BONDALAPATI SHIVAJI RAO,CHENNAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed and\nappeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

271). In the instant case, it was held\nthat in case of an abated assessment year, the return originally filed u/s\n139 of the Act stands replaced by the return of income u/s 153A of the\nAct. The AO is therefore required to conduct the assessment for such\nabated AY taking into account the return as filed u/s 153A

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

153C are intended to\nbe a complete code for post- search assessments. Considering that the\nnon-obstante clause under Section 153A excludes the application of, inter\nalia, Section 139, it is clear that the revised return filed under Section\n153A takes the place of the original return under Section 139, for the\npurposes of all other provisions

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

In the result, all the six appeals of the Revenue are\ndismissed

153C are intended to\nbe a complete code for post- search assessments. Considering that the\nnon-obstante clause under Section 153A excludes the application of, inter\nalia, Section 139, it is clear that the revised return filed under Section\n153A takes the place of the original return under Section 139, for the\npurposes of all other provisions

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

153C are intended to\nbe a complete code for post- search assessments. Considering that the\nnon-obstante clause under Section 153A excludes the application of, inter\nalia, Section 139, it is clear that the revised return filed under Section\n153A takes the place of the original return under Section 139, for the\npurposes of all other provisions

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

In the result, all the six appeals of the Revenue are\ndismissed

153C are intended to\nbe a complete code for post- search assessments. Considering that the\nnon-obstante clause under Section 153A excludes the application of, inter\nalia, Section 139, it is clear that the revised return filed under Section\n153A takes the place of the original return under Section 139, for the\npurposes of all other provisions

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

153C are intended to\nbe a complete code for post- search assessments. Considering that the\nnon-obstante clause under Section 153A excludes the application of, inter\nalia, Section 139, it is clear that the revised return filed under Section\n153A takes the place of the original return under Section 139, for the\npurposes of all other provisions

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

In the result, all the six appeals of the Revenue are\ndismissed

153C are intended to\nbe a complete code for post- search assessments. Considering that the\nnon-obstante clause under Section 153A excludes the application of, inter\nalia, Section 139, it is clear that the revised return filed under Section\n153A takes the place of the original return under Section 139, for the\npurposes of all other provisions

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. CHITRAVEL VETRIMARAN, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

penalty u/s 271D/271E of the Income -tax Act, 1961. Further,\nsource of repayment of cash loan along with interest needed verification.\nAccordingly, a common satisfaction note was recorded by the Assessing\nOfficer in this regard that the above seized material pertains to the\nassessee, other than the person referred to in section 153A of the Act in the\ngroup case

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. CHITRAVEL VETRIMARAN, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

penalty u/s 271D/271E of the Income -tax Act, 1961. Further,\nsource of repayment of cash loan along with interest needed verification.\nAccordingly, a common satisfaction note was recorded by the Assessing\nOfficer in this regard that the above seized material pertains to the\nassessee, other than the person referred to in section 153A of the Act in the\ngroup case

ANOTRA REALATORS PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. PCIT (CENTRAL)- 1, CHENNAI

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

153C of the\nAct dated 28.03.2022 be not considered as erroneous insofar as\nprejudicial to the interest of Revenue in as much as penalty\nproceedings was initiated under wrong section of 271AAC of the Act\ninstead of the provision of section 271(1)(c) of the Act. In response\nto the show-cause notice, the assessee filed reply

DCIT, CENTRAL CIR-2, MADURAI vs. M SHAHJAHAN, PALAKKAD

In the result, the Cross Objections filed by the assessees in C

penalty orders u/s\n, 271(1)(c) , and demand notice u/s 156 for the years AY-2012-13 to\n2015-16 clearly indicating receipt by the party on 08.01.2018. The\nappellant has placed at page-73 in the same paper book in the case of\nShajahan Proprietor, Madeena Traders a copy of the envelop bearing\n, stamp \"On India Government

M/S. R R INDUSTRIES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

153C r.w.s. 153A by, inter-alia, treating the rental\nreceipts offered under 'business income' as 'income from house property'\nand thereby disallowing exemption claimed u/s 10A of Rs.90,37,808/-.\nConsequently, penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) were also initiated by\nthe AO. The quantum assessment was taken up in first appeal by the\nassessee and the issue of treating

M/S. R R INDUSTRIES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

153C r.w.s. 153A by, inter-alia, treating the rental\nreceipts offered under 'business income' as 'income from house property'\nand thereby disallowing exemption claimed u/s 10A of Rs.90,37,808/-.\nConsequently, penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) were also initiated by\nthe AO. The quantum assessment was taken up in first appeal by the\nassessee and the issue of treating

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MADURAI vs. J S NIHAR BANU, PALAKKAD

In the result, the Cross Objections filed by the assessees in C

penalty orders u/s\n, 271(1)(c), and demand notice u/s 156 for the years AY-2012-13 to\n2015-16 clearly indicating receipt by the party on 08.01.2018. The\nappellant has placed at page-73 in the same paper book in the case of\nShajahan Proprietor, Madeena Traders a copy of the envelop bearing\n, stamp \"On India Government

M/S. SHRI SHI vs. HAKTHI FOUNDATIONS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAIVS.ADDL.CIT, CENTRAL RANGE-3,, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

271(1)(c) of the Act. Thus, insofar as penalty under Section 271E is concerned, it was without any satisfaction and, therefore, no such penalty could be levied. These appeals are, accordingly, dismissed. 24. Reverting back to the facts of the present case, we find that petitioner had submitted reply to the show cause notice on 02.06.2022. In his reply

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MADURAI vs. ACHU TRADERS, PALAKKAD

In the result, the Cross Objections filed by the assessees in C

penalty orders u/s\n, 271(1)(c), and demand notice u/s 156 for the years AY-2012-13 to\n2015-16 clearly indicating receipt by the party on 08.01.2018. The\nappellant has placed at page-73 in the same paper book in the case of\nShajahan Proprietor, Madeena Traders a copy of the envelop bearing\nstamp \"On India Government Service

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MADURAI vs. ACHU TRADERS, PALAKKAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S.Achu Traders, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, No. 11/1288, Madurai M.Pudur Main Road, Vs. Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 [Pan: Aapfa8131B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.359, 360, 361 & 362 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 36, 37, 38 & 39/Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri M.Shahjahan, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Prop. M/S. Madeena Traders Madurai No.Vii/561, M.Pudur Main Road, Vs Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aiyps1815P]

penalty orders u/s 271(1)(c ), and demand notice u/s 156 for the years AY-2012-13 to ITA No.355 & 27 others/Chny/2019 :- 15 -: 2015-16 clearly indicating receipt by the party on 08.01.2018. The appellant has placed at page-73 in the same paper book in the case of Shajahan Proprietor , Madeena Traders a copy of the envelop bearing stamp

DCIT, CENTRAL CIR-2, MADURAI vs. M SHAHJAHAN, PALAKKAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S.Achu Traders, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, No. 11/1288, Madurai M.Pudur Main Road, Vs. Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 [Pan: Aapfa8131B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.359, 360, 361 & 362 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 36, 37, 38 & 39/Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri M.Shahjahan, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Prop. M/S. Madeena Traders Madurai No.Vii/561, M.Pudur Main Road, Vs Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aiyps1815P]

penalty orders u/s 271(1)(c ), and demand notice u/s 156 for the years AY-2012-13 to ITA No.355 & 27 others/Chny/2019 :- 15 -: 2015-16 clearly indicating receipt by the party on 08.01.2018. The appellant has placed at page-73 in the same paper book in the case of Shajahan Proprietor , Madeena Traders a copy of the envelop bearing stamp

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MADURAI vs. APPU TRADERS, PALAKKAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S.Achu Traders, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, No. 11/1288, Madurai M.Pudur Main Road, Vs. Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 [Pan: Aapfa8131B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.359, 360, 361 & 362 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 36, 37, 38 & 39/Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri M.Shahjahan, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Prop. M/S. Madeena Traders Madurai No.Vii/561, M.Pudur Main Road, Vs Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aiyps1815P]

penalty orders u/s 271(1)(c ), and demand notice u/s 156 for the years AY-2012-13 to ITA No.355 & 27 others/Chny/2019 :- 15 -: 2015-16 clearly indicating receipt by the party on 08.01.2018. The appellant has placed at page-73 in the same paper book in the case of Shajahan Proprietor , Madeena Traders a copy of the envelop bearing stamp