DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE - 1 (1),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. AMPA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD.,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2202, 2203, 2204 & 2205/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Ampa Housing Development (P) Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), Limited, No. 19, Raman Street, Chennai 600 034. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [Pan:Aacca7430R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Dr. I.P. Roopa Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06.01.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.02.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Four Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Chennai Dated 15.03.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15. The Only Common Effective Ground Raised By The Revenue For All The Assessment Years Relates To Apportioning The Intermingled Common Expenditure With Relation To Business Income & Let Out Property Income In The Ratio Of 50:50 Without Valid Basis.

house property and business. 7.2 After considering the submissions of the assessee the ld. CIT(A) has observed as under: “I have carefully considered the submissions of the appellant. As pointed out by the appellant that the said expenses have to be incurred for carrying out his business, irrespective of the quantum of revenue/turnover involved. If this proportionate method

DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE - 1 (1),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. AMPA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD.,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2202, 2203, 2204 & 2205/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Ampa Housing Development (P) Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), Limited, No. 19, Raman Street, Chennai 600 034. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [Pan:Aacca7430R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Dr. I.P. Roopa Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06.01.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.02.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Four Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Chennai Dated 15.03.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15. The Only Common Effective Ground Raised By The Revenue For All The Assessment Years Relates To Apportioning The Intermingled Common Expenditure With Relation To Business Income & Let Out Property Income In The Ratio Of 50:50 Without Valid Basis.

house property and business. 7.2 After considering the submissions of the assessee the ld. CIT(A) has observed as under: “I have carefully considered the submissions of the appellant. As pointed out by the appellant that the said expenses have to be incurred for carrying out his business, irrespective of the quantum of revenue/turnover involved. If this proportionate method

DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE - 1 (1),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. AMPA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD.,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2202, 2203, 2204 & 2205/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Ampa Housing Development (P) Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), Limited, No. 19, Raman Street, Chennai 600 034. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [Pan:Aacca7430R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Dr. I.P. Roopa Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06.01.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.02.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Four Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Chennai Dated 15.03.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15. The Only Common Effective Ground Raised By The Revenue For All The Assessment Years Relates To Apportioning The Intermingled Common Expenditure With Relation To Business Income & Let Out Property Income In The Ratio Of 50:50 Without Valid Basis.

house property and business. 7.2 After considering the submissions of the assessee the ld. CIT(A) has observed as under: “I have carefully considered the submissions of the appellant. As pointed out by the appellant that the said expenses have to be incurred for carrying out his business, irrespective of the quantum of revenue/turnover involved. If this proportionate method

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

Section 153A of the Act.\n74. Hence, we find the action of the AO making the additions / disallowances\nfor the A.Y. 2012-13 to 2016-17 in the absence of any incriminating material was\nwithout jurisdiction and contrary to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme\nCourt and accordingly we quash the search assessment order passed\nu/s.143

KUMARAVELU VARADHARAJAN @ K.VARADHARAJAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.617/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2011-12 Kumaravelu Varadharajan @ K. The Income Tax Officer, Varadharajan, No. 11/1, Narasimma Vs. International Taxation Ii(2), Nagar, 1St Street, Kodungaiyur, 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 112. Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Abwpv4091P] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N. Devanathan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri N. Gopikrishna, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 10.10.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.10.2018 आदेश /O R D E R

191/- by rejecting the claim of deduction under section 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. 2 I.T.A. No.617/Chny/16 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income on 30.07.2011 admitting NIL income. The case was selected for scrutiny and verified the books of accounts as furnished by the assessee against statutory

ITO, NON-COPORATE WARD-19(6), CHENNAI vs. SHRI.GOMATHINAYAGAM RATHINASABAPATHY, EKKADUTHANGAL CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

191\nRespondent's Chartered Accountant during re-\nassessment proceedings\n17.03.2016 Notice under section 148 of the Act issued for 194\nthe Assessment year 2011-12\n16.05.2019 Response filed before the Assessing Officer 195\nduring re-assessment proceedings\n28.02.2019 Return of income filed for the assessment year 197\n2014-15 along with statement of income\n200\nAxis Bank account statement

JCIT, CHENNAI vs. CHENNAI CITY CENTER HOLDINGS P LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1000 & 1001/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 The Joint Commissioner Of M/S Chennai City Centre Holdings Income Tax, V. Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Circle – 1(2), No.10-11, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai Chennai - 600 034. Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. Pan : Aaacg 3869 Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

191/-. 7. Shri Shiva Srinivas, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the assessee-company let out a shopping mall and earned lease rentals, which was offered under the head “income from house property”. After claiming deduction under Section

JCIT, CHENNAI vs. CHENNAI CITY CENTER HOLDINGS P LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1000 & 1001/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 The Joint Commissioner Of M/S Chennai City Centre Holdings Income Tax, V. Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Circle – 1(2), No.10-11, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai Chennai - 600 034. Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. Pan : Aaacg 3869 Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

191/-. 7. Shri Shiva Srinivas, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the assessee-company let out a shopping mall and earned lease rentals, which was offered under the head “income from house property”. After claiming deduction under Section

ITO, CHENNAI vs. R.AISHWARYA, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1120/Mds/2016. "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-2012. The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Smt. R. Aishwarya, Non Corporate Ward 3(1) No.18, Raghave Veera Avenue, Chennai Poes Garden, Chennai 600 086. [Pan Aevpa2044K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

191/- Interest on housing loan : " 63,98,540/- --------------------- Long term capital gain : " 3,77,269/- ---------------------- Ld. Assessing Officer was of the opinion that interest of "63,98,540/- on the housing loan paid by the assessee, for the period starting from the date of purchase and ending on the date of sale of property could not be allowed as cost

USHA ANANDAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George]

house property’’. Thus income derived from the subject property was assessable only in the hands of the assessee’s husband. It is true that original assessments for all the impugned assessment year except for assessment year 2010-2011 were completed u/s.143(1) of the Act. It is also true that for assessment year 2010- 2011, assessee had not filed

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. GREEN HOUSE PROMOTERS PRIVATE LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1785, 1796 & 1828/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2010-11, 2011-12 & 2009-2010. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S. Green House Promoters Tax Vs. Pvt. Ltd, Company Circle Ii(1) No.4,Rama Rao Street, Chennai. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [Pan Aaccg 2333B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Housing Private Limited -ITA No.1097(Mad.)/2011 dated 21.03.2103, purchase cost of the lands in a real estate business can be treated as exempted under the Rule 6DD and hence cannot be subjected to the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act. In view of the decision of the Tribunal in the above case, ld. Commissioner of Income

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. GREEN HOUSE PROMOTERS PRIVATE LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1785, 1796 & 1828/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2010-11, 2011-12 & 2009-2010. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S. Green House Promoters Tax Vs. Pvt. Ltd, Company Circle Ii(1) No.4,Rama Rao Street, Chennai. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [Pan Aaccg 2333B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Housing Private Limited -ITA No.1097(Mad.)/2011 dated 21.03.2103, purchase cost of the lands in a real estate business can be treated as exempted under the Rule 6DD and hence cannot be subjected to the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act. In view of the decision of the Tribunal in the above case, ld. Commissioner of Income

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. GREEN HOUSE PROMOTERS P. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1785, 1796 & 1828/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2010-11, 2011-12 & 2009-2010. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S. Green House Promoters Tax Vs. Pvt. Ltd, Company Circle Ii(1) No.4,Rama Rao Street, Chennai. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [Pan Aaccg 2333B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Housing Private Limited -ITA No.1097(Mad.)/2011 dated 21.03.2103, purchase cost of the lands in a real estate business can be treated as exempted under the Rule 6DD and hence cannot be subjected to the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act. In view of the decision of the Tribunal in the above case, ld. Commissioner of Income

ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 10(1), CHENNAI vs. S.VINODH KUMAR, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2527/Chny/2017 & C.O.No.9/Chny/2018 (Ita No.2527/Chny/2017) "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-2012. The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Shri. S. Vinodh Kumar, Income Tax, No.25, Ranganathan Avenue, Non Corporate Circle 10 (1) Kilpauk, Chennai. Chennai 600 010. [Pan Aaipv 5798G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respondent/Cross Objector)

191 ITR 641. Per contra, ld. Authorised Representative strongly supported 5. the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 6. We have considered the rival contentions and perused the orders of the authorities below. A reading of the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) show that ld. Assessing Officer himself had mentioned the business

MOHAMED AKBAR,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCC-10(3), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahaymohamed Akbar, I.T.O., 2/2 1St St., Gf, Apt No. 2, Vs. Non-Corporate Circle 10(3), Jamalia Perambur High Road, Chennai. Chennai-12 Pan No. Afepa 3815 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, it was noted by the Assessing officer as under: “4. As per Faceless penalty scheme, which was notified and published in official gazette on 12.01.2021, further penalty proceedings were to be carried by National Faceless Penalty Scheme. In the light of above notification, the office of undersigned issued and served the Show Cause

INCOME TAX OFFICER, CHENNAI vs. RAJKUMARI , CHENNAI

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

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

house property, capital gains claimed under the head ‘capital gain’ and deductions claimed under Chapter VIA of the Act. We noted that the assessment order in this case was framed by AO only on 20.12.2019 but it was under mistaken notion or mistaken belief or may be under new technical effect of cut paste has pasted the relevant assessment order

VODAFONE CELLULAR LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.564 & 565/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-2015 Vodafone Cellular Limited, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No.1045-1046, Income Tax, Avinashi Road, Tds Circle, Coimbatore 641 018 Coimbatore [Pan Aaacb 8614L ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

191 of the Act provides that an assessee cannot be treated as an assessee in default when taxes were not deducted at source but paid directly by the recipient. This view is supported by the Instruction No. 275/201/95-ITB(B) dated 29.01.1997 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. It was further submitted before the learned TDS Officer that

VODAFONE CELLULAR LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.564 & 565/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-2015 Vodafone Cellular Limited, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No.1045-1046, Income Tax, Avinashi Road, Tds Circle, Coimbatore 641 018 Coimbatore [Pan Aaacb 8614L ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

191 of the Act provides that an assessee cannot be treated as an assessee in default when taxes were not deducted at source but paid directly by the recipient. This view is supported by the Instruction No. 275/201/95-ITB(B) dated 29.01.1997 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. It was further submitted before the learned TDS Officer that