ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. GHISULAI KOTHARI, CHENNAI

Appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

271(1)(c) of the Act. However, for the levy of penalty u/s.271AAB, the case must fall within the four corners of the definition of expression "undisclosed income" as defined u/s 271AAB itself. The assessee in this case is an individual and has earned income from partnership firm and interest income. The assessee has neither earned any business income

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. SARDARMAL KOTHARI, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s petition as filed u/r 27 stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

271(1)(c) of the Act. However, for the levy of penalty u/s.271AAB, the case must fall within the four corners of the definition of expression "undisclosed income" as defined u/s 271AAB itself. The assessee in this case is an individual and has earned income from partnership firm and interest income. The assessee has neither earned any business income

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. KEWALCHAND KOTHARI, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s petition as filed u/r 27 stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

271(1)(c) of the Act. However, for the levy of penalty u/s.271AAB, the case must fall within the four corners of the definition of expression "undisclosed income" as defined u/s 271AAB itself. The assessee in this case is an individual and has earned income from partnership firm and interest income. The assessee has neither earned any business income

ACIT CENTRLA CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. SHANTILAL KOTHARI, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s petition as filed u/r 27 stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

271(1)(c) of the Act. However, for the levy of penalty u/s.271AAB, the case must fall within the four corners of the definition of expression "undisclosed income" as defined u/s 271AAB itself. The assessee in this case is an individual and has earned income from partnership firm and interest income. The assessee has neither earned any business income

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

seizure operation u/s 132 were carried at residential and premises of M/s Pavai Varam Educational Trust on 27.12.2016. The Assessee filed his return of income originally for A.Y 2016-17 on 21.07.2017 declaring income of Rs.35,28,520/-. Notice u/s 153A was issued to the Assessee on 13.06.2018. In response, the Assessee filed return of income u/s 153A

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

seizure operation u/s 132 were carried at residential and premises of M/s Pavai Varam Educational Trust on 27.12.2016. The Assessee filed his return of income originally for A.Y 2016-17 on 21.07.2017 declaring income of Rs.35,28,520/-. Notice u/s 153A was issued to the Assessee on 13.06.2018. In response, the Assessee filed return of income u/s 153A

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. S & P FOUNDATION P. LTD., CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2084/Chny/2013 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2006-07 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. S & P Foundation P. Ltd., Income Tax, Central Circle Iv(2), Vs. Old No. 27, New No. 38, Madley Road, 46, Nungambakkam High Road, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. Chennai. [Pan: Aaics0224K] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit : ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & : Shri I Dinesh, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 02.12.2021 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 16.12.2021 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) Ii, Chennai, Dated 05.12.2012 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2006-07 In Pursuance To The Order Of The Assessing Officer In Levying Penalty Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

u/s 271(1)(c) of I.T. Act, clearly attracts in the case of the assessee as the additional income of ₹.1,58,98,570/- was offered in the return of income filed post search and no such income was disclosed in the original return of income filed by the assessee. 5 I.T.A. No. 2084/Chny/13 RELIEF CLAIMED IN APPEAL The order

R.MAHALAKSHMI,CHENNAI vs. DCIT NON CORPORATE RANGE 17, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is treated as allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaraman

search and seizure enquiry, the Revenue got confirmation from the sellers of the plots that they received on money payments from the assessee, when the said facts were brought to the assessee, she had admitted the on-money receipts of Rs. 2,46,30,500/-. Subsequently, on issue of notice u/s. 153A, the assessee filed a return admitting the total

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

271(l)(c). The learned 1st appellate authority failed to see that the penalty proceedings are independent of assessment proceedings and therefore penalty is not leviable merely on the ground that certain additions have been made in the assessment proceedings. 10. The learned Commissioner ought to have seen that penalty cannot be levied merely because an amount taxed as income

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

271(l)(c). The learned 1st appellate authority failed to see that the penalty proceedings are independent of assessment proceedings and therefore penalty is not leviable merely on the ground that certain additions have been made in the assessment proceedings. 10. The learned Commissioner ought to have seen that penalty cannot be levied merely because an amount taxed as income

PRAKASHCHAND JAIN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), CHENNAI

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 60, 61, 64 & 66/Chny/2024 िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Years: 2013-14 , 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 Prakashchand Jain, The Dy. Commissioner Of 39 & 40 Bakers Street, Vs. Income Tax, Choolai, Chennai – 600 112. Central Circle-2(3), Chennai. [Pan: Ahhpp 1690D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

penalty for concealment of income u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4. The assessee is a Doctor employed in Apollo Hospital, Chennai and also doing practice as OP consultation in the hospital. A search and seizure

PRAKASHCHAND JAIN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), CHENNAI

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 60, 61, 64 & 66/Chny/2024 िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Years: 2013-14 , 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 Prakashchand Jain, The Dy. Commissioner Of 39 & 40 Bakers Street, Vs. Income Tax, Choolai, Chennai – 600 112. Central Circle-2(3), Chennai. [Pan: Ahhpp 1690D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

penalty for concealment of income u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4. The assessee is a Doctor employed in Apollo Hospital, Chennai and also doing practice as OP consultation in the hospital. A search and seizure

PRAKASH CHAND JAIN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), CHENNAI

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 60, 61, 64 & 66/Chny/2024 िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Years: 2013-14 , 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 Prakashchand Jain, The Dy. Commissioner Of 39 & 40 Bakers Street, Vs. Income Tax, Choolai, Chennai – 600 112. Central Circle-2(3), Chennai. [Pan: Ahhpp 1690D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

penalty for concealment of income u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4. The assessee is a Doctor employed in Apollo Hospital, Chennai and also doing practice as OP consultation in the hospital. A search and seizure

PRAKASHCHAND JAIN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), CHENNAI

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 60, 61, 64 & 66/Chny/2024 िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Years: 2013-14 , 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 Prakashchand Jain, The Dy. Commissioner Of 39 & 40 Bakers Street, Vs. Income Tax, Choolai, Chennai – 600 112. Central Circle-2(3), Chennai. [Pan: Ahhpp 1690D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

penalty for concealment of income u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4. The assessee is a Doctor employed in Apollo Hospital, Chennai and also doing practice as OP consultation in the hospital. A search and seizure

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. ETHIRAJULU VAJRAVEL KUMARAN, TIRUVANNAMALAI

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1650, 1651, 1652, 1653, 1654 & 1655/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21 & 2021-22 The Dcit, Central Circle 2 (2), Chennai. Ethirajulu Vajravel Kumaran, 50A, Bhavaji Nagar, 2Nd Street, Chengam Road, Tiruvannamalai - 606 601. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Vs. Pan: Alipk 1937H (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Shiva Srinivas, Cit प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri R. Venkata Raman, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per George George K: These Six Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Different Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), Chennai-19, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called 'The Act'). The Orders Of Cit(A) Arise Out Of Orders Of Ao Imposing Penalties U/S.271(1)(C) / 270A / 271Aa Of The Act. The Relevant Assessment Years Are 2015-16, 2017-18, To 2021-22. The Details Of The Respective Appeals Preferred By The Revenue Are As Under: - S. No.

u/s. Amount of penalty levied (Rs.) 1 1650/Chny/2025 2015-16 13.03.2025 30.09.2022 271(1)(c) 1,11,89,533 2 1651/Chny/2025 2017-18 12.03.2025 28.09.2022 270A 62,74,154 3 1652/Chny/2025 2018-19 12.03.2025 28.09.2022 270A 92,46,838 4 1653/Chny/2025 2019-20 12.03.2025 27.09.2022 270A 1,09,97,688 5 1654/Chny/2025 2020-21 12.03.2025 28.09.2022 270A

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. ETHIRAJULU VAJRAVEL KUMARAN, THIRUVANNAMALAI

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1650, 1651, 1652, 1653, 1654 & 1655/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21 & 2021-22 The Dcit, Central Circle 2 (2), Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Vs. Ethirajulu Vajravel Kumaran, 50A, Bhavaji Nagar, 2Nd Street, Chengam Road, Tiruvannamalai - 606 601. Pan: Alipk 1937H (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : Shri Shiva Srinivas, Cit : Shri R. Venkata Raman, Ca : 03.09.2025 : 21.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per George George K: These Six Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Different Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), Chennai-19, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called 'The Act'). The Orders Of Cit(A) Arise Out Of Orders Of Ao Imposing Penalties U/S.271(1)(C) / 270A / 271Aa Of The Act. The Relevant Assessment Years Are 2015-16, 2017-18, To 2021-22. The Details Of The Respective Appeals Preferred By The Revenue Are As Under: - S. No.

u/s. Amount of penalty levied (Rs.) 1 1650/Chny/2025 2015-16 13.03.2025 30.09.2022 271(1)(c) 1,11,89,533 2 1651/Chny/2025 2017-18 12.03.2025 28.09.2022 270A 62,74,154 3 1652/Chny/2025 2018-19 12.03.2025 28.09.2022 270A 92,46,838 4 1653/Chny/2025 2019-20 12.03.2025 27.09.2022 270A 1,09,97,688 5 1654/Chny/2025 2020-21 12.03.2025 28.09.2022 270A

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. ETHIRAJULU VAJRAVEL KUMARAN, THIRUVANNAMALAI

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1650, 1651, 1652, 1653, 1654 & 1655/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21 & 2021-22 The Dcit, Central Circle 2 (2), Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing Vs. Ethirajulu Vajravel Kumaran, 50A, Bhavaji Nagar, 2Nd Street, Chengam Road, Tiruvannamalai - 606 601. Pan: Alipk 1937H (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri Shiva Srinivas, Cit : Shri R. Venkata Raman, Ca : 03.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per George George K: These Six Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Different Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), Chennai-19, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called 'The Act'). The Orders Of Cit(A) Arise Out Of Orders Of Ao Imposing Penalties U/S.271(1)(C) / 270A / 271Aa Of The Act. The Relevant Assessment Years Are 2015-16, 2017-18, To 2021-22. The Details Of The Respective Appeals Preferred By The Revenue Are As Under: - S. No.

u/s. Amount of penalty levied (Rs.) 1 1650/Chny/2025 2015-16 13.03.2025 30.09.2022 271(1)(c) 1,11,89,533 2 1651/Chny/2025 2017-18 12.03.2025 28.09.2022 270A 62,74,154 3 1652/Chny/2025 2018-19 12.03.2025 28.09.2022 270A 92,46,838 4 1653/Chny/2025 2019-20 12.03.2025 27.09.2022 270A 1,09,97,688 5 1654/Chny/2025 2020-21 12.03.2025 28.09.2022 270A

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. ETHIRAJULU VAJRAVEL KUMARAN, TIRUVANNAMALAI,

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1650, 1651, 1652, 1653, 1654 & 1655/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21 & 2021-22 The Dcit, Central Circle 2 (2), Chennai. Ethirajulu Vajravel Kumaran, 50A, Bhavaji Nagar, 2Nd Street, Chengam Road, Tiruvannamalai - 606 601. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing Pan: Alipk 1937H (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri Shiva Srinivas, Cit : Shri R. Venkata Raman, Ca : 03.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per George George K: These Six Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Different Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), Chennai-19, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called 'The Act'). The Orders Of Cit(A) Arise Out Of Orders Of Ao Imposing Penalties U/S.271(1)(C) / 270A / 271Aa Of The Act. The Relevant Assessment Years Are 2015-16, 2017-18, To 2021-22. The Details Of The Respective Appeals Preferred By The Revenue Are As Under: - S. No.

u/s. Amount of penalty levied (Rs.) 1 1650/Chny/2025 2015-16 13.03.2025 30.09.2022 271(1)(c) 1,11,89,533 2 1651/Chny/2025 2017-18 12.03.2025 28.09.2022 270A 62,74,154 3 1652/Chny/2025 2018-19 12.03.2025 28.09.2022 270A 92,46,838 4 1653/Chny/2025 2019-20 12.03.2025 27.09.2022 270A 1,09,97,688 5 1654/Chny/2025 2020-21 12.03.2025 28.09.2022 270A

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. ETHIRAJULU VAJRAVEL KUMARAN, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1650, 1651, 1652, 1653, 1654 & 1655/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21 & 2021-22 The Dcit, Central Circle 2 (2), Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing Vs. Ethirajulu Vajravel Kumaran, 50A, Bhavaji Nagar, 2Nd Street, Chengam Road, Tiruvannamalai - 606 601. Pan: Alipk 1937H (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri Shiva Srinivas, Cit : Shri R. Venkata Raman, Ca : 03.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per George George K: These Six Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Different Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), Chennai-19, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called 'The Act'). The Orders Of Cit(A) Arise Out Of Orders Of Ao Imposing Penalties U/S.271(1)(C) / 270A / 271Aa Of The Act. The Relevant Assessment Years Are 2015-16, 2017-18, To 2021-22. The Details Of The Respective Appeals Preferred By The Revenue Are As Under: - S. No.

u/s. Amount of penalty levied (Rs.) 1 1650/Chny/2025 2015-16 13.03.2025 30.09.2022 271(1)(c) 1,11,89,533 2 1651/Chny/2025 2017-18 12.03.2025 28.09.2022 270A 62,74,154 3 1652/Chny/2025 2018-19 12.03.2025 28.09.2022 270A 92,46,838 4 1653/Chny/2025 2019-20 12.03.2025 27.09.2022 270A 1,09,97,688 5 1654/Chny/2025 2020-21 12.03.2025 28.09.2022 270A