BONDALAPATI SHIVAJI RAO,CHENNAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed and\nappeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

b) of Section 153A(1) provided\nfor the identification of the six AYs' with reference to the \"previous year\nin which the search is conducted or requisition is made\". The block of six\nAYs' were to be identified commencing from the AY \"immediately\nITA No.1044/Chny/2023 (AY 2019-20)\nITA No.1103/Chny/2023 (AY 2019-20)\nBondalapati Shivaji Rao\n:: 16 ::\npreceding

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

153B r.w.s 153C r.w.s 153A of the Act vide order dated 19.02.2019 for AY 2010-11 to AY 2013-14 and draft assessment order for AY 2014-15 as under:\nAY Treatment of TP Adjustment Assessed total Demand raised\nshares premium as Income\n2010-11 189,26,79,120 189,26,79,120 134,00,32,126\n2011

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. R K M POWERGEN PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

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

B]\n(अपीलार्थी/Appellant)\n(प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)\nअपीलार्थी की ओर से / Appellant by :\nShri. A. Sasikumar, CIT\nप्रत्यर्थी की ओर से / Respondent by :\nShri. V. Ravichandran, CA\nसुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 13.08.2024\nघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 06.11.2024\nआदेश /ORDER\nPER S. R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:\nThese appeals filed by the revenue are directed against the common

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SUBRAMANIAM KATHIRESAN, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for AY 2014-15 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

153B of the Act prescribes the time limit for completion of assessment under section 153A and 153C of the Act; Section 153C of the Act bears the heading "Assessment of income of any other person" is a special provision in respect of assessment of income of "any other person" (third party) against whom no search

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. ETHIRAJULU VAJRAVEL KUMARAN, TIRUVANNAMALAI

68,15,120/- u/s.153A of the Act, which included an\nadditional income of Rs.3,25,88,900/-. The AO, while completing\nthe assessment, accepted the additional income so declared by\nthe assessee. However, the AO proceeded to levy penalty\nu/s.271(1)(c) of the Act amounting to Rs.1,11,89,533/-, being\n100% of the tax allegedly sought

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. ETHIRAJULU VAJRAVEL KUMARAN, THIRUVANNAMALAI

68,15,120/- u/s.153A of the Act, which included an\nadditional income of Rs.3,25,88,900/-. The AO, while completing\nthe assessment, accepted the additional income so declared by\nthe assessee. However, the AO proceeded to levy penalty\nu/s.271(1)(c) of the Act amounting to Rs.1,11,89,533/-, being\n100% of the tax allegedly sought

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. ETHIRAJULU VAJRAVEL KUMARAN, CHENNAI

In the result, all the six appeals of the Revenue are\ndismissed

68,15,120/- u/s.153A of the Act, which included an\nadditional income of Rs.3,25,88,900/-. The AO, while completing\nthe assessment, accepted the additional income so declared by\nthe assessee. However, the AO proceeded to levy penalty\nu/s.271(1)(c) of the Act amounting to Rs.1,11,89,533/-, being\n100% of the tax allegedly sought

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. ETHIRAJULU VAJRAVEL KUMARAN, TIRUVANNAMALAI

In the result, all the six appeals of the Revenue are\ndismissed

68,15,120/- u/s.153A of the Act, which included an\nadditional income of Rs.3,25,88,900/-. The AO, while completing\nthe assessment, accepted the additional income so declared by\nthe assessee. However, the AO proceeded to levy penalty\nu/s.271(1)(c) of the Act amounting to Rs.1,11,89,533/-, being\n100% of the tax allegedly sought

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. ETHIRAJULU VAJRAVEL KUMARAN, THIRUVANNAMALAI

In the result, all the six appeals of the Revenue are\ndismissed

68,15,120/- u/s.153A of the Act, which included an\nadditional income of Rs.3,25,88,900/-. The AO, while completing\nthe assessment, accepted the additional income so declared by\nthe assessee. However, the AO proceeded to levy penalty\nu/s.271(1)(c) of the Act amounting to Rs.1,11,89,533/-, being\n100% of the tax allegedly sought

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. ETHIRAJULU VAJRAVEL KUMARAN, TIRUVANNAMALAI,

68,15,120/- u/s.153A of the Act, which included an\nadditional income of Rs.3,25,88,900/-. The AO, while completing\nthe assessment, accepted the additional income so declared by\nthe assessee. However, the AO proceeded to levy penalty\nu/s.271(1)(c) of the Act amounting to Rs.1,11,89,533/-, being\n100% of the tax allegedly sought

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

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

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

153B and section 153C, all other provisions of this Act shall apply to the assessment made under this section; :-13-: ITA Nos: 2569, 2570, 2571, 2573 to 2577/Chny/2025 (ii) in an assessment or reassessment made in respect of an assessment year under this section, the tax shall be chargeable at the rate or rates as applicable

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

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

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

153B and section 153C, all other provisions of this Act shall apply to the assessment made under this section; :-13-: ITA Nos: 2569, 2570, 2571, 2573 to 2577/Chny/2025 (ii) in an assessment or reassessment made in respect of an assessment year under this section, the tax shall be chargeable at the rate or rates as applicable

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

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

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

153B and section 153C, all other provisions of this Act shall apply to the assessment made under this section; :-13-: ITA Nos: 2569, 2570, 2571, 2573 to 2577/Chny/2025 (ii) in an assessment or reassessment made in respect of an assessment year under this section, the tax shall be chargeable at the rate or rates as applicable

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

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

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

153B and section 153C, all other provisions of this Act shall apply to the assessment made under this section; :-13-: ITA Nos: 2569, 2570, 2571, 2573 to 2577/Chny/2025 (ii) in an assessment or reassessment made in respect of an assessment year under this section, the tax shall be chargeable at the rate or rates as applicable

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

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

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

153B and section 153C, all other provisions of this Act shall apply to the assessment made under this section; :-13-: ITA Nos: 2569, 2570, 2571, 2573 to 2577/Chny/2025 (ii) in an assessment or reassessment made in respect of an assessment year under this section, the tax shall be chargeable at the rate or rates as applicable

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. 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. 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. 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