M/S.ENRICA ENTERPRISES PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Das

deeming provisions are not applicable to the orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Commissioner. [Para 63] • The imposition of penalty is not automatic, i.e., imposition of penalty even if the tax liability is admitted, is not automatic. Even if the assessee has not challenged the order of assessment levying tax and interest and has paid the same, that

ITO (IT), WARD 2(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. ROHITKUMAR NEMCHAND PIPARIA, CHENNAI

The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1326/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Income Tax Officer Shri Rohitkumar Nemchand Piparia बनाम International Taxation Ward-2(1), #34 (Old #77), Meddox Street, / Vs. Chennai. Choolai, Chennai-600 112. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Akzpp-0661-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri T. Banusekar & Ms.Samyuktha Banusekar (Advocates) - Ld. Ars " थ"कीओरसे/Revenue By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) - Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07-10-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31-12-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

dividend or other income realized from NRE account would be fully exempt to tax and therefore these transactions were not reflected in the return of income. 2.3 The Ld. AO rejected the explanation on the ground that the fact of gains came to light only from the information as available with the department. The assessee did not disclose the transaction

MEGNANAPURAM PACCS,TIRUCHENDUR vs. PCIT,, MADURAI

dividend which\nhad been deleted could not form the subject-matter of imposition of penalty under\nsection 271(1) (c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, because the basis for imposition of\npenalty had ceased to exist. Therefore, the Tribunal was correct in cancelling the\npenalty imposed on account of the addition. \" (p. 189)\n5. CIT v. Bedi

PALANISAMY GOUNDER LOGANATHAN,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals stand allowed

deem it fit to first\nadjudicate the same.\n7.\nAssailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of\nthe Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was\nconducted on 23.01.2013 and that, the AO was in possession of the\nrelevant seized material basis which the reasons were recorded and\nimpugned reopening was done

PARRY INFRASTRUCTURE CO P LTD. ,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(1) , CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in respect of the additions made to the tune of Rs.45,91,25,185/- by way of enhancement to the income returned. Penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) are therefore, initiated on both counts viz., concealment of income and furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income.” Aggrieved, now assessee is in appeal before

K. SADASIVAM,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

K. BASKAR,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

R.EASWARAMOORTHY,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

M. NATESAN,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

S. ARAVIND,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

M. VELUSAMY,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

RAMASAMY PALANISAMY,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

K. KATHIRVEL,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

P. NALLUSAMY,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

K. BASKAR,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

K. PARAMASIVAM,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

M. VELUSAMY,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee

S. EASWARAMOORTHY,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

deem it fit to first adjudicate the same. 7. Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice Assailing the reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that, the survey was the Act, the Ld. AR for the assessee