ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. A S CARGO MOVERS PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and assessee are decided as under:-

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1688 /Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2015-16 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1796 /Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2017-18 Assistant Commissioner Of Income A.S.Cargo Movers Private Limited, Tax, New No.173, Old No.103, 9Th Floor B Corporate Circle-1(1), Block, Navins Presidium, Chennai. Nelson Manickam Road, Aminjikarai, Chennai-600 029. [Pan: Aaaca7739D] आयकर अपील सं./Co No.56 /Chny/2024 (Ita No.1688/Chny/2024) निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2015-16 A.S.Cargo Movers Private Limited, Assistant Commissioner Of Income New No.173, Old No.103, 9Th Floor B Tax, Block, Navins Presidium, Corporate Circle-1(1), Nelson Manickam Road, Chennai. Aminjikarai, Chennai-600 029. [Pan: Aaaca7739D] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri N.Quadir Hoseyn, Advocate & Dr.L.Natarajan, Ca. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri K.N.Dhandapani, Cit सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04.12.2024 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.01.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

house property. The Ld. DR submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition of Rs.8,45,03,079/- made by the Ld. AO and discussed the same on page-9 to 12 of his order. The Ld. DR vehemently argued in favour of the action of the Ld. AO. 14.0 We have heard rival submissions in the light

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. CEEBROS PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

293/- per sq.ft. Even in this market scenario, the assessee have retained the flats at the value of Rs.5,775/- per sq.ft., being the actual cost of construction of the project. Further the assessee has retained the flats as its investment wherein the income derived from which is taxable under the head ‘income from house property’. Therefore the provisions

L.S.VISHNU PRASAD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), CHENNAI

The appeal stands partly allowed

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

house property’ was disallowed. The assessee was saddled with another addition of Rs.0.38 Lacs under the head ‘income from other sources’, being amenities & others charges received from tenants. The last addition of Rs.25.84 Lacs represents unexplained investment in gold jewellery, silver and diamond. Though the assessee had filed wealth tax return and submitted that there were no fresh purchases during

L.S.VISHNU PRASAD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), CHENNAI

The appeal stands partly allowed

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

house property’ was disallowed. The assessee was saddled with another addition of Rs.0.38 Lacs under the head ‘income from other sources’, being amenities & others charges received from tenants. The last addition of Rs.25.84 Lacs represents unexplained investment in gold jewellery, silver and diamond. Though the assessee had filed wealth tax return and submitted that there were no fresh purchases during

L.S.VISHNU PRASAD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), CHENNAI

The appeal stands partly allowed

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

house property’ was disallowed. The assessee was saddled with another addition of Rs.0.38 Lacs under the head ‘income from other sources’, being amenities & others charges received from tenants. The last addition of Rs.25.84 Lacs represents unexplained investment in gold jewellery, silver and diamond. Though the assessee had filed wealth tax return and submitted that there were no fresh purchases during

L.S.VISHNU PRASAD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), CHENNAI

The appeal stands partly allowed

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

house property’ was disallowed. The assessee was saddled with another addition of Rs.0.38 Lacs under the head ‘income from other sources’, being amenities & others charges received from tenants. The last addition of Rs.25.84 Lacs represents unexplained investment in gold jewellery, silver and diamond. Though the assessee had filed wealth tax return and submitted that there were no fresh purchases during

L.S.VISHNU PRASAD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), CHENNAI

The appeal stands partly allowed

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

house property’ was disallowed. The assessee was saddled with another addition of Rs.0.38 Lacs under the head ‘income from other sources’, being amenities & others charges received from tenants. The last addition of Rs.25.84 Lacs represents unexplained investment in gold jewellery, silver and diamond. Though the assessee had filed wealth tax return and submitted that there were no fresh purchases during

L.S.VISHNU PRASAD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), CHENNAI

The appeal stands partly allowed

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

house property’ was disallowed. The assessee was saddled with another addition of Rs.0.38 Lacs under the head ‘income from other sources’, being amenities & others charges received from tenants. The last addition of Rs.25.84 Lacs represents unexplained investment in gold jewellery, silver and diamond. Though the assessee had filed wealth tax return and submitted that there were no fresh purchases during

L.S.VISHNU PRASAD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), CHENNAI

The appeal stands partly allowed

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

house property’ was disallowed. The assessee was saddled with another addition of Rs.0.38 Lacs under the head ‘income from other sources’, being amenities & others charges received from tenants. The last addition of Rs.25.84 Lacs represents unexplained investment in gold jewellery, silver and diamond. Though the assessee had filed wealth tax return and submitted that there were no fresh purchases during

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SICAL LOGISTICS LTD., CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

house property, the assessee is allowed deduction under section 24 of the Act on account of interest paid on the borrowed funds utilised for acquiring the immovable property. Similarly, when the income is to be computed under the head "Profits and gains from business or profession", the deduction account of interest on borrowed fund is provided under section

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SICAL LOGISTICS LTD., CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

house property, the assessee is allowed deduction under section 24 of the Act on account of interest paid on the borrowed funds utilised for acquiring the immovable property. Similarly, when the income is to be computed under the head "Profits and gains from business or profession", the deduction account of interest on borrowed fund is provided under section

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SICAL LOGISTICS LTD., CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

house property, the assessee is allowed deduction under section 24 of the Act on account of interest paid on the borrowed funds utilised for acquiring the immovable property. Similarly, when the income is to be computed under the head "Profits and gains from business or profession", the deduction account of interest on borrowed fund is provided under section

ACIT, CIRCLE-1, , TIRUPUR vs. EASTMAN EXPORTS GLOBAL CLOTHING (P) LTD., TIRUPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3326/Chny/2019 & 326/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Eastman Exports Global Clothing (P) Ltd., No. 10, 12, 2Nd Street, Kumar Income Tax, Circle 1(1), 121, Adams Buildings, 60 Feet Road, Nagar South, Tirupur 641 603. Tirupur 641 602. [Pan: Aaccc0952E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.706/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Victus Dyeings, The Assistant Commissioner Of 410, P.N. Road, R.K. Nagar, Income Tax, Circle 1, Vs. Tirupur 641 601. Tirupur. [Pan: Aacfv4420D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.768/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, Income Tax, Circle 1, 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, Vs. Tirupur. City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. [Pan: Aacfk3053B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.358/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, The Assistant Commissioner Of 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, Income Tax, Circle 1, Vs. City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. Tirupur. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

house property and profits and gains of profession. If we refer to sub-clause (iiia) of section 28 of the Act, which explains profits on sale of a license granted under the Import (Control) order, in our opinion, is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case. Further, sub- clause (iiib) of section 28 of the Act provides

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-1, TIRUPPUR vs. EASTMAN EXPORTS GLOBAL CLOTHING P LTD, TIRUPPUR,TAMILNADU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3326/Chny/2019 & 326/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Eastman Exports Global Clothing (P) Ltd., No. 10, 12, 2Nd Street, Kumar Income Tax, Circle 1(1), 121, Adams Buildings, 60 Feet Road, Nagar South, Tirupur 641 603. Tirupur 641 602. [Pan: Aaccc0952E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.706/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Victus Dyeings, The Assistant Commissioner Of 410, P.N. Road, R.K. Nagar, Income Tax, Circle 1, Vs. Tirupur 641 601. Tirupur. [Pan: Aacfv4420D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.768/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, Income Tax, Circle 1, 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, Vs. Tirupur. City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. [Pan: Aacfk3053B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.358/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, The Assistant Commissioner Of 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, Income Tax, Circle 1, Vs. City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. Tirupur. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

house property and profits and gains of profession. If we refer to sub-clause (iiia) of section 28 of the Act, which explains profits on sale of a license granted under the Import (Control) order, in our opinion, is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case. Further, sub- clause (iiib) of section 28 of the Act provides

GEENA GARMENTS,TIRUPPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, TIRUPPUR, TIRUPPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3326/Chny/2019 & 326/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Eastman Exports Global Clothing (P) Ltd., No. 10, 12, 2Nd Street, Kumar Income Tax, Circle 1(1), 121, Adams Buildings, 60 Feet Road, Nagar South, Tirupur 641 603. Tirupur 641 602. [Pan: Aaccc0952E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.706/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Victus Dyeings, The Assistant Commissioner Of 410, P.N. Road, R.K. Nagar, Income Tax, Circle 1, Vs. Tirupur 641 601. Tirupur. [Pan: Aacfv4420D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.768/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, Income Tax, Circle 1, 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, Vs. Tirupur. City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. [Pan: Aacfk3053B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.358/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, The Assistant Commissioner Of 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, Income Tax, Circle 1, Vs. City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. Tirupur. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

house property and profits and gains of profession. If we refer to sub-clause (iiia) of section 28 of the Act, which explains profits on sale of a license granted under the Import (Control) order, in our opinion, is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case. Further, sub- clause (iiib) of section 28 of the Act provides

T V SUNDARAM IYENGAR & SONS LIMITED,MADURAI vs. DCIT, CC - 2, , MADURAI

Appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1803/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-2014. M/S. T.V. Sundram Iyengar & The Deputy Commissioner Sons Private Limited, Vs. Of Income Tax, No.7B, Tvs Building, Corporate Circle 2, West Veli Street. Madurai. Madurai 625 001. Pan: Aabct 0159K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Irs, Cit

house property which is not permissible under the law. The Assessing Officer failed to examine this claim with reference to section 72(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, such lack of enquiry and allowance of incorrect claim renders the assessment order erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of revenue. Submission with regard to the ‘learned PCIT

HINDUJA FOUNDRIES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1590, 1591, 1592 & 1593/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2010-11

293 ITR 459 and in CIT v. Sakthi Sugars Ltd. (2011) 339 ITR 400. 9. On the contrary, Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the assessee’s balance sheet showed the capital work-in-progress at `1543/- lakhs which included the fixed assets schedule. According to the Ld. D.R., the new units established by the assessee

HINDUJA FOUNDRIES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1590, 1591, 1592 & 1593/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2010-11

293 ITR 459 and in CIT v. Sakthi Sugars Ltd. (2011) 339 ITR 400. 9. On the contrary, Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the assessee’s balance sheet showed the capital work-in-progress at `1543/- lakhs which included the fixed assets schedule. According to the Ld. D.R., the new units established by the assessee

HINDUJA FOUNDRIES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1590, 1591, 1592 & 1593/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2010-11

293 ITR 459 and in CIT v. Sakthi Sugars Ltd. (2011) 339 ITR 400. 9. On the contrary, Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the assessee’s balance sheet showed the capital work-in-progress at `1543/- lakhs which included the fixed assets schedule. According to the Ld. D.R., the new units established by the assessee