MRS.JOTHI NARAYANAN ,CHENNAI vs. ACIT , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

house at Rs.1.20 lakhs and divided among himself and his wife and declared Rs.60,000/- from this property and none of the authorities below have carried out this exercise of computing the correct market value, we feel that on estimate deemed rental income cannot be added u/s.24 of the Act. Hence, we delete the addition and allow this issue

PRAVEEN KUMAR G JAIN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:2728/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Praveen Kumar G Jain, Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, No.52, Near Select Theatre, Vs. Central Circle -3(2), Nattupillaiyar Koil Street, Chennai – 600 034. Sowcarpet, Chennai – 600 079. [Pan:Aeapp-4675-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

section 57(iii) of the Income Tax Act which was incurred for the purpose of earning income from other sources. For these and other grounds that may be rendered at the time of hearing it is most humbly prayed that the Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to allow the appellants appeal and thus render justice. 3. The brief facts

SACHIDANANDAIAH GANESH,TAMIL NADU vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD 1, HOSUR, HOSUR

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

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:190/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sachidanandaiah Ganesh, Income Tax Officer, 37, Vaniyar Street, Vs. Ward 1, Kelamangalam, Hosur. Krishnagiri, Tamil Nadu- 635 113. [Pan: Ajipg-9330-N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

Section 69A of the Act are not applicable to the facts of the present case. 5. The learned lower Authorities erred in law and on facts in levying tax u/s l 15BBE of the Act for the transaction made before 15.12.2016. Each of the above grounds is without prejudice to one another and the appellant craves leave

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. MENAKURU SUKUMAR REDDY, CHENNAI

140/-\n3\nPlatinum\nHoldings\nPvt Ltd\n45,98,23,543/-\n6,30,02,200/-\n52,28,25,743/- 66,91,366/-\n51,61,34,377/-\n4,84,45,000/-\n56,45,79,377/-\n4,99,22,416/-\n51,46,56,961/-\n4\nRuby\nRealty Pvt\nLtd

VENKATRAMAN JAYASHREE PRIYADHARSHINI,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NCC-3,, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.64/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 Venkatraman Jayashree Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Priyadharshini, No. 8/5, Income Tax, Rajaji 1St Street, Lake Area, Non Corporate Circle 3(1), Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. Chennai. [Pan:Adapj3317L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Y. Sridhar, F.C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 05.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.08.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.03.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Assessee Raised 5 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Giving Relief To The Extent Of ₹.88,85,000/- Under Section 54 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short]

140 taxmann.com 441 [Bang. Trib] and submits that the Bangalore Benches of the Tribunal held that the assessee is entitled to claim additional expenditure incurred by the assessee on interior renovation and furnishing of said new residential property after date of registrations as to make said house habitable under section

SMT. LINGAMMAL RAMARAJU SHASTRA PRATHISHTA TRUST,RAJAPALAYAM vs. ACIT (EXEMPTIONS), COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal stands allowed

housed in the same premises as the music school has a total of\n8,939 books on a variety of subjects and is an adjunct to the music school\nactivity. Shri S Muralidhar thus argued that the music school being run by\nthe assessee was in pursuance of its object of 'education' and it did not\nconstitute a 'general public

SMT. JAYANTHI SEEMAN,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW - 1 (2),, CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

property at T Nagar, Chennai\"\nThe assessment was completed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Income\nTax Act, 1961, wherein the following additions were made for the\nΑ.Υ. 2013-14:\nSl.No Details\nAmount Rs.\nIncome admitted in return of income\n2,57,140\nAdditions:\n1\nUnexplained cash deposits u/s.69\n1,60,46,854\n2\nInterest income omitted to be admitted

SMT. JAYANTHI SEEMAN,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW - 1 (2),, CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

property at T Nagar, Chennai\"\nThe assessment was completed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Income\nTax Act, 1961, wherein the following additions were made for the\nΑ.Υ. 2013-14:\nSl.No Details\nAmount Rs.\nIncome admitted in return of income\n2,57,140\nAdditions:\n1\nUnexplained cash deposits u/s.69\n1,60,46,854\n2\nInterest income omitted to be admitted

SUBRAMANIAN KATHIRSEN,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1 (1), AURANGABAD

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.765/Chny/2025 िनधा9रण वष9 /Assessment Year: 2019-20

house property. The gross salary of the assessee during the year as declared by the assessee is Rs.60,86,946/-. The case was selected for scrutiny for the reason that assessee has claimed huge claim u/s.89(1) of the Act and also large refund claimed. The assessee is an Subramanian Kathirsen :- 3 -: employee in M/s PFIZER HEALTHCARE INDIA

M/S VARALAKSHMI STARCH INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,SALEM vs. CIT (APPEAL)-18 , CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 723 & 724/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12

housing heavy machineries and he also stated that firm has raised bills at various times and payments were made through account payee cheque and cash. He had also furnished copies of five bills aggregating to Rs. 9,38,90,639/-. The balance sheet of the assessee shows total cost of building including Tapioca plant, maize starch plant, ETP and other

M/S VARALAKSHMI STARCH INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,SALEM vs. CIT (APPEAL)-18 , CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 723 & 724/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12

housing heavy machineries and he also stated that firm has raised bills at various times and payments were made through account payee cheque and cash. He had also furnished copies of five bills aggregating to Rs. 9,38,90,639/-. The balance sheet of the assessee shows total cost of building including Tapioca plant, maize starch plant, ETP and other

DCIT, CC2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. JAYAPRIYA COMPANY, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Property Developers. The assessee firm is also involved in the business of money lending which is carried out in the name & style of M/s Jayapriya Financiers. The assessee also operates a guest house and theatre by the name of M/s Jayapriya Guest House and M/s Jayapriya Theatre respectively. A search action u/s 132 of the Act was conducted upon

DCIT, CEN CIR 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. JAYAPRIYA COMPANY, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Property Developers. The assessee firm is also involved in the business of money lending which is carried out in the name & style of M/s Jayapriya Financiers. The assessee also operates a guest house and theatre by the name of M/s Jayapriya Guest House and M/s Jayapriya Theatre respectively. A search action u/s 132 of the Act was conducted upon

PARRY INFRASTRUCTURE CO P LTD. ,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(1) , CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. 13.2 The CIT(A) has, both in the case of TII and EID, kept on repeating the words “when undivided share of land (UDS) cannot be sold separately without corresponding sale of flats. The UDS is inseparable, meaning thereby, UDS goes along with the sale of flats“. There is no law or rule

M.CT.M.CHIDAMBARAM CHETTIAR FOUNDATION,CHENNAI vs. DCIT (EXEMPTIONS) I, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

houses and it was let-out, beyond school hours for educational purposes and promotion of fine-arts, etc., in order to augment the income to be used for educational purposes. 3. He erred in holding that letting-out of auditorium is service in the nature of trade, commerce or business. 4.The decisions relied upon the CIT(A) are distinguishable

M.CT.M.CHIDAMBARAM CHETTIAR FOUNDATION,CHENNAI vs. DCIT (EXEMPTIONS) I, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

houses and it was let-out, beyond school hours for educational purposes and promotion of fine-arts, etc., in order to augment the income to be used for educational purposes. 3. He erred in holding that letting-out of auditorium is service in the nature of trade, commerce or business. 4.The decisions relied upon the CIT(A) are distinguishable

M.CT.M.CHIDAMBARAM CHETTIAR FOUNDATION,CHENNAI vs. DCIT (EXEMPTIONS) I, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

houses and it was let-out, beyond school hours for educational purposes and promotion of fine-arts, etc., in order to augment the income to be used for educational purposes. 3. He erred in holding that letting-out of auditorium is service in the nature of trade, commerce or business. 4.The decisions relied upon the CIT(A) are distinguishable

M.CT.M.CHIDAMBARAM CHETTIAR FOUNDATION,CHENNAI vs. DCIT (EXEMPTIONS) I, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

houses and it was let-out, beyond school hours for educational purposes and promotion of fine-arts, etc., in order to augment the income to be used for educational purposes. 3. He erred in holding that letting-out of auditorium is service in the nature of trade, commerce or business. 4.The decisions relied upon the CIT(A) are distinguishable