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

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

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

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. MENAKURU SUKUMAR REDDY, CHENNAI

unexplained investment during the year under appeal. Upon\nverification of these details, the Id. CIT(A) rightly deleted the addition to that\nextent.\nIt was further submitted that out of the total addition of Rs. 57,38,29,877/-, the Id.\nCIT(A) sustained an addition of Rs. 1,54,63,996/-, which according to the\nassessee, was also unsustainable

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

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. MENAKURU SUKUMAR REDDY , CHENNAI

credits in the bank account cannot be a ground for invoking\nsection 69A of the Act, when the same are duly recorded and explained. Further,\nclerical or classification errors cannot give rise to additions when the substantive\nnature of the transaction is explained and accepted.\nIn view of the above, we direct for deletion of the addition of Rs.11

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

credits in the bank account cannot be a ground for invoking\nsection 69A of the Act, when the same are duly recorded and explained. Further,\nclerical or classification errors cannot give rise to additions when the substantive\nnature of the transaction is explained and accepted.\nIn view of the above, we direct for deletion of the addition of Rs.11

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

SMT. JAYANTHI SEEMAN,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW - 1 (2),, CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

credits in the bank account of M/s.Saraswathi Bhavanam, which were\nmostly by way of cash deposits as discussed in para 1 above. In response\nto the summons Smt.Jayanthi Seeman appeared on 05-09-2014 and a\nSworn Statement was recorded. Vide question No.4 of the statement\nSmt.Jayanthi Seeman was required to explain the details of cash deposits\nin her account

SMT. JAYANTHI SEEMAN,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW - 1 (2),, CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

credits in the bank account of M/s.Saraswathi Bhavanam, which were\nmostly by way of cash deposits as discussed in para 1 above. In response\nto the summons Smt.Jayanthi Seeman appeared on 05-09-2014 and a\nSworn Statement was recorded. Vide question No.4 of the statement\nSmt.Jayanthi Seeman was required to explain the details of cash deposits\nin her account