VANAVIL ESTATE,CHENNAI vs. PCIT CENTRAL, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal for both AYs 2017

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.925 & 926/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 V. Vanavil Estate, The Pcit (Central), 4/20, Duraiswamy Reddy Street, Chennai-1. West Tambaram, Chennai-600 045. [Pan: Aalfv 0770 H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

disallow the same. On appeal, the Hon’ble Madras High Court found that the larger issue which was the Hon’ble Madras High Court found that the larger issue which was the Hon’ble Madras High Court found that the larger issue which was the allowability of exemption u/s 54 of the Act as opposed to Section 54F was allowability

G.R.M. CONSTRUCTIONS,NAMAKKAL vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, SALEM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Jagadish

survey u/s. 133A of the Act admitted for disallowance of 10% of labour expenses. The A.O has reopened the assessment

G.R.M. CONSTRUCTIONS,NAMAKKAL vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Jagadish

survey u/s. 133A of the Act admitted for disallowance of 10% of labour expenses. The A.O has reopened the assessment

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, TRICHY, INCOME TAX OFFICE, TRICHY vs. RAMASAMY SIVAPRAKASAM, KARUR

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

disallowance of purchases of Rs.2,22,77,459/-. Briefly stated, the facts as noted are that, the assessee is an individual and the proprietor of M/s Pacific Exports, involved in the business of export of textiles. The assessee purchases yarn and cloth, which is converted into fabrics and mainly exported outside India. During the relevant AY 2014-15, the assessee

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX OFFICE, TRICHY vs. RAMASAMY SIVAPRAKASAM, KARUR

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

disallowance of purchases of Rs.2,22,77,459/-. Briefly stated, the facts as noted are that, the assessee is an individual and the proprietor of M/s Pacific Exports, involved in the business of export of textiles. The assessee purchases yarn and cloth, which is converted into fabrics and mainly exported outside India. During the relevant AY 2014-15, the assessee

SHRI R PANNERSELVAM,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CC-3(3),, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Girish Agrawal

disallowance u/s. 40A(3) of the Act. Aggrieved, the assessee went in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Before the Ld. CIT(A), assessee took additional grounds challenging the legal issue of reopening proceedings initiated by the Ld. AO u/s 147 of the Act. 8.1 Ld. CIT(A) held against the assessee by giving finding that no interference

SRI MAHASAKTHI MILLS LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. THE ACIT, CC-I,, COIMBATORE

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1059/Chny/2024 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Sri Mahasakthi Mills Limited Acit बनाम/ No.95/13, Vyshnav Building, Central Circle-1, Opp. Kg Cinemas, Race Course Road Coimbatore. Vs. Coimbatore-641 018. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcs-2111-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Venkata Raman (Ca) - Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (Cit) -Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-09-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10-12-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

survey was conducted u/s 133A at the business premises of the assessee group on 23-03-2017. It transpired that the assessee deposited cash of Rs.800.05 Lacs during demonetization period. The assessee also made cash advances of Rs.1267.55 Lacs to its sister concerns viz. M/s Imperial Spirits Ltd., M/s Overseas Beverages Ltd. and M/s Arumuga Cottspin Ltd. In recorded statement

SRI ARUMUGA COTTSPIN PVT. LTD.,COIMBATORE vs. THE ACIT, CC-I,, COIMBATORE

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1098/Chny/2024 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S. Sri Arumuga Cottspin Pvt. Ltd. Acit बनाम Sf No.919/6, No.2, Pollachi Road, Central Circle-1, / Vs. Ramanathapuram, Coimbatore-642 104. Coimbatore. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aajcs-5065-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Venkata Raman (Ca) - Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (Cit) - Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-09-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10-12-2024

survey was conducted u/s 133A at the business premises of the assessee group on 23-03-2017. It transpired that the assessee deposited cash of Rs.1902 Lacs during demonetization period. The assessee also received advance of Rs.95.55 Lacs from its sister concern i.e., M/s Mahasakthi Mills Ltd. which was also deposited in the bank account of the assessee. In recorded

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SIVA VENTURES LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA No 1392/2016 for the

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

133A was conducted on 22.07.2010. The AO reopened the assessment u/s 148 by recording the following reason. ‘the compensation received from SICCL to the extent of Rs.35 crores was in the nature of Interest against the advance made to SLCCL and not in the nature of capital. Therefore, the income earned is to be treated as Income from Other Sources

SIVA INDUSTRIES AND HOLDINGS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA No 1392/2016 for the

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

133A was conducted on 22.07.2010. The AO reopened the assessment u/s 148 by recording the following reason. ‘the compensation received from SICCL to the extent of Rs.35 crores was in the nature of Interest against the advance made to SLCCL and not in the nature of capital. Therefore, the income earned is to be treated as Income from Other Sources

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SIVA VENTURES LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA No 1392/2016 for the

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

133A was conducted on 22.07.2010. The AO reopened the assessment u/s 148 by recording the following reason. ‘the compensation received from SICCL to the extent of Rs.35 crores was in the nature of Interest against the advance made to SLCCL and not in the nature of capital. Therefore, the income earned is to be treated as Income from Other Sources

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SIVA VENTURES LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA No 1392/2016 for the

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

133A was conducted on 22.07.2010. The AO reopened the assessment u/s 148 by recording the following reason. ‘the compensation received from SICCL to the extent of Rs.35 crores was in the nature of Interest against the advance made to SLCCL and not in the nature of capital. Therefore, the income earned is to be treated as Income from Other Sources

M/S. GOLDEN SHELTERS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2990, 2992 & 2993/Chny/2024 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16

disallowance. Subsequently, a survey u/s 133A of the Act was conducted on 08.02.2018 and ITA Nos.2990, 2992 & 2993/Chny/2024 M/s. Golden

M/S. GOLDEN SHELTERS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORP. CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2990, 2992 & 2993/Chny/2024 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16

disallowance. Subsequently, a survey u/s 133A of the Act was conducted on 08.02.2018 and ITA Nos.2990, 2992 & 2993/Chny/2024 M/s. Golden

M/S. GOLDEN SHELTERS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE.2(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2990, 2992 & 2993/Chny/2024 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16

disallowance. Subsequently, a survey u/s 133A of the Act was conducted on 08.02.2018 and ITA Nos.2990, 2992 & 2993/Chny/2024 M/s. Golden

SURESH KUMAR,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 167/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Suresh Kumar, Deputy Commissioner Of 114/10 (Ligh), Gandhi Road, V. Income Tax, West Tambaram, Central Circle 1(3), Chennai – 600 045. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aagps-0396-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. D. Anand, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16.08.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.08.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

133A of the Act, which the assessee did not accounted in his books of accounts and also not brought to tax in the relevant assessment years. The AO has made additions towards excess stock as unexplained investment u/s. 69B of the Act in absence of necessary explanation with regard to source for said excess stock. Under those facts

SYED ASIM,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-3(3), CHENNAI

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1885, 1886, 1887 & 1888/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 Syed Asim, The Income Tax Officer, New No.4, Old No.2, Chandralekha Vs. Non Corporate Ward-3(3), Muthusamy Mudaliar Street, Chennai. Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aveps 3501P]

survey conducted u/s. 133A of the Act has recorded reason and reopened the assessment after taking approval from JCIT, Non Corporate Range-3, Chennai. During the assessment, the assessee did not furnish any of documentary evidences and explanation sought in the show cause notice and therefore, the A.O has passed order u/s. 143(3) of the Act by disallowing

SYED ASIM,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-3(3), CHENNAI

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1885, 1886, 1887 & 1888/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 Syed Asim, The Income Tax Officer, New No.4, Old No.2, Chandralekha Vs. Non Corporate Ward-3(3), Muthusamy Mudaliar Street, Chennai. Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aveps 3501P]

survey conducted u/s. 133A of the Act has recorded reason and reopened the assessment after taking approval from JCIT, Non Corporate Range-3, Chennai. During the assessment, the assessee did not furnish any of documentary evidences and explanation sought in the show cause notice and therefore, the A.O has passed order u/s. 143(3) of the Act by disallowing