TIRUVENGADAM INVESTMENTS P LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri. G. Pavan Kumarआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No. 1230/Mds/2013 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year : 2002-03 M/S. Tiruvengadam Investments P Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Now Hansa Vision India P Ltd., Income Tax, South Indian Film Chamber Building, Company Circle Iii(2), No. 605-606, Anna Salai, Chennai. Ii Floor, Thousand Lights, Chennai – 600 006. [Pan: Aabct 3770E]

house property, payment of society maintenance charges of Rs. 13,71,437/- and filed the explanations that these charges includes municipal taxes of Rs. 10,80,112/- and Rs. 2,91,325/- other expenses and the Municipal Tax Receipts are in respect of Pusa Road property at New Delhi Rs. 9,38,427/- as furnished by the assesseee relate

SANJAY CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE, SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

section 50C/43CA of Income tax Act, without which the difference in value for the same property cannot be brought to tax. 3. NO MATERIALS FOUND FOR ON-MONEY: a) The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that there has been no materials seized evidencing on-money, beyond the value recorded in registered document. b) The CIT (Appeals

SANJAY CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE, SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

section 50C/43CA of Income tax Act, without which the difference in value for the same property cannot be brought to tax. 3. NO MATERIALS FOUND FOR ON-MONEY: a) The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that there has been no materials seized evidencing on-money, beyond the value recorded in registered document. b) The CIT (Appeals

REKHA CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM, SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

section 50C/43CA of Income tax Act, without which the difference in value for the same property cannot be brought to tax. 3. NO MATERIALS FOUND FOR ON-MONEY: a) The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that there has been no materials seized evidencing on-money, beyond the value recorded in registered document. b) The CIT (Appeals

SANJAY CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM., SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

section 50C/43CA of Income tax Act, without which the difference in value for the same property cannot be brought to tax. 3. NO MATERIALS FOUND FOR ON-MONEY: a) The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that there has been no materials seized evidencing on-money, beyond the value recorded in registered document. b) The CIT (Appeals

SANJAY CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM., SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

section 50C/43CA of Income tax Act, without which the difference in value for the same property cannot be brought to tax. 3. NO MATERIALS FOUND FOR ON-MONEY: a) The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that there has been no materials seized evidencing on-money, beyond the value recorded in registered document. b) The CIT (Appeals

REKHA CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM., SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

section 50C/43CA of Income tax Act, without which the difference in value for the same property cannot be brought to tax. 3. NO MATERIALS FOUND FOR ON-MONEY: a) The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that there has been no materials seized evidencing on-money, beyond the value recorded in registered document. b) The CIT (Appeals

SANJAY CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM., SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

section 50C/43CA of Income tax Act, without which the difference in value for the same property cannot be brought to tax. 3. NO MATERIALS FOUND FOR ON-MONEY: a) The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that there has been no materials seized evidencing on-money, beyond the value recorded in registered document. b) The CIT (Appeals

REKHA CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM, SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

section 50C/43CA of Income tax Act, without which the difference in value for the same property cannot be brought to tax. 3. NO MATERIALS FOUND FOR ON-MONEY: a) The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that there has been no materials seized evidencing on-money, beyond the value recorded in registered document. b) The CIT (Appeals

SANJAY CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE, SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

section 50C/43CA of Income tax Act, without which the difference in value for the same property cannot be brought to tax. 3. NO MATERIALS FOUND FOR ON-MONEY: a) The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that there has been no materials seized evidencing on-money, beyond the value recorded in registered document. b) The CIT (Appeals

REKHA CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM, SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

section 50C/43CA of Income tax Act, without which the difference in value for the same property cannot be brought to tax. 3. NO MATERIALS FOUND FOR ON-MONEY: a) The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that there has been no materials seized evidencing on-money, beyond the value recorded in registered document. b) The CIT (Appeals

ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1), TRICHY vs. SHAIK ISMAIL, PUDUKOTTAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3170/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Shri Shaik Ismail, Income Tax, Circle 3(1), Williams 383, East Street, Arasarkulam, Road, Cantonment, Trichy 620 001. Aranthangi Taluk, Pudukkottai – 614 801. [Pan:Aaapi2395C] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit : ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 15.11.2022 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.01.2023 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) 1, Trichy, Dated 19.09.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed The Return Of Income On 26.11.2013 For The Assessment Year 2013-14 Admitting An Income Of ₹.1,24,41,730/- Which Includes Capital Gain Of ₹.98,07,591/-. The Assessee Along With Five Others Had Sold A Property Situated At Arcot

801. [PAN:AAAPI2395C] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant by Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT : ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent by Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing 15.11.2022 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 24.01.2023 आदेश /O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal filed by the Revenue

M.CT.M.CHIDAMBARAM CHETTIAR FOUNDATION,CHENNAI vs. DCIT (EXEMPTIONS) I, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

houses and it was let-out, beyond school hours for educational purposes and promotion of fine-arts, etc., in order to augment the income to be used for educational purposes. 3. He erred in holding that letting-out of auditorium is service in the nature of trade, commerce or business. 4.The decisions relied upon the CIT(A) are distinguishable

M.CT.M.CHIDAMBARAM CHETTIAR FOUNDATION,CHENNAI vs. DCIT (EXEMPTIONS) I, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

houses and it was let-out, beyond school hours for educational purposes and promotion of fine-arts, etc., in order to augment the income to be used for educational purposes. 3. He erred in holding that letting-out of auditorium is service in the nature of trade, commerce or business. 4.The decisions relied upon the CIT(A) are distinguishable

M.CT.M.CHIDAMBARAM CHETTIAR FOUNDATION,CHENNAI vs. DCIT (EXEMPTIONS) I, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

houses and it was let-out, beyond school hours for educational purposes and promotion of fine-arts, etc., in order to augment the income to be used for educational purposes. 3. He erred in holding that letting-out of auditorium is service in the nature of trade, commerce or business. 4.The decisions relied upon the CIT(A) are distinguishable

M.CT.M.CHIDAMBARAM CHETTIAR FOUNDATION,CHENNAI vs. DCIT (EXEMPTIONS) I, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

houses and it was let-out, beyond school hours for educational purposes and promotion of fine-arts, etc., in order to augment the income to be used for educational purposes. 3. He erred in holding that letting-out of auditorium is service in the nature of trade, commerce or business. 4.The decisions relied upon the CIT(A) are distinguishable

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. NEYVELI LIGNITE CORPORATION LTD., NEYVELI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos. 374/2004, 529/2006 & 222/2009 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2000-01. The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Neyveli Lignite Of Income Tax, Corporation Ltd, Company Circle Iv(4), Neyveli 607 801. Chennai

801. Vs. of Income Tax, Company Circle IV(4) Chennai. [PAN AAACN 1121C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Department by : Shri. E.S. Nagendra Prasad, CIT, DR. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent by : Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 07-05-2015 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement : 26-06-2015 I.T.A.No. 374/04, 529/06, 222/09

M/S. NEYVELI LIGNITE CORPORATION LIMITED,NEYVELI vs. ITO, CUDDALORE

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos. 374/2004, 529/2006 & 222/2009 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2000-01. The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Neyveli Lignite Of Income Tax, Corporation Ltd, Company Circle Iv(4), Neyveli 607 801. Chennai

801. Vs. of Income Tax, Company Circle IV(4) Chennai. [PAN AAACN 1121C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Department by : Shri. E.S. Nagendra Prasad, CIT, DR. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent by : Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 07-05-2015 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement : 26-06-2015 I.T.A.No. 374/04, 529/06, 222/09

M/S. NEYVELI LIGNITE CORPORATIONLIMITED,NEYVELI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos. 374/2004, 529/2006 & 222/2009 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2000-01. The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Neyveli Lignite Of Income Tax, Corporation Ltd, Company Circle Iv(4), Neyveli 607 801. Chennai

801. Vs. of Income Tax, Company Circle IV(4) Chennai. [PAN AAACN 1121C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Department by : Shri. E.S. Nagendra Prasad, CIT, DR. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent by : Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 07-05-2015 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement : 26-06-2015 I.T.A.No. 374/04, 529/06, 222/09