DCIT CC 2 2 , CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT LTD, CHENNAI

In the result, both the both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Revenue and the

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act‘). referred to as ‘the Act‘). 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that, the assessee is a Briefly stated the facts of the case are that, the assessee is a Briefly stated the facts of the case are that

ALTHI VENKATA NARENDRA RAJU,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

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

250, section 254, section 260, section 262, section 263,\nor section 264 or in an order of any court in a proceeding otherwise than by way of\nappeal or reference under this Act, on or before the expiry of twelve months from the\nend of the month in which such order is received or passed by the 30[Principal Chief

ACIT, CUDDALORE CIRCLE,, CUDDALORE vs. M/S. THE CUDDALORE DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,, CUDDALORE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

reassessment order, the AO stated that details were called for and assessment was completed after going through the details furnished. This shows that details already filed during 1 round of 147 proceedings were examined and order was passed on 06.03.2015. Thereafter on 31.03.2015 i.e barely after lapse of 24 days, the AO issued notice u/s 148 for re-assessment

SRI KRISHA TRADERS,SIVAGANGAI vs. DCIT, NON CORPORATE CIRCLE-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Ms. Padmavathy.Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2223/Chny/2025 िनधा%रण वष% /Assessment Year: 2017-18

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( in short "the Act") dated 09.06.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18. The assessee has raised several grounds contending the addition made both on merits as well as legal grounds. The Ld. AR during the course of hearing submitted that the assessee has raised the legal contention that the assessment

MOHANRAJ,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3, CHENNAI

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 548 To 552/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2018-19 Shri Mohanraj Deputy Commissioner Of 76, State Bank Road, Vs. Income Tax, Coimbatore-641 018. Central Circle-3 Pan: Ahopm-2335-H Coimbatore. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms.T.M.Suganthamala, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26.02.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: These Five Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against Five Separate Orders Of Cit(A), Chennai-20, All Dated 16.02.2024, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). The Relevant Assessment Years Are 2014-15 To 2018-19. 2. The Common Issue Is Raised In These Appeals, Hence, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. Identical Grounds Are Raised Except For Variation In Figures.

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Years are 2014-15 to 2018-19. 2. The common issue is raised in these appeals, hence, they were heard together and are being disposed off by this consolidated order. Identical grounds are raised except for variation in figures. ITA Nos.548 to 552//CHNY/2024 The ground

MOHANRAJ,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3, COIMBATORE

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 548 To 552/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2018-19 Shri Mohanraj Deputy Commissioner Of 76, State Bank Road, Vs. Income Tax, Coimbatore-641 018. Central Circle-3 Pan: Ahopm-2335-H Coimbatore. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms.T.M.Suganthamala, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26.02.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: These Five Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against Five Separate Orders Of Cit(A), Chennai-20, All Dated 16.02.2024, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). The Relevant Assessment Years Are 2014-15 To 2018-19. 2. The Common Issue Is Raised In These Appeals, Hence, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. Identical Grounds Are Raised Except For Variation In Figures.

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Years are 2014-15 to 2018-19. 2. The common issue is raised in these appeals, hence, they were heard together and are being disposed off by this consolidated order. Identical grounds are raised except for variation in figures. ITA Nos.548 to 552//CHNY/2024 The ground

MOHANRAJ,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3, COIMBATORE

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 548 To 552/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2018-19 Shri Mohanraj Deputy Commissioner Of 76, State Bank Road, Vs. Income Tax, Coimbatore-641 018. Central Circle-3 Pan: Ahopm-2335-H Coimbatore. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms.T.M.Suganthamala, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26.02.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: These Five Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against Five Separate Orders Of Cit(A), Chennai-20, All Dated 16.02.2024, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). The Relevant Assessment Years Are 2014-15 To 2018-19. 2. The Common Issue Is Raised In These Appeals, Hence, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. Identical Grounds Are Raised Except For Variation In Figures.

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Years are 2014-15 to 2018-19. 2. The common issue is raised in these appeals, hence, they were heard together and are being disposed off by this consolidated order. Identical grounds are raised except for variation in figures. ITA Nos.548 to 552//CHNY/2024 The ground

MOHANRAJ,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3, COIMBATORE

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 548 To 552/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2018-19 Shri Mohanraj Deputy Commissioner Of 76, State Bank Road, Vs. Income Tax, Coimbatore-641 018. Central Circle-3 Pan: Ahopm-2335-H Coimbatore. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms.T.M.Suganthamala, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26.02.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: These Five Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against Five Separate Orders Of Cit(A), Chennai-20, All Dated 16.02.2024, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). The Relevant Assessment Years Are 2014-15 To 2018-19. 2. The Common Issue Is Raised In These Appeals, Hence, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. Identical Grounds Are Raised Except For Variation In Figures.

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Years are 2014-15 to 2018-19. 2. The common issue is raised in these appeals, hence, they were heard together and are being disposed off by this consolidated order. Identical grounds are raised except for variation in figures. ITA Nos.548 to 552//CHNY/2024 The ground

DCIT CC 2 2 , CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT LTD, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the\nassessee are dismissed

6 years from relevant\n assessment year (AY 2021-22) from the end of the previous year (2020-\n21) in which the search was conducted on the assessee (26-02-2021).\nIn such a situation, the Ld. AO would be subjected to further conditions\nas stipulated in fourth proviso to Sec.153A(1). These conditions are (a)\nthat certain income

SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT.. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the\nassessee are dismissed

6 years from relevant\n assessment year (AY 2021-22) from the end of the previous year (2020-\n21) in which the search was conducted on the assessee (26-02-2021).\nIn such a situation, the Ld. AO would be subjected to further conditions\nas stipulated in fourth proviso to Sec.153A(1). These conditions are (a)\nthat certain income

DCIT CC 2 2 , CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT LTD, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the\nassessee are dismissed

6 years from relevant\n assessment year (AY 2021-22) from the end of the previous year (2020-\n21) in which the search was conducted on the assessee (26-02-2021).\nIn such a situation, the Ld. AO would be subjected to further conditions\nas stipulated in fourth proviso to Sec.153A(1). These conditions are (a)\nthat certain income

ACIT, CENT CIRCLE-1, TRICHY vs. M/S MANGAL & MANGAL, TRICHY

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 511/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Mangal & Mangal, Income Tax, V. 25, N.S.B. Road, Teppakulam, Central Circle -2, Trichy – 620 002. No. 44, Williams Road, [Pan: Aaifm-3378-B] Cantonment, Trichy – 620 001. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate : Shri. Nlay Baran Som, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.04.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

250/-, addition of interest income on EB deposits for Rs. 1,41,220/- and addition of interest on other deposits @ 10% for Rs. 44,370/-. 5. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee challenged reopening of assessment on the ground that, the Assessing Officer

DCIT, COIMBATORE vs. MAHESWARA SUGARS LIMITED, COIMBATORE

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

u/s 143(3) on 25.03.2008 determining a loss of (-)Rs 2,79,26,240/-. A sum of Rs 6,38,22,436/- and Rs 20,15,02,830/- was determined as unabsorbed business loss and Depreciation respectively from the A.Y. 1999-2000 to 2006-07, and allowed to be carried forward for set off from future income. The assessee company

MOHANRAJ,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3, COIMBATORE

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the assessee are\nallowed

147, Section 148, Section 149,\nSection 151 and Section 153, in the case of a person where a search is initiated\nunder section 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets are\nrequisitioned under section 132-A after the 31st day of May, 2003, the Assessing\nOfficer shall-\n(a) issue notice to such person requiring

S.VIJAYALAKSHMI ,PUDUCHERRY vs. ITO WARD I(2) , PONDICHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for assessment

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George Mathan

6 -: order accordingly vide its order dated 02.02.2011. The ld. Assessing Officer revised the taxable income for `3,76,620/- in obeying the Ld.CIT(A)’s instruction strictly vide his order dated 28.03.2011. Subsequently the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, Pondicherry issued a show cause notice u/s 263 requesting the assessee to explain as to why the difference between

S.VIJAYALAKSHMI ,PUDUCHERRY vs. ITO WARD I(2) , PONDICHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for assessment

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George Mathan

6 -: order accordingly vide its order dated 02.02.2011. The ld. Assessing Officer revised the taxable income for `3,76,620/- in obeying the Ld.CIT(A)’s instruction strictly vide his order dated 28.03.2011. Subsequently the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, Pondicherry issued a show cause notice u/s 263 requesting the assessee to explain as to why the difference between

S.VIJAYALAKSHMI ,PUDUCHERRY vs. ITO WARD I(2) , PONDICHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for assessment

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George Mathan

6 -: order accordingly vide its order dated 02.02.2011. The ld. Assessing Officer revised the taxable income for `3,76,620/- in obeying the Ld.CIT(A)’s instruction strictly vide his order dated 28.03.2011. Subsequently the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, Pondicherry issued a show cause notice u/s 263 requesting the assessee to explain as to why the difference between

S.VIJAYALAKSHMI ,PUDUCHERRY vs. ITO WARD I(2) , PONDICHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for assessment

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George Mathan

6 -: order accordingly vide its order dated 02.02.2011. The ld. Assessing Officer revised the taxable income for `3,76,620/- in obeying the Ld.CIT(A)’s instruction strictly vide his order dated 28.03.2011. Subsequently the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, Pondicherry issued a show cause notice u/s 263 requesting the assessee to explain as to why the difference between