M/S ENRICE 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

section 270A(3) defines ( Preceding order) as under: ITA Nos.1166 & 1167/Chny/2023 :: 23 :: (a) "preceding order" means an order immediately preceding the order during the course of which the penalty under subsection (1) has been initiated; 7.6.5 In the present case, penalty has been initiated vide order u/s 143(3) rws 153A. "Preceding order1 prior to order u/s 143(3

M/S ENRIA 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

section 270A(3) defines ( Preceding order) as under: ITA Nos.1166 & 1167/Chny/2023 :: 23 :: (a) "preceding order" means an order immediately preceding the order during the course of which the penalty under subsection (1) has been initiated; 7.6.5 In the present case, penalty has been initiated vide order u/s 143(3) rws 153A. "Preceding order1 prior to order u/s 143(3

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. ETHIRAJULU VAJRAVEL KUMARAN, TIRUVANNAMALAI,

3) r.w.s\n153A of the Act\nAssessed Income (Rs.)\n1,76,52,420\n2,47,74,950\n1,70,35,810\n2,07,91,320\nOutcome of quantum\nassessment\nReturned Income by the assessee including the additional\nincome offered has been accepted by the AO without any\nvariation\nPenalty initiated by the AO\n270A of the Act\nNature of charge/default

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. ETHIRAJULU VAJRAVEL KUMARAN, TIRUVANNAMALAI

In the result, all the six appeals of the Revenue are\ndismissed

3) r.w.s\n153A of the Act\nAssessed Income (Rs.)\nOutcome of\nquantum\nassessment\nPenalty initiated by the AO\nNature of charge/default\nrecorded by the AO in the\nassessment order relating to\ninitiation of penalty u/s.270A\nof the Act\nDate of issuance of first\nshow cause notice by the\nAO u/s.274 r.w.s 270A of\nthe Act\nNature of charge/default\nspecified

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. ETHIRAJULU VAJRAVEL KUMARAN, TIRUVANNAMALAI

3) r.w.s\n153A of the Act\nAssessed Income (Rs.)\n1,76,52,420\n2,47,74,950\n1,70,35,810\n2,07,91,320\nOutcome of quantum\nassessment\nReturned Income by the assessee including the additional\nincome offered has been accepted by the AO without any\nvariation\nPenalty initiated by the AO\n270A of the Act\nNature of charge/default

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. ETHIRAJULU VAJRAVEL KUMARAN, CHENNAI

In the result, all the six appeals of the Revenue are\ndismissed

3) r.w.s\n153A of the Act\nAY 2017-18 AY 2018-19 AY 2019-20 AY 2020-21\n31.10.2017\n31.10.2018\n26.09.2019\n12.02.2021\n98,53,470\n1,17,64,060\n19,29,180\n20,90,670\n10.12.2021\n10.12.2021\n10.12.2021\n10.12.2021\n07.03.2022\n07.03.2022\n07.03.2022\n07.03.2022

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. ETHIRAJULU VAJRAVEL KUMARAN, THIRUVANNAMALAI

In the result, all the six appeals of the Revenue are\ndismissed

3) r.w.s\n153A of the Act\nAssessed Income (Rs.)\nOutcome of\nassessment\nquantum\nAY 2017-18 AY 2018-19 AY 2019-20 AY 2020-21\n1,76,52,420\n2,47,74,950\n1,70,35,810\n2,07,91,320\nReturned Income by the assessee including the additional\nincome offered has been accepted by the AO without any\nvariation

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. ETHIRAJULU VAJRAVEL KUMARAN, THIRUVANNAMALAI

3) r.w.s\n153A of the Act\n24.03.2022\n24.03.2022\n24.03.2022\n24.03.2022\nAssessed Income (Rs.)\n1,76,52,420\n2,47,74,950\n1,70,35,810\n2,07,91,320\nOutcome of quantum\nassessment\nReturned Income by the assessee including the additional\nincome offered has been accepted by the AO without any\nvariation\nPenalty initiated by the AO\nNature of charge/default

ARUSUVAI FOOD PROCESSORS PVT. LTD.,SALEM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), SALEM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

disallowances under Section 14A of the Act. This by no stretch of imagination can be held to be ‘misreporting’. 8. This Court also finds that there is not even a whisper as to which limb of Section 270A of the Act is attracted and how the ingredient of sub- section (9) of Section 270A is satisfied. In the absence

M/S. AVM PRODUCTIONS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NON CORPORATE CIRCLE-20(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Ms. Padmavathy. S

section 270A was issued to the assessee on 25.10.2019 asking the assessee to show cause as to why an order imposing penalty u/s. 270A should not be passed for mis- reporting of income Another show cause notice u/s. 274 r.w.s 270A was issued to the assessee on 13.02.2024 giving one more opportunity to present his case. In response

N. VIJAY KUMAR, ACIT, CHENNAI vs. RAJAH MUTHIAH CHETTIAR CHARITABLE AND EDUCATIONAL TRUST, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue & CO of assessee are

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

disallowances under Section 14A of the Act. This by no stretch of imagination can be held to be ‘misreporting’. 8. This Court also finds that there is not even a whisper as to which limb of Section 270A of the Act is attracted and how the ingredient of sub-section (9) of Section 270A is satisfied. In the absence

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. JAGATHRAKSKAN SRINISHA, CHENNAI

disallow the claim of gift. The Ld.CIT(A) had reasoned out that\nthe assessee's brother had given a letter stating the fact of the gift and that stands as\nan evidence to show that gifts are indeed made. In our view, this is acceptable. At any\nrate, we find that the AO never brought out any material to disprove

JAYASAKTHI KNIT WEAR,TIRUPPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), TIRUPPUR

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1758/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. Jayasakthi Knit Wear, The Ito, 3/95, Thanneerpandal Colony, Ward-1(4), Cheyur Road, Tirupur. Karukkampalayam B.O. Avinashi, Tirupur-641 654. [Pan: Aaffj 4343 J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

disallowances under Section 14A of the Act. This by no stretch of imagination can be held to be ‘misreporting’. 8. This Court also finds that there is not even a whisper as to which limb of Section 270A of the Act is attracted and how the ingredient of sub-section (9) of Section 270A is satisfied. In the absence

KAWARILAL,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CRICLE-1(2) CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

disallowances under Section 14A of the Act. This by no stretch of imagination can be held to be ‘misreporting’. 8. This Court also finds that there is not even a whisper as to which limb of Section 270A of the Act is attracted and how the ingredient of sub- section (9) of Section 270A is satisfied. In the absence

KAWARILAL,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

disallowances under Section 14A of the Act. This by no stretch of imagination can be held to be ‘misreporting’. 8. This Court also finds that there is not even a whisper as to which limb of Section 270A of the Act is attracted and how the ingredient of sub- section (9) of Section 270A is satisfied. In the absence

KAG INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. PCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R.Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 1366/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 The Pcit (Central), M/S. Kag India Pvt Ltd., V. Chennai -2. No. 264/15-1, Sathiyanathan Complex, Velachery Road, East Tambaram, Chennai – 600 059. [Pan: Aadck-5381-Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. Y. Sridhar, Fca ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 21.11.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.12.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

3)The amount of under-reported income shall be,— (i)in a case where income has been assessed for the first time,— (a)if return has been furnished, the difference between the amount of income assessed and the amount of income determined under clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 143; (b)in a case where no return

MELAKANDY PUTHALATH FAROOK,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1890/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Melekandy Puthalath Farook Acit बनाम/ Faraz No.9 Sbi Colony, Corporate Circle-2(1) Vs. Sastri Nagar, Adyar, Chennai-600 020. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaapf-2644-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri D. Anand (Advocate) - Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita (Addl.Cit) -Ld. Sr. Dr

3(1)(2), New Delhi and Ors. W.P.(C) No. 5111/2022 vide judgment dated 28.03.2022 observed as under:- “6. Having perused the impugned order dated 9th March, 2022, this Court is of the view that the Respondents’ action of denying the benefit of immunity on the ground that the penalty was initiated under Section 270A of the Act for misreporting

M/S. CITADINES OMR APARTHOTEL PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO CORP WARD 1(3), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the stay application of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Ms. Padmavathy.Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.303/Chny/2026 & Sa No.29/Chny/2026 (Arising Out Of Ita No.303/Chny/2026) िनधा$रण वष$ /Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Citadines Omr Aparthotel Pvt. The Income Tax Officer, Ltd., Vs. Corporate Ward-1(3), No.94, Somerset Greenways, Chennai. Sathyadev Avenue, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai – 600 028. Pan: Aadcr 5653C

270A(6)(a) of the Act. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the fact that the Appellant, during the course of proceedings under section 263 and revised assessment proceedings under section 143(3) read with section 263 of the Act, voluntarily admitted that the expenses were not allowable and accepted the corresponding disallowance

TNCP LLP.,COIMBATORE vs. ITO, NCW-1(1), COIMBATORE

In the result, the quantum\nNo

disallowed by the CPC, Bengaluru while processing the return of income\nfiled for the assessment year under consideration in the intimation order passed\nin terms of Section 143(1) of the Act dated 01.10.2019.\n:-4-:\nITA. Nos:2602 & 2603/Chny/2025\n11. The said scrutiny assessment order was passed in determining the\ntaxable total income at Rs.2