DCIT, CHENNAI vs. JAGATHRAKSHAKAN SRINISHA, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

120/-, an amount of Rs.4,00,00,000/- being a reasonable amount, can be\nconsidered for telescoping towards investment in gold jewellery.\nAccordingly, out of the amount of Rs.4,72,45,018/-, if the sum of Rs.\n4,00,00,000/- is telescoped, the balance amount of Rs.72,45,018/- can only be treated\nas unexplained investment made from unaccounted

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. JAGATHRAKSHAKAN SRINISHA, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

120/-, an amount of Rs.4,00,00,000/- being a reasonable amount, can be\nconsidered for telescoping towards investment in gold jewellery.\nAccordingly, out of the amount of Rs.4,72,45,018/-, if the sum of Rs.\n4,00,00,000/- is telescoped, the balance amount of Rs.72,45,018/- can only be treated\nas unexplained investment made from unaccounted

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. JAGATHRAKSKAN SRINISHA, CHENNAI

120/-, an amount of Rs.4,00,00,000/- being a reasonable amount, can be\nconsidered for telescoping towards investment in gold jewellery.\nAccordingly, out of the amount of Rs. 4,72,45,018/-, if the sum of Rs.\n4,00,00,000/- is telescoped, the balance amount of Rs. 72,45,018/- can only be treated\nas unexplained investment made

R MURUGAPPA @ MURUVAPPAN,PONDICHERRY vs. ITO, WARD-4, PONDICHERRY

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

68 of the Act consequently in the hands of the Appellant was wrong, erroneous, unjustified, incorrect and not sustainable in law. 4. The CIT (Appeals) failed to appreciate that the sustenance of the addition made in the hands of the Appellant was wrong, erroneous, unjustified, incorrect and not sustainable in law. 5. The CIT (Appeals) went wrong in recording

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, MADURAI vs. RAMASUBBU MINNALKODI, TIRUNELVELI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

sections": [ "143(3)", "133A", "139(1)", "143(2)", "142(1)", "68", "115BBE", "127", "120", "2(7A)" ], "issues": "1. 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

120/- Net professional income (-)Rs. 3,59,150/- Add: Disallowance of interest unrelated to Rs. 8,93,642/- profession Income assessed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 153A Rs. 5,35,492/- Tuition income as undisclosed income u/s 68 Rs. 10,65,970/- Gift received as undisclosed income u/s 68 Rs. 24,80,636/- Receipts from friends and relatives u/s 68

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

120/- Net professional income (-)Rs. 3,59,150/- Add: Disallowance of interest unrelated to Rs. 8,93,642/- profession Income assessed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 153A Rs. 5,35,492/- Tuition income as undisclosed income u/s 68 Rs. 10,65,970/- Gift received as undisclosed income u/s 68 Rs. 24,80,636/- Receipts from friends and relatives u/s 68

M/S. OJAS PLANTATIONS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1769/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Ojas Plantations Private Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 51, Park View Street, Near Gandhi Income Tax/Dc, Road, Alwarthirunagar, Tiruvallur, Central Circle 1(2), Chennai 600 087. Chennai. [Pan:Aabco1853F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1770/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Pippala Leaf Developers Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Narne Income Tax/Dc, Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Manikonda, Central Circle 1(2), Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan: Aahcp2411J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1771/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Tatva Renewable Power Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Narne Income Tax/Dc, Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Manikonda, Central Circle 1(2), Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan: Aaect8340D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

68 of the Act and made thereon under section 153A of the Act based on the statement of searched person and seized material, is not justified in the case of the assessee. 9 I.T.A. Nos.1769 to 1772 & 1793/Chny/25 13. The above said conclusion is supported by the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case

M/S. TATVA RENEWABLE POWER PVT. LTD.,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1769/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Ojas Plantations Private Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 51, Park View Street, Near Gandhi Income Tax/Dc, Road, Alwarthirunagar, Tiruvallur, Central Circle 1(2), Chennai 600 087. Chennai. [Pan:Aabco1853F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1770/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Pippala Leaf Developers Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Narne Income Tax/Dc, Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Manikonda, Central Circle 1(2), Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan: Aahcp2411J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1771/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Tatva Renewable Power Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Narne Income Tax/Dc, Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Manikonda, Central Circle 1(2), Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan: Aaect8340D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

68 of the Act and made thereon under section 153A of the Act based on the statement of searched person and seized material, is not justified in the case of the assessee. 9 I.T.A. Nos.1769 to 1772 & 1793/Chny/25 13. The above said conclusion is supported by the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case

M/S. TATVA CLEAN ENERGIES PVT. LTD.,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1769/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Ojas Plantations Private Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 51, Park View Street, Near Gandhi Income Tax/Dc, Road, Alwarthirunagar, Tiruvallur, Central Circle 1(2), Chennai 600 087. Chennai. [Pan:Aabco1853F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1770/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Pippala Leaf Developers Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Narne Income Tax/Dc, Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Manikonda, Central Circle 1(2), Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan: Aahcp2411J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1771/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Tatva Renewable Power Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Narne Income Tax/Dc, Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Manikonda, Central Circle 1(2), Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan: Aaect8340D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

68 of the Act and made thereon under section 153A of the Act based on the statement of searched person and seized material, is not justified in the case of the assessee. 9 I.T.A. Nos.1769 to 1772 & 1793/Chny/25 13. The above said conclusion is supported by the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case

M/S. MAHINDRA ORCHARDS PVT. LTD.,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CC-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1769/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Ojas Plantations Private Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 51, Park View Street, Near Gandhi Income Tax/Dc, Road, Alwarthirunagar, Tiruvallur, Central Circle 1(2), Chennai 600 087. Chennai. [Pan:Aabco1853F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1770/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Pippala Leaf Developers Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Narne Income Tax/Dc, Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Manikonda, Central Circle 1(2), Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan: Aahcp2411J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1771/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Tatva Renewable Power Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Narne Income Tax/Dc, Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Manikonda, Central Circle 1(2), Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan: Aaect8340D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

68 of the Act and made thereon under section 153A of the Act based on the statement of searched person and seized material, is not justified in the case of the assessee. 9 I.T.A. Nos.1769 to 1772 & 1793/Chny/25 13. The above said conclusion is supported by the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case

M/S. PIPPALA LEAF DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1769/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Ojas Plantations Private Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 51, Park View Street, Near Gandhi Income Tax/Dc, Road, Alwarthirunagar, Tiruvallur, Central Circle 1(2), Chennai 600 087. Chennai. [Pan:Aabco1853F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1770/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Pippala Leaf Developers Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Narne Income Tax/Dc, Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Manikonda, Central Circle 1(2), Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan: Aahcp2411J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1771/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Tatva Renewable Power Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Narne Income Tax/Dc, Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Manikonda, Central Circle 1(2), Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan: Aaect8340D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

68 of the Act and made thereon under section 153A of the Act based on the statement of searched person and seized material, is not justified in the case of the assessee. 9 I.T.A. Nos.1769 to 1772 & 1793/Chny/25 13. The above said conclusion is supported by the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case

ACIT, CIRCLE-1, TIRUNELVELI vs. ESAKKIMUTHU MUTHUVEL IYAPPAN, TIRUNELVELI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.794/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-2018) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Shri Esakkimuthu Muthuvel Iyappan, Income Tax, No.4, Highways Road, Circle 1, Tisayanvilai, Tirunelveli 627 011. Tirunelveli 627 657. [Pan : Arupm 4796J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. T. Vasudevan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Arv Srinivasan, Irs, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 19.06.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.07.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

Section 68 of the I.T. Act entailed for cash credits states that where any sum is found credited in the books of an assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature of source there of or the explanation offer by the assess is not satisfactory then sum so credited is taxed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NUNGAMBAKKAM vs. R K M POWERGEN PRIVATE LIMITED, T NAGAR

In the result the appeal of the revenue for the both the

120 134,00,32,126\n2011-12 286,37,33,520 288,55,68,096 186,64,95,391\n2012-13 230,46,51,600 233,55,66,922 137,83,70,108\n2013-14 615,34,48,800 641,28,07,603 352,92,52,393\n2014

M/S. HILLVIEW RENEWABLE POWER PVT. LTD.,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1758 & 1759/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2016-17 M/S. Hillview Renewable Power Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Income Tax/Dc, Narne Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Central Circle 1(2), Manikonda, Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan:Aadch3040D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1760 & 1761/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2016-17 M/S. Magnolia Ecopower Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Narne Income Tax/Dc, Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Manikonda, Central Circle 1(2), Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan: Aaicm9358C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1762/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Chetan Orchardes Private Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 51, Park View Street, Near Gandhi Income Tax/Dc, Road, Alwarthirunagar, Tiruvallur, Central Circle 1(2), Chennai 600 087. Chennai. [Pan:Aadcc7086L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

68 of the Act and made thereon under section 153A of the Act based on the statement of searched person and seized material, is not justified in the case of the assessee. 15. The above said conclusion is supported by the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT v. Ramesh D. Patel

M/S. HILLVIEW RENEWABLE POWER PVT. LTD.,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1758 & 1759/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2016-17 M/S. Hillview Renewable Power Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Income Tax/Dc, Narne Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Central Circle 1(2), Manikonda, Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan:Aadch3040D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1760 & 1761/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2016-17 M/S. Magnolia Ecopower Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Narne Income Tax/Dc, Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Manikonda, Central Circle 1(2), Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan: Aaicm9358C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1762/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Chetan Orchardes Private Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 51, Park View Street, Near Gandhi Income Tax/Dc, Road, Alwarthirunagar, Tiruvallur, Central Circle 1(2), Chennai 600 087. Chennai. [Pan:Aadcc7086L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

68 of the Act and made thereon under section 153A of the Act based on the statement of searched person and seized material, is not justified in the case of the assessee. 15. The above said conclusion is supported by the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT v. Ramesh D. Patel

M/S. CHETAN ORCHARDES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1758 & 1759/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2016-17 M/S. Hillview Renewable Power Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Income Tax/Dc, Narne Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Central Circle 1(2), Manikonda, Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan:Aadch3040D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1760 & 1761/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2016-17 M/S. Magnolia Ecopower Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Narne Income Tax/Dc, Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Manikonda, Central Circle 1(2), Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan: Aaicm9358C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1762/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Chetan Orchardes Private Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 51, Park View Street, Near Gandhi Income Tax/Dc, Road, Alwarthirunagar, Tiruvallur, Central Circle 1(2), Chennai 600 087. Chennai. [Pan:Aadcc7086L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

68 of the Act and made thereon under section 153A of the Act based on the statement of searched person and seized material, is not justified in the case of the assessee. 15. The above said conclusion is supported by the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT v. Ramesh D. Patel

M/S. MAGNOLIA ECOPOWER PVT. LTD.,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1758 & 1759/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2016-17 M/S. Hillview Renewable Power Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Income Tax/Dc, Narne Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Central Circle 1(2), Manikonda, Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan:Aadch3040D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1760 & 1761/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2016-17 M/S. Magnolia Ecopower Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Narne Income Tax/Dc, Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Manikonda, Central Circle 1(2), Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan: Aaicm9358C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1762/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Chetan Orchardes Private Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 51, Park View Street, Near Gandhi Income Tax/Dc, Road, Alwarthirunagar, Tiruvallur, Central Circle 1(2), Chennai 600 087. Chennai. [Pan:Aadcc7086L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

68 of the Act and made thereon under section 153A of the Act based on the statement of searched person and seized material, is not justified in the case of the assessee. 15. The above said conclusion is supported by the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT v. Ramesh D. Patel

M/S. MAHINDRA AGRO FARMS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1758 & 1759/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2016-17 M/S. Hillview Renewable Power Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Income Tax/Dc, Narne Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Central Circle 1(2), Manikonda, Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan:Aadch3040D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1760 & 1761/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2016-17 M/S. Magnolia Ecopower Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Narne Income Tax/Dc, Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Manikonda, Central Circle 1(2), Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan: Aaicm9358C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1762/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Chetan Orchardes Private Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 51, Park View Street, Near Gandhi Income Tax/Dc, Road, Alwarthirunagar, Tiruvallur, Central Circle 1(2), Chennai 600 087. Chennai. [Pan:Aadcc7086L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

68 of the Act and made thereon under section 153A of the Act based on the statement of searched person and seized material, is not justified in the case of the assessee. 15. The above said conclusion is supported by the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT v. Ramesh D. Patel