DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(1), CHENNAI vs. REPCO HOME FINANCE P LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA no

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

Section 36(1)(viii) without calling for the income earned under the respective heads’ The assessee submitted before learned CIT(A), details of income earned under each of the activity :- Other Total Revenue Purpose of Operating Operating from S.No. Income In Rs. Loan income In Operations In Rs. Rs. A Construction 189,33,11,359 1

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

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act‘) 2. Since the issues involved in both these appeals are common, they were heard together. Both the parties also argued them together raising similar arguments on these issues. Accordingly, for the sake of convenience and brevity, we dispose both these appeals by this consolidated order

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

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act‘) 2. Since the issues involved in both these appeals are common, they were heard together. Both the parties also argued them together raising similar arguments on these issues. Accordingly, for the sake of convenience and brevity, we dispose both these appeals by this consolidated order

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]

250/- from the trust account. This money was obviously used for paying the difference between actual purchase amount of ITA Nos2125 to 2128 :- 9 -: & 2219 to 2222 /2017 "1,25,00,000/- and apparent consideration of "40,00,000/. Thus there was violation of a nature specified u/s.13(1) (c) of the Act. (v) During the previous year ended

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]

250/- from the trust account. This money was obviously used for paying the difference between actual purchase amount of ITA Nos2125 to 2128 :- 9 -: & 2219 to 2222 /2017 "1,25,00,000/- and apparent consideration of "40,00,000/. Thus there was violation of a nature specified u/s.13(1) (c) of the Act. (v) During the previous year ended

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]

250/- from the trust account. This money was obviously used for paying the difference between actual purchase amount of ITA Nos2125 to 2128 :- 9 -: & 2219 to 2222 /2017 "1,25,00,000/- and apparent consideration of "40,00,000/. Thus there was violation of a nature specified u/s.13(1) (c) of the Act. (v) During the previous year ended

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]

250/- from the trust account. This money was obviously used for paying the difference between actual purchase amount of ITA Nos2125 to 2128 :- 9 -: & 2219 to 2222 /2017 "1,25,00,000/- and apparent consideration of "40,00,000/. Thus there was violation of a nature specified u/s.13(1) (c) of the Act. (v) During the previous year ended

RAMAKRISHNAN PRABHU JYOTHI,,COIMBATORE vs. ACOT, NCC-5, , COIMBATORE

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.690/Chny/2020 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years: 2016-17 Ramakrishnan Prabhu Jyothi, Race Course, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu-641018, [Pan: Adjpp4946N] Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Non-Corporate Circle-5, Coimbatore. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri N.P.Vijay Kumar, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.05.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.08.2024 आदेश / Order Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M : This Appeal Is Filed Against The Order Bearing Din & Order No.Itba/Apl/S/250/2029-20/1026334108(1) Dated 09.03.2020 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax [Herein After “Cit(A), For The

250 dated 09.03.2020 passed by CIT(A), Coimbatore. :- 2 -: ITA No.690/Chny/2020 2.0 Before proceeding further, it is necessary to examine the grounds of appeal raised by the appellant. The appellant had originally filed grounds of appeal which were out rightly descriptive and narrative in nature. The appellant, vide order dated 30.11.2023, was directed to file to file concise grounds

BHARATHAN ANAND,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

1) Chennai, without appreciating the law that as per provisions of section 49 read with Explanation (iii) of section 48 of the Income-tax Act the index point of 100 pertaining to 01.04.1981 :- 2 -: adopted by the appellant was correct as the property was acquired by the appellant's father prior to 01.04.1981 as against the index point

ARAVA SUBBA RAO,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri. G. Pavan Kumar

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (herein after referred to as ‘the Act’) 2. The substantive ground raised by the assessee that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the findings of the Assessing Officer on self occupied house property assessed u/s.23(1) of the Act treated as deemed let out on estimated annual value

C.ARYAMA SUNDARAM,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

250 of the Income Tax Act. :-2-: I.T.A. No.1208/Mds/2015 2. The Assessee has raised the following grounds: 2.1 The CIT(A) erred in confirming the order passed by the Assessing Officer, relating to the computation of Long Term Capital Gains arising on the sale of property of the appellant, and situate at No. 137, Sundar Nagar, New Delhi

SHRI V. NATARAJAN (INDIVIDUAL),RASIPURAM vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, SALEM

In the result, both the appeals of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1535 & 1801/Chny/2024 ननिाारण वर्ा/Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2015-16 V. Varadappan Natarajan/ The Acit, V. Natarajan (Individual), Central Circle, No.64-C, Rotary Nagar, Salem. Rasipuram Tamil Nadu-637 408. [Pan: Acgpn1477Q] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, Fca (Virtual) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Shiva Srinivas, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2025 घोर्णाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2025

House property. Therefore, claim of appellant that just because AO happened to not make disallowance during previous year, same disallowance can't be made for current year does not sound reasonable. Therefore, I am of considered view that AO has correctly made disallowance of interest Rs.14,94,644/- which has no nexus with earning ITA Nos.1535 & 1801/Chny/2024

VARADAPPAN NATARAJAN,RASIPURAM vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, SALEM

In the result, both the appeals of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1535 & 1801/Chny/2024 ननिाारण वर्ा/Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2015-16 V. Varadappan Natarajan/ The Acit, V. Natarajan (Individual), Central Circle, No.64-C, Rotary Nagar, Salem. Rasipuram Tamil Nadu-637 408. [Pan: Acgpn1477Q] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, Fca (Virtual) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Shiva Srinivas, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2025 घोर्णाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2025

House property. Therefore, claim of appellant that just because AO happened to not make disallowance during previous year, same disallowance can't be made for current year does not sound reasonable. Therefore, I am of considered view that AO has correctly made disallowance of interest Rs.14,94,644/- which has no nexus with earning ITA Nos.1535 & 1801/Chny/2024

G-TECH STONE LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1), CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

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

250, wherein it has been held that assessment proceedings generated by issuance of a notice under section 153A(l)(a) can be concluded against the interest of assessee including making additions even without any incriminating material being available against assessee in search u/s.132 on the basis of which notice was issued u/s.153(1)(a). 5.3. The Id. CIT(A) erred

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 (1) INVESTIGATION WING, CHENNAI vs. M/S G TECH STONE LTD, CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

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

250, wherein it has been held that assessment proceedings generated by issuance of a notice under section 153A(l)(a) can be concluded against the interest of assessee including making additions even without any incriminating material being available against assessee in search u/s.132 on the basis of which notice was issued u/s.153(1)(a). 5.3. The Id. CIT(A) erred

G-TECH STONE LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1), CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

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

250, wherein it has been held that assessment proceedings generated by issuance of a notice under section 153A(l)(a) can be concluded against the interest of assessee including making additions even without any incriminating material being available against assessee in search u/s.132 on the basis of which notice was issued u/s.153(1)(a). 5.3. The Id. CIT(A) erred

G-TECH STONE LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1), CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

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

250, wherein it has been held that assessment proceedings generated by issuance of a notice under section 153A(l)(a) can be concluded against the interest of assessee including making additions even without any incriminating material being available against assessee in search u/s.132 on the basis of which notice was issued u/s.153(1)(a). 5.3. The Id. CIT(A) erred

G-TECH STONE LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1), CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

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

250, wherein it has been held that assessment proceedings generated by issuance of a notice under section 153A(l)(a) can be concluded against the interest of assessee including making additions even without any incriminating material being available against assessee in search u/s.132 on the basis of which notice was issued u/s.153(1)(a). 5.3. The Id. CIT(A) erred