METTUR MUNICIPALITY,SALEM vs. ITO (TDS) , SALEM

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 758 & 759/Chny/2025 धनिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2023-24, 2024-25 Mettur Municipality Income Tax Officer (Tds) Salem. Municipality Office Road, Mettur Dam, Vs. Salem – 636 401. Tamil Nadu [Pan: Aaalm2764R] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. S. Bhupendran, Advocate. प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04.06.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12.08.2025

Housing and Urban Development Corporation Limited, which is a central government undertaking; o In exercise of powers conferred under Section 194A(3)(iii)(f), the Central Government issued Notification No. S.O.3489 [No.170(F.No.12/164/68-ITCC/ITJ)] dated 22/10/1970 listing out such entities exempted from the operation of Section 194A. Among those listed, TUFIDCO is covered by Category (ii) - “any company in which

ZANNATHU FIRDOUSE,CHENNAI vs. ITO, INTNL. TAXN WARD-2(2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 422/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Zannathul Firdouse, The Income Tax Officer, Flat C-104, Raheja Regency, V. International Taxation Ward - 147, Santhome High Road, 2(2), R A Puram, Chennai. Chennai – 600 028. [Pan: Aadpz-6639-H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. B. Ramakrishna, Fca : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.08.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

196 Taxmann 87 (Kar). Therefore, we cannot find fault with the claim of the assessee :-8-: ITA. No: 422/Chny/2023 on this ground alone. In so far as second reason given by the Assessing Officer is that, the construction of house property was not completed within three years from the date of transfer of original asset. We find that the assessee

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. MENAKURU SUKUMAR REDDY, CHENNAI

196\nLedger copy\nPaper book 5\np.g 393-394\n5.\nK. Arvind\nReddy\nRs.38,50,000/-(Cr)\nRs.40,00,000/-\n(Dr)\nRs.1,50,000/- (Dr)\nIt's running\naccount and for\nyour reference\nledger copies\nattached for\nsubsequent\ntransactions\nConfirmation\nPaper book 1-\np.g 198\nLedger copy\nPaper book 5\np.g 395\n6.\nK. Sreedhar\nReddy -\nHUF\nΑΑΕΡΚ5245K\nRs.18

AADARSH SURANA, CHENNAI,CHENNAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

house property of Rs.7,000/– and\nincome from other sources of Rs.14,826/-. The case was selected for limited\nscrutiny assessment for verification of the following issues: -\ni. Expenses incurred for earning exempt income\nii. Share capital/capital\n6. Consequently, notice u/s.143(2) of the Act was issued on 28.08.2018,\nfollowed by multiple notices u/s.142(1) of the Act.\n7. During

SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2),, CHENNAI

In the result, both the both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Revenue and the

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 153A(1)(b) states that the assessing officer shall assess or Section 153A(1)(b) states that the assessing officer shall assess or Section 153A(1)(b) states that the assessing officer shall assess or reassess the total income of six years immediately preceding the reassess the total income of six years immediately preceding the reassess the total income

DCIT CC 2 2 , CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT LTD, CHENNAI

In the result, both the both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Revenue and the

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 153A(1)(b) states that the assessing officer shall assess or Section 153A(1)(b) states that the assessing officer shall assess or Section 153A(1)(b) states that the assessing officer shall assess or reassess the total income of six years immediately preceding the reassess the total income of six years immediately preceding the reassess the total income

ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 15, CHENNAI vs. ANITHA KUMARAN, CHENNAI

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

section 56(2)(vii) of the Act. Since the ground does not require appreciation of new facts, the same is admitted. 3. The Ld. Sr. DR, drawing attention to the grounds of appeal, submitted that a corporate entity was the owner of the asset which was transferred to the assessee and therefore, the provisions of Sec.56(2)(vii) has rightly

JESUDASON BIJI ,CHENNAI vs. OFFICE OF INCOME TAX OFFICER INT. TAXN WARD1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

houses and the total consideration received during F.Y. 2013-14 is Rs.3,46,12,700/-. And the assessee had deposited Rs.50,00,000/- in 54EC bonds on 31.12.2013 and hence was eligible for deduction u/s.54EC. However, in respect of the claim of deduction u/s.54F, AO noted that the investment was made in acquisition of a vacant land and construction

CELLAN GUNASEELAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 3(1), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 2717/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011 - 12 Shri Cellan Gunaseelan, The Acit, No.6, Jayammal Road, Vs. Non-Corporate Circle 3(1), Teynampet, Chennai. Chennai – 600 018. Pan: Aampg 2229F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Chinthapalli Mehar Chand, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 20.09.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20.09.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Chennai, In Ita No.141/2016-17/A.Y.2011-12/Cit(A)-4 Dated 27.09.2017. The Assessment Was Framed By The Acit, Non-Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai For The Assessment Year 2011-12 U/S.147 (3) R.W.S 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) Vide Order Dated 27.09.2017. 2. The First Issue In This Appeal Of Assessee Is As Regards To Reopening Of Assessment & Assumption Of Jurisdiction By The Ao U/S.147 Of The Act, Confirmed By The Cit(A). At The Outset, The Ld.Counsel For The Assessee Has Not Pressed This Issue & Hence, The Same Is Dismissed As Not-Pressed.

property sold at Bangalore 5,100,000.00 Less: Indexed cost of acquisition (61785*711/223) 196,992.00 4,903,008.00 The ld.counsel stated that as per the provisions of section 45 of the Act, the long term capital gain which was not utilized for construction of residential house

MENAKURU SUKUMAR REDDY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT(A), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

property. Aggrieved by the addition made, the assessee filed an appeal before ld.CIT(A) and raised grounds on disallowance of development expenditures. During the first appellate proceedings the assessee made submission with respect to disallowances made towards development expenditure incurred by the assessee. However, the ld.CIT(A), without considering the issue under consideration i.e., disallowance of expenditure, enhanced the income

MENAKURU SUKUMAR REDDY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT(A), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

property. Aggrieved by the addition made, the assessee filed an appeal before ld.CIT(A) and raised grounds on disallowance of development expenditures. During the first appellate proceedings the assessee made submission with respect to disallowances made towards development expenditure incurred by the assessee. However, the ld.CIT(A), without considering the issue under consideration i.e., disallowance of expenditure, enhanced the income

MENAKURU SUKUMAR REDDY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT(A), CHENNAI

196\nLedger copy\nPaper book 5\np.g 393-394\n4.\nHi-fashions\nKushpath\nD jain\nΑΕΑΡΑ7814A\nRs.21,00,000/-\n(Dr)\nRs.21,00,000/-\n(Dr)\nSubsequently\nPayment was\nmade in AY\n2019-20 and the\nbalance in the\nledger NIL as on\ntoday\nConfirmation\nPaper book 1-\np.g 198\nLedger copy\nPaper book 5\np.g 395\n5.\nK. Arvind

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. MENAKURU SUKUMAR REDDY , CHENNAI

196\nLedger copy\nPaper book 5\np.g 393-394\nHi-fashions\nKushpath\nD jain\nΑΕΑΡΑ7814A\nRs.21,00,000/-\n(Dr)\nRs.21,00,000/-\n(Dr)\nSubsequently\nPayment was\nmade in AY\n2019-20 and the\nbalance in the\nledger NIL as on\ntoday\nConfirmation\nPaper book 1-\np.g 198\nLedger copy\nPaper book 5\np.g 395\n5.\nK. Arvind\nReddy

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

house of the Murugappa group. 15.1 Further, the CIT(A) held that in the assessment year 2012- 2013, a sum of Rs.12,81,22,208/- had already been debited and claimed and therefore only a further sum of Rs.81,77,792/- was allowable towards the total cost of construction and only that was allowable in this year. The balance

ACIT, NCC - 11 (1),, CHENNAI vs. SHRI ANIL KUMAR SHANTICHAND MEHTA,, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.302/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Shri Anil Kumar Shantichand Mehta, Income Tax, No. 196, Govindappa Naicken Street, Non Corporate Circle 11(1), George Town, Chennai 600 001. Chennai 600 006. [Pan:Aavps4928E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri D. Anand, Advdocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 02.08.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.09.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 13, Chennai, Dated 21.11.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2016-17. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: 1. The Order Of The Learned Cit (A) Is Contrary To Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. 2. The Cit(A) Erroneously Held That The Assessee Had Not Claimed Exemption U/S.10(37) [P.8.2] Though The Assessee, Vide His Letter Dated 26-12-2018 Stated "The Compensation Of Rs.7,62,40,126/- Received Was Claimed Exempt U/S.10(37), However, It Was Erroneously Omitted To Be Mentioned In The Return Of Income Filed."

196, Govindappa Naicken Street, Non Corporate Circle 11(1), George Town, Chennai 600 001. Chennai 600 006. [PAN:AAVPS4928E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri D. Anand, Advdocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 02.08.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 28.09.2022 आदेश

CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, NON CORP WARD 8, CHENNAI

In the result, Revenue Appeal for AY 2012-13 stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

House, 2nd Floor, Chennai. No.2, N.S.C. Bose Road, Chennai-600 001. [PAN: AABCC 6633 K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee by : Mr. Sandeep Bagmar, Advocate; Mr. Balachandar, FCA Department by : Mr. Nilay Baran Som, CIT : सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date of Hearing 22.01.2025 : घोषणाक"तारीख /Date of Pronouncement 19.03.2025 ITA No.1282, 1283 to 1285/Chny/2024

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OFFICER , CHENNAI vs. CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, Revenue Appeal for AY 2012-13 stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

House, 2nd Floor, Chennai. No.2, N.S.C. Bose Road, Chennai-600 001. [PAN: AABCC 6633 K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee by : Mr. Sandeep Bagmar, Advocate; Mr. Balachandar, FCA Department by : Mr. Nilay Baran Som, CIT : सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date of Hearing 22.01.2025 : घोषणाक"तारीख /Date of Pronouncement 19.03.2025 ITA No.1282, 1283 to 1285/Chny/2024

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NUNGAMBAKKAM CHENNAI vs. CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, Revenue Appeal for AY 2012-13 stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

House, 2nd Floor, Chennai. No.2, N.S.C. Bose Road, Chennai-600 001. [PAN: AABCC 6633 K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee by : Mr. Sandeep Bagmar, Advocate; Mr. Balachandar, FCA Department by : Mr. Nilay Baran Som, CIT : सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date of Hearing 22.01.2025 : घोषणाक"तारीख /Date of Pronouncement 19.03.2025 ITA No.1282, 1283 to 1285/Chny/2024

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CHENNAI vs. CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, Revenue Appeal for AY 2012-13 stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

House, 2nd Floor, Chennai. No.2, N.S.C. Bose Road, Chennai-600 001. [PAN: AABCC 6633 K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee by : Mr. Sandeep Bagmar, Advocate; Mr. Balachandar, FCA Department by : Mr. Nilay Baran Som, CIT : सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date of Hearing 22.01.2025 : घोषणाक"तारीख /Date of Pronouncement 19.03.2025 ITA No.1282, 1283 to 1285/Chny/2024