JAY FARM HOUSE,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

House, The Assistant Commissioner of No.18, Balamuthukrishnan Street, v. Income-tax, T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. Central Circle II(2), Chennai – 600 034. PAN: AAB FJ 6822 G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं /Appellant by : Shri G.Seetharaman, Chartered Accountant ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : Shri T.R.Senthil Kumar, Standing Counsel सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 23.08.2016 घोषणा

JAY FARM HOUSE,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

House, The Assistant Commissioner of No.18, Balamuthukrishnan Street, v. Income-tax, T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. Central Circle II(2), Chennai – 600 034. PAN: AAB FJ 6822 G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं /Appellant by : Shri G.Seetharaman, Chartered Accountant ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : Shri T.R.Senthil Kumar, Standing Counsel सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 23.08.2016 घोषणा

JAY FARM HOUSE,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

House, The Assistant Commissioner of No.18, Balamuthukrishnan Street, v. Income-tax, T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. Central Circle II(2), Chennai – 600 034. PAN: AAB FJ 6822 G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं /Appellant by : Shri G.Seetharaman, Chartered Accountant ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : Shri T.R.Senthil Kumar, Standing Counsel सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 23.08.2016 घोषणा

M/S. J FARM HOUSE,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

House, The Assistant Commissioner of No.18, Balamuthukrishnan Street, v. Income-tax, T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. Central Circle II(2), Chennai – 600 034. PAN: AAB FJ 6822 G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं /Appellant by : Shri G.Seetharaman, Chartered Accountant ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : Shri T.R.Senthil Kumar, Standing Counsel सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 23.08.2016 घोषणा

TRISHUL SHELTERS PVT LTD.,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed “

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

sections 69, 69A, 69B and 69C being treated separately, because such deemed income is not income from salary, house property

THIRUVENGADAMUDALIAR RAMALINGAM,ARNI vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1830/Chny/2024 िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Year: 2020-21 Thiruvengadamudaliar Ramalingam The Principal Commissioner Of No.4, Big Sayakara Street, Vs. Income Tax (Central), Kosapalayam, Chennai-1. Arni – 632 301. [Pan: Aacpr 1690P]

69B of the Act. The Ld AR submitted that the assessee has filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) against the addition and the matter is pending before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore the Ld. PCIT does not have jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act. The Ld. AR has further submitted that the A.O during assessment proceedings

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. MUTHULAKSHMI VELLAISAMY, TIRUPUR

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

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 605/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Gnanaguru Lavanya, Vs. 52, Iswarya Garden, Rakkiyapalayam Road, Ammapalayam, Avinashi Road, Tirupur - 641 654. [Pan: Abipl-5558-M] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 610/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Chennai. Muthulakshmi Vellaisamy, Vs. 52, Iswarya Garden, Rakkiyapalayam Road, Ammapalayam, Avinashi Road, Tirupur - 641 654. [Pan:Afbpg-3703-L] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, C.I.T. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. R. Venkata Raman, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20.01.2026 :-2-:

section 23(3). The rule of law on this subject has, in our opinion, been fairly and rightly stated by the Lahore High Court in the case of Seth Gurmukh Singh (supra). 6.3.30 As evident from the decisions cited above, though it is true that the provisions of Evidence Act do not apply with the same rigor to the Income

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]

Housing (P) Ltd (supra). In any case, there is nothing on record nor anything coming out of the statements given by Shri.Prakash who had drawn the cash imprest, which can corroborate the finding of the ld. Assessing Officer that land development expenditure claimed to have been incurred in cash, had gone to the hands of any of the trustees

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]

Housing (P) Ltd (supra). In any case, there is nothing on record nor anything coming out of the statements given by Shri.Prakash who had drawn the cash imprest, which can corroborate the finding of the ld. Assessing Officer that land development expenditure claimed to have been incurred in cash, had gone to the hands of any of the trustees

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]

Housing (P) Ltd (supra). In any case, there is nothing on record nor anything coming out of the statements given by Shri.Prakash who had drawn the cash imprest, which can corroborate the finding of the ld. Assessing Officer that land development expenditure claimed to have been incurred in cash, had gone to the hands of any of the trustees

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]

Housing (P) Ltd (supra). In any case, there is nothing on record nor anything coming out of the statements given by Shri.Prakash who had drawn the cash imprest, which can corroborate the finding of the ld. Assessing Officer that land development expenditure claimed to have been incurred in cash, had gone to the hands of any of the trustees

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. GNANAGURU LAVANYA, TIRUPUR

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 605/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Gnanaguru Lavanya, Vs. 52, Iswarya Garden, Rakkiyapalayam Road, Ammapalayam, Avinashi Road, Tirupur - 641 654. [Pan: Abipl-5558-M] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 610/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Chennai. Muthulakshmi Vellaisamy, Vs. 52, Iswarya Garden, Rakkiyapalayam Road, Ammapalayam, Avinashi Road, Tirupur - 641 654. [Pan:Afbpg-3703-L] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, C.I.T. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. R. Venkata Raman, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20.01.2026 :-2-:

section 23(3). The rule of law on this subject has, in our opinion, been fairly and rightly stated by the Lahore High Court in the case of Seth Gurmukh Singh (supra). 6.3.30 As evident from the decisions cited above, though it is true that the provisions of Evidence Act do not apply with the same rigor to the Income