax Act,1961 provides presumption that the seized documents\nbelonged to searched person and their contents are true?\n4. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in deletion of the addition made without taking into\nconsideration the recent directions of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in\n(Suo Motu PIL) WP No 1592 of 2015 involving ‘Illegal