SARANGABANI KIRUBAGARAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

The appeal stand 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.1236/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Shri Sarangabani Kirubakaran Dcit बनाम/ 17/6, First Pillayar Koil Street, Circle-1(2) Vs. Ekkatuthangal, Chennai-600 032. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Bumpk-0892-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms.T.V. Muthu Abirami (Advocate)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) -Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25-07-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04-09-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14 Arises Out Of The Common Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Chennai, [Cit(A)] Dated 13-09-2023 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By The Ld. Ao U/S.153C R.W.S. 153A R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Act On 31-03-2022. The Only Grievance Of The Assessee Is Confirmation Of Addition U/S 69 For Rs.30 Lacs & Assessment Of Short- Term Capital Gain (Stcg) For Rs.12.19 Lacs. 2. The Ld Ar Advanced Arguments & Submitted That Impugned Addition Of Rs.30 Lacs U/S 69 Represent Advance Received Through

disallowed. The Ld. CIT-DR, on the other hand, filed written submissions and submitted that the quoting of wrong section would not vitiate the addition made by Ld. AO as held in various judicial decisions. The copies of the same has been placed on record. The assessment of STCG was also justified. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal

SARANGABANI KIRUBAKARAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

The appeal stand 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.1237/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Shri Sarangabani Kirubakaran Dcit बनाम/ 17/6, First Pillayar Koil Street, Circle-1(2) Vs. Ekkatuthangal, Chennai-600 032. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Bumpk-0892-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. T.V. Muthu Abirami (Advocate)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) -Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25-07-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04-09-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-15 Arises Out Of The Common Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Chennai, [Cit(A)] Dated 13-09-2023 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By The Ld. Ao U/S.153C R.W.S. 144 Of The Act On 31- 03-2022. The Grievance Of The Assessee Is Confirmation Of Addition U/S 69 For Rs.8.04 Lacs & Rs.5 Lacs. The Assessee Is Also Aggrieved By Computation Of Long-Term Capital Gains (Ltcg) Of Rs.157.45 Lacs. 2. The Ld Ar Advanced Arguments On Merits As Well As On Legal Grounds & Also Raised Additional Grounds Of Appeal. The Ld. Cit-Dr

disallow the same is the allegation that the assessee is not able to show the carrying out of agricultural activities on the said land. We are of the considered opinion that as long as the land is classified as agricultural land and the same is sold as such then in such a case, the purpose for which the purchaser would

INTEGRATED SERVICE POINT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), CHENNAI

Accordingly, the assessee's appeals in ITA Nos.1881, 1882,\nand 1883/Chny/2025 for A.Ys.2016-17, 2019-20, and 2022-23 are\nallowed

Disallowance u/s 36 of the Act on\naccount of Inflated handling charges at port of Rs.75,00,000/-;\nDisallowance u/s 37 of the Act on account of Bogus purchases of\nRs.3,89,98,710/-, Unexplained money

ACIT, NUNAGAMBAKKAM vs. INTEGRATED SERVICE POINT LIMITED, ANNA NAGAR

Disallowance u/s 36 of the Act on\n- : 16 -:\nITA Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025\nITA Nos.1874, 1876 & 1879/Chny/2025\nIntegrated Service Point Ltd.\naccount of Inflated handling charges at port of Rs.75,00,000/-;\nDisallowance u/s 37 of the Act on account of Bogus purchases of\nRs.3,89,98,710/-, Unexplained money

ACIT, NUNGAMBAKKAM vs. INTEGRATED SERVICE POINT LIMITED, ANNA NAGAR

Accordingly, the assessee's appeals in ITA Nos.1881, 1882,\nand 1883/Chny/2025 for A.Ys.2016-17, 2019-20, and 2022-23 are\nallowed

Disallowance u/s 36 of the Act on\n:- 16 -:\nITA Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025\nITA Nos.1874, 1876 & 1879/Chny/2025\nIntegrated Service Point Ltd.\naccount of Inflated handling charges at port of Rs.75,00,000/-;\nDisallowance u/s 37 of the Act on account of Bogus purchases of\nRs.3,89,98,710/-, Unexplained money

INTEGRATED SERVICE POINT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CC-2(4), CHENNAI

Accordingly, the assessee's appeals in ITA Nos.1881, 1882,\nand 1883/Chny/2025 for A.Ys.2016-17, 2019-20, and 2022-23 are\nallowed

Disallowance u/s 36 of the Act on\n:- 16 -:\nITA Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025\nITA Nos.1874, 1876 & 1879/Chny/2025\nIntegrated Service Point Ltd.\naccount of Inflated handling charges at port of Rs.75,00,000/-;\nDisallowance u/s 37 of the Act on account of Bogus purchases of\nRs.3,89,98,710/-, Unexplained money

M/S SRI SARAVANA TYRADERS(FIRM),COIMBATORE vs. IITO, NON CORPORATE WARD-1(5), COIMBATORE

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.380/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-2018) M/S. Sri Saravana Traders (Firm) Vs. The Income Tax Officer, S.F.No.54/2, Non Corporate Ward 1(5) Pichanur Village, Coimbatore 641 018 Navakkarai Post, Coimbatore 641 105. [Pan: Achfs 2783D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Yeshwanth Kumar, C.A., ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Ashwin D. Gowda, Irs, Addl. Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 22.10.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11.12.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

unexplained money resulted in double taxation because the said amount was already part of the turnover disclosed. The ld.CIT(A) directed the ld. Assessing Officer to ascertain whether the business turnover declared in the return included the cash deposited in the demonetization period, if so, reduce the corresponding gross profit relatable to cash deposited. Further, before

NEELARAJ VINOTH,PERAMBALUR vs. ACIT, CC-2, , TRICHY

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1982/Chny/2024 & C.O.No. 60/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Assistant Commissioner Of Neelaraj Vinoth, Income Tax, V. 274-C, Thuraiyur Road, Central Circle -2, Perambalur – 621 212, Trichy. Tamilnadu. [Pan: Ajupv-3588-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respondent/Cross Objector) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2119/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Neelaraj Vinoth, Assistant Commissioner Of 274-C, Thuraiyur Road, V. Income Tax, Perambalur – 621 212, Central Circle -2, Tamilnadu. Trichy. [Pan: Ajupv-3588-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

money as Rs.17,01,00,000/- discussed above (u/s. 69A) Total income assessed Rs.17,17,91,070/- Aggrieved by the order of the AO the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld.CIT(A), Chennai – 19. :-9-: ITA. No: 1982 & 2119/Chny/2024 CO No: 60/Chny/2024 5. Before the ld.CIT(A), the assessee stated the AO has erred in treating the investment

SAI TELECOM,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 3(3), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manjunatha. Gआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2534/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Sai Telecom, The Income Tax Officer, No.407, 4Th Floor, Kaveri Complex, Vs. Non Corporate Ward-3(3), Nungambakkam, Chennai. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Abrfs-4178-F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri N. Arjun Raj, C.A ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Arv Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.07.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 15.09.2023

money in the books of accounts during the relevant year under consideration in the name of Sh.A.M. Mohan whose credit worthiness has never been proved. Hence, I do not find any infirmity in the finding of the AO that this was unexplained cash credit which needed to be taxed u/s 68 of the Act. Accordingly, the addition is confirmed. Even

M/S OVERSEAS LEATHERS,RANIPET vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 962/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Overseas Leathers, Deputy Commissioner Of No. 131, Sidco Industrial V. Income-Tax, Estates, Central Circle -3(3), Sipcot, Ranipet, Ranipet New No. 46, Old No. 108, District – 632 403 Mahatma Gandhi Road, [Pan: Aaafo-0375-L] Chennai – 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. D. Anand, Advocate : Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05.04.2023

money. Likewise, unexplained credits in the Balance Sheet are also broOught to tax under Section 68 of the Act. 9. In the light of the above, the contention raised by the learned counsel for the Assessee has essentially emanated from a misconception that the Additions made under Section 69B/69C have to be reduced to some extent by giving leverage

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 (2), CHENNAI vs. M/S MIDAS GOLDEN DISTILLERIES PRIVATE LIMITED, KANCHIPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2562/Chny/2017 िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Year: 2004-05

unexplained share application money by distinguishing the facts of assessee's case from that of Lovely Exports Pvt Ltd case cited supra. 3. The Id CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to arrive at the depreciation for the invoices/bills available on record amounting to Rs.2,20,42,544/- and to disallow

MANIKANDAN SUBASH CHANDRA BOSE ,THIRUMANGALAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, MADURAI

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

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1452/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Income Tax Officer, Manikandan Subash Chandra V. Non Corporate Ward 2(4), Bose, Madurai – 625 002. New No. 70 (Old 131), Big Bazaar Street, Thirumangalam – 625 706 [Pan: Abcpm-6497-L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. B. Pratap, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.07.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.09.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha:

unexplained money u/s.69A of the Act and the submissions of the appellant has been perused. It can be seen from the assessment order that the appellant for the first time reported business income as a proprietary business for the AY 2017-18 declaring total income at Rs.8,26,303/-. Prior to this the appellant was a partner in firms

PALANICHAMY NANTHINI DEVI,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-17(4), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 565/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Palanichamy Nanthini Devi, The Income Tax Officer, Staff Nurse Room Stanley Medical Vs. Non-Corporate Ward -17 (4), College, Chennai. Chennai – 600 001. [Pan: Axfpn-2460-F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

unexplained money along with disallowing the claim of deduction Chapter VIA to the tune of Rs.4,02,160/-. 4. Aggrieved

CHANDRAKUMARI,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD -3(1), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.291/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Chandrakumari, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, New No. 66, Old No. 142, Non Corporate Ward 3(1), Eldams Road, Teynampet, Chennai. Chennai 600 018. [Pan:Aelpc0455J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Girish Kumar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 10.11.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10.11.2023 आदेश /O R D E R This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi Dated 06.01.2023 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2017-18. Vide Order In M.P. No. 133/Chny/2023 Dated 10.11.2023, The Captioned Appeal Order Dated 14.07.2022 Has Been Recalled & Restored For Fresh Adjudication For Rectifying The Mistake Apparent In The Order.

disallowance to the extent of ₹.15.00 lakhs and the balance amount of ₹.7,60,000/- shall be treated as unexplained money

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

unexplained money. 2. That the Ld.CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the provisions of section 69A of the Act are not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case of the appellant and consequently not justified in not deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer u/s.69A of the Act. 3. That the Ld.CIT(A) is not justified

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MADURAI vs. S R TRUST, MADURAI

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

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1549/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Assistant Commissioner Of S R Trust, Income Tax, Vs. 1, Melur Road, Lake Area, Central Circle -1, Madurai – 625 107. Madurai. [Pan: Aacts-0376-F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

unexplained money Rs.1,75,14,608/- - Travel expenses disallowed Rs.54,48,077/- - Legal expenses disallowed Rs.1,12,50,000/- An appeal

PADMANABHAN SRIRAMULU,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CORP. CIRCLE-6(1), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2963/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Padmanabhan Sriramulu, The Assistant Commissioner Of 77/1, Thirupalli Street, Vs. Income Tax, Sowcarpet, Non-Corporate Circle 6(1), Room No.223, 2Nd Floor, Chennai – 600 079. Bsnl Tower Ii, No.16, Greams Road, Chennai – 600 006. [Pan: Abhps-7297-P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

money by giving it the color of debtors. The AO has alreay granted the necessary relief to the appellant by giving credit of cash in hand of Rs.36,02,650/- as on 08.11.2016. Further, the appellant has relied on various case laws which are not squarely applicable to the fact of the case. :-5-: ITA. No: 2963/Chny/2024 The Assessing Officer

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

unexplained expenditure u/s. 69C of the Act. 4. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed a detailed written submission which has been reproduced at Para 9 of page 9 to 12 of ld. CIT(A) order. The sum and substance of arguments