DCIT, CHENNAI vs. JAGATHRAKSKAN SRINISHA, CHENNAI

54,261\nAY 2013-14\n16,06,290\n41,84,410 (1,605 gms)\nAY 2014-15\n43,86,555\n37, 69,343 (1,446 gms)\nAY 2015-16\n68,16,158\n79,73,302 (3,060 gms)\nAY 2016-17\n45,50,376\n39,13,497 (1,350 gms)\nTotal

ACHALA PUNJA,CHENNAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 3(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

54.\n3. The appellant submits that there has been no concealment of any income or\nfurnishing of inaccurate particulars warranting penalty u/s 271(1)(c). Mere\nmaking of a claim, even if it is found not sustainable in law, by itself, will not\namount to furnishing inaccurate particulars of income CIT v. Reliance\nPetroproducts

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. JAGATHRAKSHAKAN SRINISHA, CHENNAI

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

54,261\nAY 2013-14\n16,06,290\n41,84,410 (1,605 gms)\nAY 2014-15\n43,86,555\n37, 69,343 (1,446 gms)\nAY 2015-16\n68,16,158\n79,73,302 (3,060 gms)\nAY 2016-17\n45,50,376\n39,13,497 (1,350 gms)\nTotal

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. JAGATHRAKSHAKAN SRINISHA, CHENNAI

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

54,261\nAY 2013-14\n16,06,290\n41,84,410 (1,605 gms)\nAY 2014-15\n43,86,555\n37, 69,343 (1,446 gms)\nAY 2015-16\n68,16,158\n79,73,302 (3,060 gms)\nAY 2016-17\n45,50,376\n39,13,497 (1,350 gms)\nTotal

P. KALAISELVI ,POLUR vs. ACIT , VELLORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Arun Khodpia, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.984/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. Ms.Palani Kalai Selvi, The Asst. Commissioner – No.2A, Old No.7, Of Income Tax, Abdul Sukkur St., Circle-1, Polur-606 608. Vellore. [Pan: Bcapk 5385 B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : None ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14.03.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14.03.2023

54 TTJ 644 (Cuttack); AO vs Saphire traders pvt ltd. 66 TTJ 180 (And). 2.8 The AO ought to have understood the purpose of the audit report u/s 44AB stated in para 17.2 of CBDT circular No.387 dt.6.7.1984 [152 ITR 11 (ST)] which has been achieved when income returned was accepted and therefore ought to have desisted from levying

M/S.REDINGTON DISTRIBUTIONS PTE LTD.,SINGAPORE vs. ACIT, INTLTAXATION CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income ITA Nos.889 to 894/Chny/2025 (AYs 2011-12 to 2016-17) M/s. Redington Distribution Pte Ltd. :: 2 :: Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act‘) on the common addition(s) made on account of the profits of the assessee attributed to be taxed in India. With the consent of both

M/S. REDINGTON DISTRIBUTION PTE LTD.,SINGAPORE vs. ACIT, INTL TAXATION CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income ITA Nos.889 to 894/Chny/2025 (AYs 2011-12 to 2016-17) M/s. Redington Distribution Pte Ltd. :: 2 :: Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act‘) on the common addition(s) made on account of the profits of the assessee attributed to be taxed in India. With the consent of both

M/S.REDINGTON DISTRIBUTION PTE LTD.,SINGAPORE vs. ACIT,INTL TAXATION CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income ITA Nos.889 to 894/Chny/2025 (AYs 2011-12 to 2016-17) M/s. Redington Distribution Pte Ltd. :: 2 :: Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act‘) on the common addition(s) made on account of the profits of the assessee attributed to be taxed in India. With the consent of both

M/S. REDINGTON DISTRIBUTION PTE LTD.,SINGAPORE vs. ACIT , INTL TAXATION CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income ITA Nos.889 to 894/Chny/2025 (AYs 2011-12 to 2016-17) M/s. Redington Distribution Pte Ltd. :: 2 :: Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act‘) on the common addition(s) made on account of the profits of the assessee attributed to be taxed in India. With the consent of both

M/S.REDINGTON DISTRIBUTIONS PTE LTD.,SINGAPORE vs. ACIT, INTLTAXATION CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income ITA Nos.889 to 894/Chny/2025 (AYs 2011-12 to 2016-17) M/s. Redington Distribution Pte Ltd. :: 2 :: Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act‘) on the common addition(s) made on account of the profits of the assessee attributed to be taxed in India. With the consent of both

M/S.REDINGTON DISTRIBUTORS PTE LTD.,SINGAPORE vs. ACIT, INTL TAXATION CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income ITA Nos.889 to 894/Chny/2025 (AYs 2011-12 to 2016-17) M/s. Redington Distribution Pte Ltd. :: 2 :: Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act‘) on the common addition(s) made on account of the profits of the assessee attributed to be taxed in India. With the consent of both

MOHAMED AKBAR,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCC-10(3), CHENNAI

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahaymohamed Akbar, I.T.O., 2/2 1St St., Gf, Apt No. 2, Vs. Non-Corporate Circle 10(3), Jamalia Perambur High Road, Chennai. Chennai-12 Pan No. Afepa 3815 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

54 of the Act and added the same to the total income of the assessee under the head capital gains. The Assessing Officer also initiated penalty under Section 271(1)(C) of the Act for concealment of income. Subsequently, the penalty order under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act was passed on 18/01/2022 for the assessment year under consideration

PARK TRUST,TIRUPUR vs. DCIT EXEMPTIONS, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for\nstatistical purposes

Section 13(3)(c). The A.O\nhas also disallowed interest of Rs. 1,40,95,279/- @ 12% of the sum\nadvanced to M/s. Park ED Trust of Rs. 4,01,71,568/-, Park Hospital\nLtd. Rs.7,18,36,076/- and VP Trust Rs. 54,53,018/- on the ground that\nthe assessee trust is paying heavy interest on unsecured loans

THE IMMACULATE HEART OF MARY'S SOCIETY,MADURAI vs. ITO EXEMPTIONS, MADURAI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Hon’Ble Judicial Membe & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 968, 969 & 970/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, The Immaculate Heart Of V. Exemptions Ward, Mary’S Society, Madurai. Arul Malar Convent, No.1, K.K. Nagar, Madurai – 625 020. [Pan:Aaatt-7531-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. P.M. Kathir, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. V. Nandakumar, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.06.2024 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28.06.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha:

section 274 r.w.s. 271F of the Act was issued on 29/3/2022 to the assessee in consonance with the order U/s.147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act for levying penalty. Since the assessee trust has not participated in the penalty proceedings, the exparte order has been passed by the AO on 16/09/2022 by levying penalty Rs.5,000/- U/s. 271F

THE IMMACULATE HEART OF MARY'S SOCIETY,MADURAI vs. ITO EXEMPTIONS, MADURAI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Hon’Ble Judicial Membe & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 968, 969 & 970/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, The Immaculate Heart Of V. Exemptions Ward, Mary’S Society, Madurai. Arul Malar Convent, No.1, K.K. Nagar, Madurai – 625 020. [Pan:Aaatt-7531-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. P.M. Kathir, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. V. Nandakumar, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.06.2024 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28.06.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha:

section 274 r.w.s. 271F of the Act was issued on 29/3/2022 to the assessee in consonance with the order U/s.147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act for levying penalty. Since the assessee trust has not participated in the penalty proceedings, the exparte order has been passed by the AO on 16/09/2022 by levying penalty Rs.5,000/- U/s. 271F

THE IMMACULATE HEART OF MARY'S SOCIETY,MADURAI vs. ITO EXEMPTIONS, MADURAI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Hon’Ble Judicial Membe & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 968, 969 & 970/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, The Immaculate Heart Of V. Exemptions Ward, Mary’S Society, Madurai. Arul Malar Convent, No.1, K.K. Nagar, Madurai – 625 020. [Pan:Aaatt-7531-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. P.M. Kathir, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. V. Nandakumar, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.06.2024 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28.06.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha:

section 274 r.w.s. 271F of the Act was issued on 29/3/2022 to the assessee in consonance with the order U/s.147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act for levying penalty. Since the assessee trust has not participated in the penalty proceedings, the exparte order has been passed by the AO on 16/09/2022 by levying penalty Rs.5,000/- U/s. 271F

COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI

penalty\nproceedings under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act, without\nappreciating the contentions placed in the above grounds.\n\nThe Appellant craves leave to add, supplement, amend, delete or otherwise\nmodify any of the grounds stated hereinabove at the time of hearing.\"\n\n4. Ground No. 1 is general in nature and hence, doesn

ANWAR SULTHAN AKBAR ALI,TIRUVALLUR vs. ITO, NCW-19(3), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.460 & 461/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Anwar Sulthan Akbar Ali, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 5131, Mosque Road, Non Corporate Ward 19(3), Ayapakkam, Tiruvallur 600 077. Chennai. [Pan:Aonpa4265J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Y. Sridhar, F.C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Krishna Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 07.05.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.05.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Both Dated 20.11.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. First, We Shall Take Up Appeal In Ita No. 460/Chny/2025 For Adjudication Of Confirmation Of Quantum Addition.

section 69A of the Act as well as addition towards income from brokerage. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 299 days. Having not satisfied with the condonation petition filed by the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal. 5. The ld. AR Shri