DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. VELS INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE & ADVANCED STUDIES, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3547 To 3550/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2015-16) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs M/S. Vels Institute Of Science, (Exemptions), Chennai Circle Technology & Advanced Chennai-600 034. Studies, 521/2, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai-600 035. Pan: Aaatv 9804F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

8. We have carefully gone through the provisions of Section 13 of the Act. Section 13(1)(a) says that if any part of the property or income of the Trust is given to the interested person without either adequate security or adequate interest, for the benefit of the person interested, then there shall be a diversion of funds

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. VELS INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE & ADVANCED STUDIES, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3547 To 3550/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2015-16) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs M/S. Vels Institute Of Science, (Exemptions), Chennai Circle Technology & Advanced Chennai-600 034. Studies, 521/2, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai-600 035. Pan: Aaatv 9804F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

8. We have carefully gone through the provisions of Section 13 of the Act. Section 13(1)(a) says that if any part of the property or income of the Trust is given to the interested person without either adequate security or adequate interest, for the benefit of the person interested, then there shall be a diversion of funds

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. VELS INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE & ADVANCED STUDIES, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3547 To 3550/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2015-16) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs M/S. Vels Institute Of Science, (Exemptions), Chennai Circle Technology & Advanced Chennai-600 034. Studies, 521/2, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai-600 035. Pan: Aaatv 9804F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

8. We have carefully gone through the provisions of Section 13 of the Act. Section 13(1)(a) says that if any part of the property or income of the Trust is given to the interested person without either adequate security or adequate interest, for the benefit of the person interested, then there shall be a diversion of funds

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. VELS INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE & ADVANCED STUDIES, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3547 To 3550/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2015-16) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs M/S. Vels Institute Of Science, (Exemptions), Chennai Circle Technology & Advanced Chennai-600 034. Studies, 521/2, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai-600 035. Pan: Aaatv 9804F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

8. We have carefully gone through the provisions of Section 13 of the Act. Section 13(1)(a) says that if any part of the property or income of the Trust is given to the interested person without either adequate security or adequate interest, for the benefit of the person interested, then there shall be a diversion of funds

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. VELLORE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, VELLORE

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas that of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

8 & 8.1 5 & 5.1 expenses in cash, through imprest account of Finance Manager, Prakash. 17 Erroneously held that there was --- 6 to 6.3 9 to 9.3 6 to 6.3 no diversion of funds & violation of 13(1) (c) though Assessing Officer proved that cash refund of advance fees & tuition fees were not confirmed by parents and despite failure

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. VELLORE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, VELLORE

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas that of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

8 & 8.1 5 & 5.1 expenses in cash, through imprest account of Finance Manager, Prakash. 17 Erroneously held that there was --- 6 to 6.3 9 to 9.3 6 to 6.3 no diversion of funds & violation of 13(1) (c) though Assessing Officer proved that cash refund of advance fees & tuition fees were not confirmed by parents and despite failure

VELLORE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,VELLORE vs. DCIT, CC IV(1), CHENNAI

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas that of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

8 & 8.1 5 & 5.1 expenses in cash, through imprest account of Finance Manager, Prakash. 17 Erroneously held that there was --- 6 to 6.3 9 to 9.3 6 to 6.3 no diversion of funds & violation of 13(1) (c) though Assessing Officer proved that cash refund of advance fees & tuition fees were not confirmed by parents and despite failure

VELLORE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,VELLORE vs. DCIT, CC IV(1), CHENNAI

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas that of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

8 & 8.1 5 & 5.1 expenses in cash, through imprest account of Finance Manager, Prakash. 17 Erroneously held that there was --- 6 to 6.3 9 to 9.3 6 to 6.3 no diversion of funds & violation of 13(1) (c) though Assessing Officer proved that cash refund of advance fees & tuition fees were not confirmed by parents and despite failure

THAJUNNISSA BEGUM ,CHENNAI vs. ITO,NON CORPORATE WARD -10(4), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 196/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Mrs. Thajunnissa Begum, Income Tax Officer, No. 3, Prasanna Vinayagar V. Non Corporate Ward -10(4), Kovil St., Chennai. 235, Poonamalle High Road, Chennai – 600 029. [Pan: Adcpt-2186-K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Y. Sridhar, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16.02.2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28.02.2023

13 independent residential flats the denial of exemption under section 54 is not correct. 7.The learned Commissioner(Appeals) ought to have appreciated the fact that the land remained the same and the entire land remained in the hands of the assessee only and further exemption under section 54 is available for land also. 8.The learned Commissioner(Appeals) ought to have

DYNACON EQUIPMENTS PVT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(4), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Duvvuru R.L.Reddy

13. Before dealing with the respective contentions, we may state, in a summary form, scheme of the Act about the computation of the total income. Section 4 of the Act is the charging Section as per which the total income of an assessee, subject to statutory exemptions, is chargeable to tax. Section 14 of the Act enumerates five heads

DYNACON EQUIPMENTS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(4), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Duvvuru R.L.Reddy

13. Before dealing with the respective contentions, we may state, in a summary form, scheme of the Act about the computation of the total income. Section 4 of the Act is the charging Section as per which the total income of an assessee, subject to statutory exemptions, is chargeable to tax. Section 14 of the Act enumerates five heads

TAMIL NADU BRICK INDUSTRIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.744/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 M/S. Tamilnadu Brick Industries, The Income Tax Officer, No. 47, Mangali Nagar 1St Street, Vs. Non Corporate Circle 8(1), Arumbakkam, Chennai 600 106. Chennai. [Pan: Aafft3643P] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Vijay Kumar Punna, Jr. Standing Counsel सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 13.02.2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11.05.2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 9, Chennai, Dated 27.02.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: “1. The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 9, Chennai Dated 27.02.2017 In I.T.A.No.07/Cit(A)-9/2016-17 For The Above Mentioned Assessment Year Is Contrary To Law, Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case.

section 53A: To qualify for the protection of the doctrine of part-performance it must be shown that there is a contract to transfer for consideration immovable property and the contract is evidenced by a writing signed by the person sought to be bound by it and from which the terms necessary to constitute the transfer can be ascertained with

UPPU KARUNASESH,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.978 & 979/Chny/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11

8 I.T.A. Nos.978 & 979/Chny/15 India Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Stratbiz Consulting Pvt. Ltd. While computing income from house property, the assessee has reduced the lease rental paid to land owners. The question arises for consideration is while computing income from house property under Sections 23 and 24 of the Act, can the assessee reduce the rent paid for the land

UPPU KARUNASESH,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.978 & 979/Chny/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11

8 I.T.A. Nos.978 & 979/Chny/15 India Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Stratbiz Consulting Pvt. Ltd. While computing income from house property, the assessee has reduced the lease rental paid to land owners. The question arises for consideration is while computing income from house property under Sections 23 and 24 of the Act, can the assessee reduce the rent paid for the land

ACIT (OSD) CORPORATE CIRCLE 4(2), CHENNAI vs. KKA BUILDTECH PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1159/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15

8 -: electricity, maintenance of sanitary, plumbing, common equipments, housekeeping, repair and AMC of the lifts/Generators, maintenance and repair and insurance of building etc. and the lessor submitted a complete audit document of all charges collected. From the above, it is very clear that the assessee has not simply let out the shops to lessees. It is the obligation

DCIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 1, CHENNAI vs. MUTHU DANIEL RAJAN, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1675/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 Mr.Muthu Daniel Rajan, V. The Asst. Commissioner- No.10, Appar Street, Of Income Tax, Kalakshetra Colony, Non-Corporate Circle-1(1), Besant Nagar, Chennai. Chennai-600 090. [Pan: Aadpd 9713 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 54F, and had denied the benefit of claim of exemption U/s 54F, amounting to a value of Rs 2,60,54,377/-. 3. The appellant had purchased a residential house at Besant Nagar in the Assessment Year of 2012-13; and to meet out the costs of purchase; had sold his lands at Kunnakkadu in this Assessment Year

MUTHU DANIEL RAJAN,CHENNAI vs. CIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1675/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 Mr.Muthu Daniel Rajan, V. The Asst. Commissioner- No.10, Appar Street, Of Income Tax, Kalakshetra Colony, Non-Corporate Circle-1(1), Besant Nagar, Chennai. Chennai-600 090. [Pan: Aadpd 9713 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 54F, and had denied the benefit of claim of exemption U/s 54F, amounting to a value of Rs 2,60,54,377/-. 3. The appellant had purchased a residential house at Besant Nagar in the Assessment Year of 2012-13; and to meet out the costs of purchase; had sold his lands at Kunnakkadu in this Assessment Year

DCIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 1, CHENNAI vs. MUTHU DANIEL RAJAN, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1675/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 Mr.Muthu Daniel Rajan, V. The Asst. Commissioner- No.10, Appar Street, Of Income Tax, Kalakshetra Colony, Non-Corporate Circle-1(1), Besant Nagar, Chennai. Chennai-600 090. [Pan: Aadpd 9713 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 54F, and had denied the benefit of claim of exemption U/s 54F, amounting to a value of Rs 2,60,54,377/-. 3. The appellant had purchased a residential house at Besant Nagar in the Assessment Year of 2012-13; and to meet out the costs of purchase; had sold his lands at Kunnakkadu in this Assessment Year