MENAKURU SUKUMAR REDDY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT(A), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

cash deposit of Rs.35,11,000/-. h) The ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.57,38,29,877/- on account of unexplained investments. Before us the ld.AR for the assessee assailing the action of the ld.CIT(A) submitted that the ld.CIT(A) has erred in rejecting the legal grounds raised by the assessee in respect of validity

MENAKURU SUKUMAR REDDY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT(A), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

cash deposit of Rs.35,11,000/-. h) The ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.57,38,29,877/- on account of unexplained investments. Before us the ld.AR for the assessee assailing the action of the ld.CIT(A) submitted that the ld.CIT(A) has erred in rejecting the legal grounds raised by the assessee in respect of validity

ITO, CHENNAI vs. USHA ANANDAN, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1298/Chny/2013 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2003-04 & Cross Objection No.128/Chny/2013 [In Ita No.1298/Chny/2013] िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2003-04

reassessment is bad in law. 4. For that the Assessing Officer failed to comply with the statutory requirements. 5. For that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.3 lakhs as unexplained cash credit

USHA ANANDAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1298/Chny/2013 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2003-04 & Cross Objection No.128/Chny/2013 [In Ita No.1298/Chny/2013] िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2003-04

reassessment is bad in law. 4. For that the Assessing Officer failed to comply with the statutory requirements. 5. For that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.3 lakhs as unexplained cash credit

MENAKURU SUKUMAR REDDY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT(A), CHENNAI

cash deposit of Rs.35,11,000/-. h) The Id.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.57,38,29,877/- on account of unexplained investments. Before us the Id.AR for the assessee assailing the action of the Id.CIT(A) submitted that the Id.CIT(A) has erred in rejecting the legal grounds raised by the assessee in respect of validity

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. MENAKURU SUKUMAR REDDY , CHENNAI

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 991, 992 & 993/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 Menakuru Sukumar Reddy, 8-2-696-697, Road No.2, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad - 500 034. [Pan: Aabhm-8414-M] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Dcit, Vs. Central Circle -3(4), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1639 & 1644/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18 Acit, Central Circle -3(4), Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Menakuru Sukumar Reddy, Vs. 8-2-696-697, Road No.2, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad - 500 034. [Pan: Aabhm-8414-M] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. P. Murali Mohana Rao, Ca Department By : Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 02.03.2026 आदेश /Order Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am : :-2-:

cash deposit of Rs.35,11,000/-. h) The Id.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.57,38,29,877/- on account of unexplained investments. Before us the Id.AR for the assessee assailing the action of the Id.CIT(A) submitted that the Id.CIT(A) has erred in rejecting the legal grounds raised by the assessee in respect of validity

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

unexplained cash credit u/s 68 received from friends and relatives. Ground No. is related to long term capital gain. Ground No.8 is related to interest u/s 234A/B/C. Ground No.9 is related to penalty levied. Accordingly, the ground of appeal is disposed of in the subsequent paragraphs. 6.2 During appeal proceedings, the appellant has filed written submission. Relevant portion of submission

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

unexplained cash credit u/s 68 received from friends and relatives. Ground No. is related to long term capital gain. Ground No.8 is related to interest u/s 234A/B/C. Ground No.9 is related to penalty levied. Accordingly, the ground of appeal is disposed of in the subsequent paragraphs. 6.2 During appeal proceedings, the appellant has filed written submission. Relevant portion of submission

M/S METAL IMPEX,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.799 To 805/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2016-17 To 2020-21 V. M/S. Metal Impex, The Acit, The Lattice, 4Th Floor, Central Circle-1(1), No.20 Waddles Road, Chennai. Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010. [Pan: Aamfm 4856 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

unexplained cash credit was in the nature of ‘asset’ as defined in fourth proviso to Section 153C of the Act and hence the condition precedent set out in fourth proviso to Section 153A of the Act was met. The Ld. CIT, DR further submitted that, the impugned addition was made with reference to ITA Nos.799 to 805/Chny/2024

M/S METAL IMPEX,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.799 To 805/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2016-17 To 2020-21 V. M/S. Metal Impex, The Acit, The Lattice, 4Th Floor, Central Circle-1(1), No.20 Waddles Road, Chennai. Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010. [Pan: Aamfm 4856 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

unexplained cash credit was in the nature of ‘asset’ as defined in fourth proviso to Section 153C of the Act and hence the condition precedent set out in fourth proviso to Section 153A of the Act was met. The Ld. CIT, DR further submitted that, the impugned addition was made with reference to ITA Nos.799 to 805/Chny/2024

M/S METAL IMPEX,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.799 To 805/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2016-17 To 2020-21 V. M/S. Metal Impex, The Acit, The Lattice, 4Th Floor, Central Circle-1(1), No.20 Waddles Road, Chennai. Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010. [Pan: Aamfm 4856 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

unexplained cash credit was in the nature of ‘asset’ as defined in fourth proviso to Section 153C of the Act and hence the condition precedent set out in fourth proviso to Section 153A of the Act was met. The Ld. CIT, DR further submitted that, the impugned addition was made with reference to ITA Nos.799 to 805/Chny/2024

M/S METAL IMPEX,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.799 To 805/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2016-17 To 2020-21 V. M/S. Metal Impex, The Acit, The Lattice, 4Th Floor, Central Circle-1(1), No.20 Waddles Road, Chennai. Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010. [Pan: Aamfm 4856 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

unexplained cash credit was in the nature of ‘asset’ as defined in fourth proviso to Section 153C of the Act and hence the condition precedent set out in fourth proviso to Section 153A of the Act was met. The Ld. CIT, DR further submitted that, the impugned addition was made with reference to ITA Nos.799 to 805/Chny/2024

M/S METAL IMPEX,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.799 To 805/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2016-17 To 2020-21 V. M/S. Metal Impex, The Acit, The Lattice, 4Th Floor, Central Circle-1(1), No.20 Waddles Road, Chennai. Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010. [Pan: Aamfm 4856 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

unexplained cash credit was in the nature of ‘asset’ as defined in fourth proviso to Section 153C of the Act and hence the condition precedent set out in fourth proviso to Section 153A of the Act was met. The Ld. CIT, DR further submitted that, the impugned addition was made with reference to ITA Nos.799 to 805/Chny/2024

M/S METAL IMPEX,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.799 To 805/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2016-17 To 2020-21 V. M/S. Metal Impex, The Acit, The Lattice, 4Th Floor, Central Circle-1(1), No.20 Waddles Road, Chennai. Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010. [Pan: Aamfm 4856 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

unexplained cash credit was in the nature of ‘asset’ as defined in fourth proviso to Section 153C of the Act and hence the condition precedent set out in fourth proviso to Section 153A of the Act was met. The Ld. CIT, DR further submitted that, the impugned addition was made with reference to ITA Nos.799 to 805/Chny/2024

M/S METAL IMPEX,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.799 To 805/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2016-17 To 2020-21 V. M/S. Metal Impex, The Acit, The Lattice, 4Th Floor, Central Circle-1(1), No.20 Waddles Road, Chennai. Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010. [Pan: Aamfm 4856 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

unexplained cash credit was in the nature of ‘asset’ as defined in fourth proviso to Section 153C of the Act and hence the condition precedent set out in fourth proviso to Section 153A of the Act was met. The Ld. CIT, DR further submitted that, the impugned addition was made with reference to ITA Nos.799 to 805/Chny/2024

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CHENNAI vs. SINGHVI LICKMI CHAND, VELLORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as Revenue

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.643, 644, 645, 646 & 647/Chny/2025 िनधा+रण वष+ /Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shri Singvi Lickmi Chand, The Dy. Commissioner Of No.3, Kasi Chetty Street, Vs. Income Tax, Ambur – 635 803. Central Circle-3(3), Pan: Aaapl 6736A Chennai.

reassess taking into consideration the other material alone in respect of completed assessment / unabated assessments. The Ld. CIT(A) therefore held that there was incriminating material seized during the course of search which shows that the assessee had made unexplained cash deposit in the bank accounts and therefore, the A.O had jurisdiction to assess the total income taking into consideration

SHRI SINGHVI LICKMI CHAND,AMBUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as Revenue

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.643, 644, 645, 646 & 647/Chny/2025 िनधा+रण वष+ /Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shri Singvi Lickmi Chand, The Dy. Commissioner Of No.3, Kasi Chetty Street, Vs. Income Tax, Ambur – 635 803. Central Circle-3(3), Pan: Aaapl 6736A Chennai.

reassess taking into consideration the other material alone in respect of completed assessment / unabated assessments. The Ld. CIT(A) therefore held that there was incriminating material seized during the course of search which shows that the assessee had made unexplained cash deposit in the bank accounts and therefore, the A.O had jurisdiction to assess the total income taking into consideration

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. SINGHVI LICKMI CHAND, VELLORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as Revenue

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.643, 644, 645, 646 & 647/Chny/2025 िनधा+रण वष+ /Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shri Singvi Lickmi Chand, The Dy. Commissioner Of No.3, Kasi Chetty Street, Vs. Income Tax, Ambur – 635 803. Central Circle-3(3), Pan: Aaapl 6736A Chennai.

reassess taking into consideration the other material alone in respect of completed assessment / unabated assessments. The Ld. CIT(A) therefore held that there was incriminating material seized during the course of search which shows that the assessee had made unexplained cash deposit in the bank accounts and therefore, the A.O had jurisdiction to assess the total income taking into consideration