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

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

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

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-:

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

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

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S.R.Raghunatha, Hon'Bleआयकर अपील सं/.Ita Nos.: 770, 771, 772 & 773/Chny/2020 निर्धा रणवर्ष / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Smt. Jayanthi Seeman, C/O. Aparna Nandakumar, Advocate & Tax Consultant, J Nandakumar & Poojesh J (Advocates) No. 6, Ramakrishna Street, T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. [Pan: Acypj-0739-K] (अपीलार्थी/Assessee) अपीलार्थीकीओरसे/Assessee By प्रत्यर्थीकीओरसे/Respondent By सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement

crediting to the bank accounts of the assessee. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the assessee has proved the source to the extent of Rs.24,87,500/- on account of refund of rent advances from the following parties in cash: P.Saroja Rs.10,00,000/- R.Malathy Rs. 7,50,000/- Sathurappan & Rukmani Rs. 1,26,000/- K.Balaraman

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

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COIMBATORE vs. KAMATCHIPURAM VELLINGIRI JAYARAMAN, COIMBATORE

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed, where as the Cross objection of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

147 as under:- Income returned u/s 148 (-) 4,48,718/- Add: Rs. 49,40,946/- Disallowance of other expenses and development charges u/s 37(1) Unexplained cash credits u/s 68 Rs. 2,93,50,000/- Total income Rs. 3,38,42,228/- 6. Aggrieved, assessee challenged the order of assessment u/s 143(3)/147 dated 30.03.2022 before

DCIT, COIMBATORE vs. M/S. SENTHIL BUILDING MATERIAL MANUFACTURING CO. (P) LTD., COIMBATORE

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment

147, 148, 149, 151 & 153. 7.2 Assessee filed return of income in response to notice u/s. 153A of the Act on 27.04.2007. Period of 21 months u/s. 153B of the Act should be reckoned from the end of the financial year in which the last of 11 44 Appeals of S/Shri M.Palanisamy, A. Senthilkumar, T.M.Muthukumar, O. Arumugasamy & others authorization

DCIT, COIMBATORE vs. SRI M.PALANISAMY, COIMBATORE

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment

147, 148, 149, 151 & 153. 7.2 Assessee filed return of income in response to notice u/s. 153A of the Act on 27.04.2007. Period of 21 months u/s. 153B of the Act should be reckoned from the end of the financial year in which the last of 11 44 Appeals of S/Shri M.Palanisamy, A. Senthilkumar, T.M.Muthukumar, O. Arumugasamy & others authorization