GOVINDARAJAN MALLIGA ,TRICHY vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), CHENNAI

The appeals stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.536/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 1994-95) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.537/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 1995-96) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.538/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 1996-97) & & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.539/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 1997-98) & & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.540/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 1998-99) Smt. Govindarajan Malliga, Acit बनाम Tamil Pannai House, Central Circle-2(3), / Vs. Main Road, Kuzhumani, Trichy-639 103. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Afgpm-8105-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri M. Karunakaran (Advocate)- Ld. Ar " थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, (Jcit)-Ld.Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24-07-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27-09-2023

unexplained investment in purchase of land on protective basis. The assessee is also aggrieved by the fact that the agricultural income has been treated as income from other sources. The substantive addition was made in the hands of Shri Ku.Pa. Krishnan which has been deleted by us in that appeal. Accordingly, the issue of impugned addition in the hands

GOVINDARAJAN MALLIGA ,TRICHY vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), CHENNAI

The appeals stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.536/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 1994-95) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.537/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 1995-96) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.538/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 1996-97) & & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.539/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 1997-98) & & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.540/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 1998-99) Smt. Govindarajan Malliga, Acit बनाम Tamil Pannai House, Central Circle-2(3), / Vs. Main Road, Kuzhumani, Trichy-639 103. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Afgpm-8105-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri M. Karunakaran (Advocate)- Ld. Ar " थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, (Jcit)-Ld.Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24-07-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27-09-2023

unexplained investment in purchase of land on protective basis. The assessee is also aggrieved by the fact that the agricultural income has been treated as income from other sources. The substantive addition was made in the hands of Shri Ku.Pa. Krishnan which has been deleted by us in that appeal. Accordingly, the issue of impugned addition in the hands

GOVINDARAJAN MALLIGA ,TRICHY vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), CHENNAI

The appeals stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.536/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 1994-95) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.537/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 1995-96) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.538/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 1996-97) & & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.539/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 1997-98) & & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.540/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 1998-99) Smt. Govindarajan Malliga, Acit बनाम Tamil Pannai House, Central Circle-2(3), / Vs. Main Road, Kuzhumani, Trichy-639 103. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Afgpm-8105-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri M. Karunakaran (Advocate)- Ld. Ar " थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, (Jcit)-Ld.Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24-07-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27-09-2023

unexplained investment in purchase of land on protective basis. The assessee is also aggrieved by the fact that the agricultural income has been treated as income from other sources. The substantive addition was made in the hands of Shri Ku.Pa. Krishnan which has been deleted by us in that appeal. Accordingly, the issue of impugned addition in the hands

GOVINDARAJAN MALLIGA ,TRICHY vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), CHENNAI

The appeals stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.536/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 1994-95) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.537/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 1995-96) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.538/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 1996-97) & & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.539/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 1997-98) & & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.540/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 1998-99) Smt. Govindarajan Malliga, Acit बनाम Tamil Pannai House, Central Circle-2(3), / Vs. Main Road, Kuzhumani, Trichy-639 103. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Afgpm-8105-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri M. Karunakaran (Advocate)- Ld. Ar " थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, (Jcit)-Ld.Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24-07-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27-09-2023

unexplained investment in purchase of land on protective basis. The assessee is also aggrieved by the fact that the agricultural income has been treated as income from other sources. The substantive addition was made in the hands of Shri Ku.Pa. Krishnan which has been deleted by us in that appeal. Accordingly, the issue of impugned addition in the hands

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MADURAI vs. JAYARAJ JAISON, TIRUNELVELI

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

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:2512/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 The Assistant Commissioner Of Jayaraj Jaison, Income Tax, Vs. No.9/10, Prop: Jaison Bkery, Central Circle -2, Madurai. Kavalkinaru, Tirunelveli – 625 002. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) [Pan:Akgpj-2821-E] (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, J.C.I.T. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. R. Venkata Raman,C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 02.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am: This Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 30.07.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai (‘Ld.Cit(A)’ In Short), Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Dated 30.09.2022 Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ In Short) By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle - 2, Madurai (‘Ao’ In Short), For The Assessment Year (‘Ay’ In Short) 2020-21. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

house had been gifted to him by his brother two years prior, and he had subsequently undertaken the construction of a new building for business purposes, incurring an expenditure of Rs.60,00,000/-. Accordingly, the assessee agreed to offer the said amount as additional business income. 7. Further, the Authorized Officer inquired into the daily sales figures of the assessee

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

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

House Property by following the procedure laid down under the Act at para 6.4.6., had confirmed the addition of Rs.1,38,70,048/- made as deemed dividend u/s.2(22)(e) of the Act at para 6.5.3 and confirmed the addition of Rs.92,95,305/- made u/s.56(2)(viii)(c) of the Act at para 6.6.5 of the impugned order

GOPALSAMY,CHENNAI vs. CIT(A)-18, CHENNAI, CHENNAI

The appeals stands allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1384/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1385/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1386/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Shri Gopalsamy Vs. Acit No.3B, 3Rd Floor New No.27 Dc/Ac Central Cir 1(2) East Street, Krishna Apartments, Chennai Raghava Reddy Colony, Ashok Nagar, Chennai 600 083. [Pan: Bjtpg 4193H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri R. Subramanian, C.A., ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som, Irs, Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 21.05.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

unexplained investment u/s 69 for Rs.107.40 Lacs with respect to investment in immoveable properties. The same was subjected to the provisions of Sec.115BBE. In AY 2019-20, Ld. AO made similar addition u/s 69 for Rs.200.43 Lacs and another addition of Rs.56 Lacs respectively. 5. ISSUE WISE GROUNDS FOR ADJUDICATION Commission Income: 5.1 The assessee was doing consultancy business

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

House Property by following the procedure laid down under the Act\nat para 6.4.6., had confirmed the addition of Rs.1,38,70,048/- made as deemed\ndividend u/s.2(22)(e) of the Act at para 6.5.3 and confirmed the addition of\nRs.92,95,305/- made u/s.56(2)(viii)(c) of the Act at para 6.6.5 of the impugned\norder

SUDHA RAMANI,CHENNAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD 10(3), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3352/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sudha Ramani, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Flat A3, 862, Siddharth Manor, Non Corporate Ward 10(3), Poonamallee High Road, Kilpauk, Chennai. Chennai 600 010. [Pan:Ahepr9857M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Venkata Raman, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 25.02.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 17.10.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Assessee Raised 3 Grounds Of Appeal, Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified

unexplained investment. 4. Having aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) by filing a petition under Rule 46A of Income Tax Rules, 1962 for admission of additional evidence substantiating the source for investment in the immovable property. The ld. CIT(A) treated the said additional evidences as new evidence

MADANRAJ HAMIRMAL SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ITO, ERODE

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 1334 & 1335/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Madanraj Hamirmal Shah Income Tax Officer, C-405, Royal Samrat, Ward -1(2), S.V. Road,Goregoan West, V. Erode. Mumbai – 400 062. [Pan: Adwpm-2343-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. P.C. Jain, Advocate & Shri. Mohit Bangani, Advocate ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. P. Vijaideepan, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.02.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.03.2025

house property purchased in that assessment year was the impugned asset on account of the unexplained investment decided in favour

MADANRAJ HAMIRMAL SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ITO, ERODE

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 1334 & 1335/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Madanraj Hamirmal Shah Income Tax Officer, C-405, Royal Samrat, Ward -1(2), S.V. Road,Goregoan West, V. Erode. Mumbai – 400 062. [Pan: Adwpm-2343-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. P.C. Jain, Advocate & Shri. Mohit Bangani, Advocate ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. P. Vijaideepan, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.02.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.03.2025

house property purchased in that assessment year was the impugned asset on account of the unexplained investment decided in favour

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

Investment in 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

Investment in 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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, NON-CORPORATE CIRCLE 7(1), CHENNAI vs. KUMARASAMY PILLAI APARNA, CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 999/Chny/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Kumarasamy Pillai Aparna, Deputy Commissioner Of V. No. 43, Kannadasan Salai, Income Tax, T.Nagar, Srds, Non-Corporate Circle -7(1), Chennai – 600 017. Chennai. [Pan:Afzpa-9359-N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. R. Vikneswaran, Jcit ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. T. Vasudevan, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.06.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

investment in residential property was Rs.7,90,36,400/-. 7.3 The ld.AR brought to our notice that the document no. 2 & 3 was registered in favour of the assessee by way of sale deed in the year 2017-18 consisting of 50% of the front portion of the residential building was acquired by the assessee through the ‘agreement to sale

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. MENAKURU SUKUMAR REDDY, CHENNAI

unexplained investments.\n:-52-:\nITA Nos: 991, 992, 993,\n1639 & 1644/Chny/2025\nWe note that the Id. AR submitted that the Investments in shares amounting to\nRs.1,54,63,996/- were acquired in earlier years. These investments were duly\nreflected in earlier years' returns. The Id.AR also took us through the year-wise\ndetails of investments and loans and advances were

AADARSH SURANA, CHENNAI,CHENNAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

house property of Rs.7,000/– and\nincome from other sources of Rs.14,826/-. The case was selected for limited\nscrutiny assessment for verification of the following issues: -\ni. Expenses incurred for earning exempt income\nii. Share capital/capital\n6. Consequently, notice u/s.143(2) of the Act was issued on 28.08.2018,\nfollowed by multiple notices u/s.142(1) of the Act.\n7. During

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. CHINNARASU VEERAMANI, JOLARPET

In the result, all the appeals stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.3317/Chny/2024 (िनधा(रण वष( / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.3318/Chny/2024 (िनधा(रण वष( / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.3319/Chny/2024 (िनधा(रण वष( / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit Shri Chinnarasu Veeramani बनाम/ Central Circle-2(4), 43A, Gandhi Road, Edayampatti Chennai. Chonnaakodiyur Village, Vs. Jolarpet-638 851 (Tn) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Adkpv-3559-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Shiva Srinivas (Cit) – Ld. Dr " थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri B. Ramakrishna (Fca) & Shri Shrenik Chordia (Ca) – Ld. Ars सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01-05-2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08-07-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Revenue For Assessment Years (Ay) 2015- 16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 Have Identical Facts. First, We Take Up Appeal For Ay 2015-16 Which Arises Out Of An Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai-19 [Cit(A)] On 17-10-

investment of Rs.4 Crores in Avathi Village, a finding was rendered that the assessee paid sum of Rs.3 Crores by RTGS and remaining amount of Rs.1 Crores was paid by Cheque and the stamp duty was also paid by way of demand draft. There was no evidence to indicate any cash payment. All the payments were made through banking channels

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. CHINNARASU VEERAMANI, JOLARPET

In the result, all the appeals stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.3317/Chny/2024 (िनधा(रण वष( / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.3318/Chny/2024 (िनधा(रण वष( / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.3319/Chny/2024 (िनधा(रण वष( / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit Shri Chinnarasu Veeramani बनाम/ Central Circle-2(4), 43A, Gandhi Road, Edayampatti Chennai. Chonnaakodiyur Village, Vs. Jolarpet-638 851 (Tn) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Adkpv-3559-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Shiva Srinivas (Cit) – Ld. Dr " थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri B. Ramakrishna (Fca) & Shri Shrenik Chordia (Ca) – Ld. Ars सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01-05-2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08-07-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Revenue For Assessment Years (Ay) 2015- 16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 Have Identical Facts. First, We Take Up Appeal For Ay 2015-16 Which Arises Out Of An Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai-19 [Cit(A)] On 17-10-

investment of Rs.4 Crores in Avathi Village, a finding was rendered that the assessee paid sum of Rs.3 Crores by RTGS and remaining amount of Rs.1 Crores was paid by Cheque and the stamp duty was also paid by way of demand draft. There was no evidence to indicate any cash payment. All the payments were made through banking channels

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. CHINNARASU VEERAMANI, JOLARPET

In the result, all the appeals stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.3317/Chny/2024 (िनधा(रण वष( / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.3318/Chny/2024 (िनधा(रण वष( / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.3319/Chny/2024 (िनधा(रण वष( / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit Shri Chinnarasu Veeramani बनाम/ Central Circle-2(4), 43A, Gandhi Road, Edayampatti Chennai. Chonnaakodiyur Village, Vs. Jolarpet-638 851 (Tn) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Adkpv-3559-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Shiva Srinivas (Cit) – Ld. Dr " थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri B. Ramakrishna (Fca) & Shri Shrenik Chordia (Ca) – Ld. Ars सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01-05-2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08-07-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Revenue For Assessment Years (Ay) 2015- 16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 Have Identical Facts. First, We Take Up Appeal For Ay 2015-16 Which Arises Out Of An Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai-19 [Cit(A)] On 17-10-

investment of Rs.4 Crores in Avathi Village, a finding was rendered that the assessee paid sum of Rs.3 Crores by RTGS and remaining amount of Rs.1 Crores was paid by Cheque and the stamp duty was also paid by way of demand draft. There was no evidence to indicate any cash payment. All the payments were made through banking channels