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)

cash credit' but it does not suggest discovery of an undisclosed ‘asset' by the Revenue so as to bring it within the teeth of the fourth proviso to Section 153A of the Act for invoking jurisdiction u/s 153A for the extended period. 8.15 Hence, from the above discussion, it is thus clear that Section 153A

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)

cash credit' but it does not suggest discovery of an undisclosed ‘asset' by the Revenue so as to bring it within the teeth of the fourth proviso to Section 153A of the Act for invoking jurisdiction u/s 153A for the extended period. 8.15 Hence, from the above discussion, it is thus clear that Section 153A

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)

cash credit' but it does not suggest discovery of an undisclosed ‘asset' by the Revenue so as to bring it within the teeth of the fourth proviso to Section 153A of the Act for invoking jurisdiction u/s 153A for the extended period. 8.15 Hence, from the above discussion, it is thus clear that Section 153A

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)

cash credit' but it does not suggest discovery of an undisclosed ‘asset' by the Revenue so as to bring it within the teeth of the fourth proviso to Section 153A of the Act for invoking jurisdiction u/s 153A for the extended period. 8.15 Hence, from the above discussion, it is thus clear that Section 153A

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)

cash credit' but it does not suggest discovery of an undisclosed ‘asset' by the Revenue so as to bring it within the teeth of the fourth proviso to Section 153A of the Act for invoking jurisdiction u/s 153A for the extended period. 8.15 Hence, from the above discussion, it is thus clear that Section 153A

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)

cash credit' but it does not suggest discovery of an undisclosed ‘asset' by the Revenue so as to bring it within the teeth of the fourth proviso to Section 153A of the Act for invoking jurisdiction u/s 153A for the extended period. 8.15 Hence, from the above discussion, it is thus clear that Section 153A

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

reassessment proceedings on the following counts: (i) Lack of jurisdiction in issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act; (ii) Improper service of notice u/s 148 on an incorrect email ID; and (iii) Absence of Document Identification Number (DIN) in the assessment order. However, since the detailed arguments were also addressed on merits by the parties, we first proceed

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

reassessment proceedings on the following counts: (i) Lack of jurisdiction in issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act; (ii) Improper service of notice u/s 148 on an incorrect email ID; and (iii) Absence of Document Identification Number (DIN) in the assessment order. However, since the detailed arguments were also addressed on merits by the parties, we first proceed

K.GURUMURTHY,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 11(4), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar

unexplained cash credit in the hands of the assessee" is incorrect because: As explained in earlier paras the source for cash deposits in the bank is clearly explains and hence the Peak Credit addition treating as un explained is incorrect. Prayer: The Appellant here by earnestly pray to the Members of the Hon. ITAT that: 1) The Hon. Members

K.GURUMURTHY,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 11(4), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar

unexplained cash credit in the hands of the assessee" is incorrect because: As explained in earlier paras the source for cash deposits in the bank is clearly explains and hence the Peak Credit addition treating as un explained is incorrect. Prayer: The Appellant here by earnestly pray to the Members of the Hon. ITAT that: 1) The Hon. Members

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

147 of the Income\nTax Act, 1961, wherein the following additions were made for the\nΑ.Υ.2012-13:\nIncome admitted in Return of Income\nAdditions:\nUnexplained cash deposits u/s. 69\nExcess in capital account u/s. 69\nUnexplained investment u/s. 69\nInterest Receipt not admitted in ROI\nDisallowance of Rent payment\nUnexplained Fee Receipts\nIncome from Long Term Capital Gains

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. MENAKURU SUKUMAR REDDY, CHENNAI

u/s 24 of the Act and the balance amount of Rs.57,43,956/- is\nheld to be rental advance received from the said party. Hence, the AO is directed to delete the\naddition to the tune of Rs. 1,30,18,054/- & Rs.57.43,956/-and thereafter consider the amount\nof Rs.1,30,18,054/- as gross rental receipts from house

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

u/s.!43(l) cannot be treated as assessment and the reopening u/s.147 is valid in law; CO No.128/Chny/2013 & :: 3 :: 2.4 It is submitted that according to the Explanation under Sec. 149(1)(a) & (b), in determining the income escaping assessment as per this section, the provisions of Explanation 2 to Sec. 147 shall apply as they apply for the purposes

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

u/s.!43(l) cannot be treated as assessment and the reopening u/s.147 is valid in law; CO No.128/Chny/2013 & :: 3 :: 2.4 It is submitted that according to the Explanation under Sec. 149(1)(a) & (b), in determining the income escaping assessment as per this section, the provisions of Explanation 2 to Sec. 147 shall apply as they apply for the purposes

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

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R.Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं/.Ita Nos.: 770, 771, 772 & 773/Chny/2020 िनधा" रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Smt. Jayanthi Seeman, Income Tax Officer, C/O. Aparna Nandakumar, V. Non-Corporate Ward -1(2), Advocate & Tax Consultant, Chennai. J Nandakumar & Poojesh J (Advocates) No. 6, Ramakrishna Street, T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. [Pan: Acypj-0739-K] (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Assessee By : Shri. Y. Sridhar, Fca ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. R. Raghupathy, Addl.Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.02.2025 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28.02.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R

147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the A.Y. 2011-12, wherein the following additions were made by the AO: Sl.No. Details Amount In Rs. Income admitted in Return of Income 2,45,080/- :-23-: ITA. Nos: 770 to 773/Chny/2020 Additions: 1 Unexplained Cash Deposits u/s 68 44,60,849/- 2 Disallowance of interest 6,10,002/- 3 Disallowance

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