DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MADURAI vs. SUBBIAH NADAR JEGATHEESAN, TIRUNELVELI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:603/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Subbiah Nadar Jegatheesan, Tax, Vs. 3, Ml Theri Road, Keeraikaranthattu, Central Circle -2, Mahadevankulam, Madurai. Tirunelveli – 627 657. [Pan:Abxpj-7672-F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, C.I.T. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. R. Venkata Raman, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.07.2025

credit found in the books of accounts. In the present case, the assessee has discharged this burden by stating that the sum in question represents agricultural income derived from self-owned agricultural land and by furnishing corroborative documentary evidence in support thereof. Once the assessee has provided a plausible explanation supported by credible evidence, the onus shifts to the Revenue

KATHIRAVAN SRINIVASAN ,PERAMBALUR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1, TIRUCHIRAPALLI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकरअपील सं./Ita Nos.: 170 & 171/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 & आयकरअपील सं./Ita No.: 172/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Kathiravan Srinivasan, Vs The Dcit, No.274C, Thuraiyur Road, Circle-1, 2Nd Perambalur – 621 212. Main Building, Floor, New No.44, Old No.4, Williams Road, Cantonment, Pan: Ajspk 6687Q Trichirapalli-620 001. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Darzakhum Songate, Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 18.10.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Vp: These Three Appeals By The Assessee Are Arising Out Of Two Different Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai In Ita Nos.581 & 582/Chny/19-20 Dated 03.03.2022. The Assessments In Ita Nos.170 & 172/Chny/2022 Were Framed By The Jcit, Range 1, Trichy For The Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2011-12 U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) Vide Orders Dated 31.03.2013 & 31.03.2014 Respectively. The Third Appeal In Ita No.171/Chny/2022 Is Against The Assessment Order Framed In Consequence To Revision Order Passed By Pcit U/S.263 Of The Act & Consequent Order Of The Ao For The Assessment Year 2010-11 U/S.143(3) R.W.S. 263 Of The Act Dated 12.03.2015 Passed By The Dcit, Circle-1, Trichy.

house at Trichy viii. Interest income and income from other sources (Brokerage / Commission) The AO noted the fact that the assessee has maintained detailed books of accounts for these lines of his business activities. The AO for assessment year 2010-11 noted that there is sudden increase in cash deposit on various dates during financial year 2009-10 relevant

KATHIRAVAN SRINIVASAN ,PERAMBALUR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE -1, TIRUCHIRAPALLI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकरअपील सं./Ita Nos.: 170 & 171/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 & आयकरअपील सं./Ita No.: 172/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Kathiravan Srinivasan, Vs The Dcit, No.274C, Thuraiyur Road, Circle-1, 2Nd Perambalur – 621 212. Main Building, Floor, New No.44, Old No.4, Williams Road, Cantonment, Pan: Ajspk 6687Q Trichirapalli-620 001. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Darzakhum Songate, Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 18.10.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Vp: These Three Appeals By The Assessee Are Arising Out Of Two Different Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai In Ita Nos.581 & 582/Chny/19-20 Dated 03.03.2022. The Assessments In Ita Nos.170 & 172/Chny/2022 Were Framed By The Jcit, Range 1, Trichy For The Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2011-12 U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) Vide Orders Dated 31.03.2013 & 31.03.2014 Respectively. The Third Appeal In Ita No.171/Chny/2022 Is Against The Assessment Order Framed In Consequence To Revision Order Passed By Pcit U/S.263 Of The Act & Consequent Order Of The Ao For The Assessment Year 2010-11 U/S.143(3) R.W.S. 263 Of The Act Dated 12.03.2015 Passed By The Dcit, Circle-1, Trichy.

house at Trichy viii. Interest income and income from other sources (Brokerage / Commission) The AO noted the fact that the assessee has maintained detailed books of accounts for these lines of his business activities. The AO for assessment year 2010-11 noted that there is sudden increase in cash deposit on various dates during financial year 2009-10 relevant

KATHIRAVAN SRINIVASAN ,PERAMBALUR vs. DCIT ,CIRCLE-1, TIRUCHIRAPALLI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकरअपील सं./Ita Nos.: 170 & 171/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 & आयकरअपील सं./Ita No.: 172/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Kathiravan Srinivasan, Vs The Dcit, No.274C, Thuraiyur Road, Circle-1, 2Nd Perambalur – 621 212. Main Building, Floor, New No.44, Old No.4, Williams Road, Cantonment, Pan: Ajspk 6687Q Trichirapalli-620 001. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Darzakhum Songate, Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 18.10.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Vp: These Three Appeals By The Assessee Are Arising Out Of Two Different Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai In Ita Nos.581 & 582/Chny/19-20 Dated 03.03.2022. The Assessments In Ita Nos.170 & 172/Chny/2022 Were Framed By The Jcit, Range 1, Trichy For The Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2011-12 U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) Vide Orders Dated 31.03.2013 & 31.03.2014 Respectively. The Third Appeal In Ita No.171/Chny/2022 Is Against The Assessment Order Framed In Consequence To Revision Order Passed By Pcit U/S.263 Of The Act & Consequent Order Of The Ao For The Assessment Year 2010-11 U/S.143(3) R.W.S. 263 Of The Act Dated 12.03.2015 Passed By The Dcit, Circle-1, Trichy.

house at Trichy viii. Interest income and income from other sources (Brokerage / Commission) The AO noted the fact that the assessee has maintained detailed books of accounts for these lines of his business activities. The AO for assessment year 2010-11 noted that there is sudden increase in cash deposit on various dates during financial year 2009-10 relevant

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. MENAKURU SUKUMAR REDDY, CHENNAI

cash\ndeposits of Rs.35,11,000/-, as unexplained and made an addition u/s.69A of the\nAct. On appeal, the Id.CIT(A) granted partial relief but sustained an addition of\nRs.8,00,10,000/- as unexplained credits.\nWe note that the Id. AR submitted the complete party-wise details including name,\nPAN, opening balance, transactions during the year and closing balance

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

unexplained cash credit u/s 68. Once the amount is held taxable u/s 68, no fault can be found with AO in applying tax rate as per provisions of section 115BBE of IT Act as it is inserted vide Finance Act, 2012 and applicable in case of income added u/s 68 Consequently, Ground of appeal relating to the issue is Dismissed

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

unexplained cash credit u/s 68. Once the amount is held taxable u/s 68, no fault can be found with AO in applying tax rate as per provisions of section 115BBE of IT Act as it is inserted vide Finance Act, 2012 and applicable in case of income added u/s 68 Consequently, Ground of appeal relating to the issue is Dismissed

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. MENAKURU SUKUMAR REDDY , CHENNAI

credits in the bank account cannot be a ground for invoking\nsection 69A of the Act, when the same are duly recorded and explained. Further,\nclerical or classification errors cannot give rise to additions when the substantive\nnature of the transaction is explained and accepted.\nIn view of the above, we direct for deletion of the addition of Rs.11

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

credits in the bank account cannot be a ground for invoking\nsection 69A of the Act, when the same are duly recorded and explained. Further,\nclerical or classification errors cannot give rise to additions when the substantive\nnature of the transaction is explained and accepted.\nIn view of the above, we direct for deletion of the addition of Rs.11

SMT. JAYANTHI SEEMAN,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW - 1 (2),, CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

unexplained cash u/s.68 of the\nI.T.Act and assessed to tax under the head 'income from other sources'\nchargeable to tax at maximum marginal rate.\"\nThe Id.CIT(A) in his Order dated 30.07.2020 vide para 8.5 has\nrejected the assessee's ground in respect of claim of Agricultural\nIncome as source for cash deposits stating that the assessee did not\nproduce

SMT. JAYANTHI SEEMAN,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW - 1 (2),, CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

unexplained cash u/s.68 of the\nI.T.Act and assessed to tax under the head 'income from other sources'\nchargeable to tax at maximum marginal rate.\"\nThe Id.CIT(A) in his Order dated 30.07.2020 vide para 8.5 has\nrejected the assessee's ground in respect of claim of Agricultural\nIncome as source for cash deposits stating that the assessee did not\nproduce

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. SINGHVI LICKMI CHAND, VELLORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as Revenue

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.643, 644, 645, 646 & 647/Chny/2025 िनधा+रण वष+ /Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shri Singvi Lickmi Chand, The Dy. Commissioner Of No.3, Kasi Chetty Street, Vs. Income Tax, Ambur – 635 803. Central Circle-3(3), Pan: Aaapl 6736A Chennai.

unexplained money based on mere presumptions and suspicions without any direct material to establish that the amounts in the employee passbooks were unaccounted income of the appellant and that passbooks were used to route undisclosed cash transactions on behalf of the appellant. 6. The learned CIT(A)-20 failed to see that passbook pertains to an employee of the appellant

SHRI SINGHVI LICKMI CHAND,AMBUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE.3(2), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as Revenue

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.643, 644, 645, 646 & 647/Chny/2025 िनधा+रण वष+ /Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shri Singvi Lickmi Chand, The Dy. Commissioner Of No.3, Kasi Chetty Street, Vs. Income Tax, Ambur – 635 803. Central Circle-3(3), Pan: Aaapl 6736A Chennai.

unexplained money based on mere presumptions and suspicions without any direct material to establish that the amounts in the employee passbooks were unaccounted income of the appellant and that passbooks were used to route undisclosed cash transactions on behalf of the appellant. 6. The learned CIT(A)-20 failed to see that passbook pertains to an employee of the appellant

SHRI SINGHVI LICKMI CHAND,AMBUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as Revenue

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.643, 644, 645, 646 & 647/Chny/2025 िनधा+रण वष+ /Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shri Singvi Lickmi Chand, The Dy. Commissioner Of No.3, Kasi Chetty Street, Vs. Income Tax, Ambur – 635 803. Central Circle-3(3), Pan: Aaapl 6736A Chennai.

unexplained money based on mere presumptions and suspicions without any direct material to establish that the amounts in the employee passbooks were unaccounted income of the appellant and that passbooks were used to route undisclosed cash transactions on behalf of the appellant. 6. The learned CIT(A)-20 failed to see that passbook pertains to an employee of the appellant

SHRI SINGHVI LICKMI CHAND,AMBUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as Revenue

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.643, 644, 645, 646 & 647/Chny/2025 िनधा+रण वष+ /Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shri Singvi Lickmi Chand, The Dy. Commissioner Of No.3, Kasi Chetty Street, Vs. Income Tax, Ambur – 635 803. Central Circle-3(3), Pan: Aaapl 6736A Chennai.

unexplained money based on mere presumptions and suspicions without any direct material to establish that the amounts in the employee passbooks were unaccounted income of the appellant and that passbooks were used to route undisclosed cash transactions on behalf of the appellant. 6. The learned CIT(A)-20 failed to see that passbook pertains to an employee of the appellant

SINGHVI LICKMI CHAND,AMBUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(3), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as Revenue

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.643, 644, 645, 646 & 647/Chny/2025 िनधा+रण वष+ /Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shri Singvi Lickmi Chand, The Dy. Commissioner Of No.3, Kasi Chetty Street, Vs. Income Tax, Ambur – 635 803. Central Circle-3(3), Pan: Aaapl 6736A Chennai.

unexplained money based on mere presumptions and suspicions without any direct material to establish that the amounts in the employee passbooks were unaccounted income of the appellant and that passbooks were used to route undisclosed cash transactions on behalf of the appellant. 6. The learned CIT(A)-20 failed to see that passbook pertains to an employee of the appellant

SHRI SINGHVI LICKMI CHAND,AMBUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as Revenue

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.643, 644, 645, 646 & 647/Chny/2025 िनधा+रण वष+ /Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shri Singvi Lickmi Chand, The Dy. Commissioner Of No.3, Kasi Chetty Street, Vs. Income Tax, Ambur – 635 803. Central Circle-3(3), Pan: Aaapl 6736A Chennai.

unexplained money based on mere presumptions and suspicions without any direct material to establish that the amounts in the employee passbooks were unaccounted income of the appellant and that passbooks were used to route undisclosed cash transactions on behalf of the appellant. 6. The learned CIT(A)-20 failed to see that passbook pertains to an employee of the appellant

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CHENNAI vs. SINGHVI LICKMI CHAND, VELLORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as Revenue

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.643, 644, 645, 646 & 647/Chny/2025 िनधा+रण वष+ /Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shri Singvi Lickmi Chand, The Dy. Commissioner Of No.3, Kasi Chetty Street, Vs. Income Tax, Ambur – 635 803. Central Circle-3(3), Pan: Aaapl 6736A Chennai.

unexplained money based on mere presumptions and suspicions without any direct material to establish that the amounts in the employee passbooks were unaccounted income of the appellant and that passbooks were used to route undisclosed cash transactions on behalf of the appellant. 6. The learned CIT(A)-20 failed to see that passbook pertains to an employee of the appellant