M/S. GLOBAL KNITTING NEEDS (FIRM),,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-22(1),, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.403 & 404/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Global Knitting Needs (Firm), Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Block No. C-1, 4Th Floor, D. No. 402, Non Corporate Ward 22(1), Akshya Belvedre Apartments, Gst Chennai. Road, Nandivaram Village, Guduvancherry, Chennai 603 202. [Pan:Aahfg6848D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06.04.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12.04.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Chennai Dated 26.11.2019 Towards Quantum & The Order Dated 14.01.2020 Against Levy Of Penalty Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] For The Assessment Year 2012-13. The Assessee Has Challenged Confirmation Of Addition Of ₹.69,72,900/-

202. [PAN:AAHFG6848D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, CA ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 06.04.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 12.04.2022 आदेश /O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: Both the appeals filed

M/S. GLOBAL KNITTING NEEDS (FIRM),,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-22(1),, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.403 & 404/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Global Knitting Needs (Firm), Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Block No. C-1, 4Th Floor, D. No. 402, Non Corporate Ward 22(1), Akshya Belvedre Apartments, Gst Chennai. Road, Nandivaram Village, Guduvancherry, Chennai 603 202. [Pan:Aahfg6848D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06.04.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12.04.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Chennai Dated 26.11.2019 Towards Quantum & The Order Dated 14.01.2020 Against Levy Of Penalty Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] For The Assessment Year 2012-13. The Assessee Has Challenged Confirmation Of Addition Of ₹.69,72,900/-

202. [PAN:AAHFG6848D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, CA ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 06.04.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 12.04.2022 आदेश /O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: Both the appeals filed

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1), CHENNAI vs. SHIV SAHAI & SONS (INDIA) LTD., CHENNAI

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

68,000 10,02,87,876 2007-08 2,43,35,309 11,38,61,202 2008-09 1,37,

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. NARESH PRASAD AGARWAL, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

68,000 10,02,87,876 2007-08 2,43,35,309 11,38,61,202 2008-09 1,37,

SAHAI & SONS (I) LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

68,000 10,02,87,876 2007-08 2,43,35,309 11,38,61,202 2008-09 1,37,

NARESH PRASAD AGARWAL,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

68,000 10,02,87,876 2007-08 2,43,35,309 11,38,61,202 2008-09 1,37,

NILAA CHARITABLE TRUST,VILLUPURAM vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD-1, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K (Vice President), SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA (Accountant Member)

202. Chennai. PAN: AABTN-0861-F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Mr. Sendamarai Kannan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 25.02.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 28.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal

DCIT, CIRCLE-2, TRICHY vs. M/S. MC HOSPITAL, NAGAPATTINAM

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as the Cross

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. M. C. Hospital Income-Tax, Plot No. 38, Sivan Sannathi Circle-2, Trichy. Street, Velipalayam, O/O The Joint Nagapattinam, Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tamil Nadu-611001. Tax, Range-2, No. 100, (Pan: Aapfm2058R) Nanjikottai Road, Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu- 620001. (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No. 6/Chny/2022 In Ita No.11/Chny/2021 Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. M. C. Hospital Deputy Commissioner Of Plot No. 38, Sivan Sannathi Income-Tax, Street, Velipalayam, Circle-2, Trichy. Nagapattinam, Vs. O/O The Joint Commissioner Tamil Nadu-611001. Of Income Tax, Range-2, No. (Pan: Aapfm2058R) 100, Nanjikottai Road, Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu- 620001. (Cross Objector) (Respondent) Present For: Revenue/Appellant By : Shri Chinthapalli Mehar Chand, Jcit Assessee/Cross Objector By : Shri K. P. Dewani, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 24.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.08.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal By The Revenue & The Cross Objection By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-1, Trichy Vide Ita No.535/2019-20/Cit(A0-1/Try Dated 23.09.2020 Against The Assessment Order Passed By Acit, Circle-2(1), Trichy U/S. 143(3) Of The 2

202%; (iii) that increase in cash receipts is also not accepted as the bills copies submitted does not give details of patients which are incomplete in details; (iv) that increasing in pharmacy sales is beyond human probabilities ; (v) that books are unreliable and prepared in such a manner so as to regularize the undisclosed income by recording it as cash

TAMIL NADU BRICK INDUSTRIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.744/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 M/S. Tamilnadu Brick Industries, The Income Tax Officer, No. 47, Mangali Nagar 1St Street, Vs. Non Corporate Circle 8(1), Arumbakkam, Chennai 600 106. Chennai. [Pan: Aafft3643P] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Vijay Kumar Punna, Jr. Standing Counsel सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 13.02.2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11.05.2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 9, Chennai, Dated 27.02.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: “1. The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 9, Chennai Dated 27.02.2017 In I.T.A.No.07/Cit(A)-9/2016-17 For The Above Mentioned Assessment Year Is Contrary To Law, Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case.

68,500/-. f. The appellant also stated at Page 10 of the Assessment order that the FMV prevailing for the schedule property was steeply increased from Rs.1200/- per sq.ft prevailing upto 31.03.2012 to Rs.5500/- per sq.ft from 01.04.2012. g. The appellant adopted the date of transfer as on 30.01.2012 i.e., the date of execution of MOA and the guideline value

VPM TRADES,GUDIYATTAM vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, VELLORE

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1218/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vpm Trades, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of 24, New Street, Income Tax, Gudiyatam 636 202. Circle I, Vellore. [Pan:Aaafv1917D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R.K.V. Sundar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 08.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2026 : आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 11.04.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Raised 8 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Confirming The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer Under Section 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

202. Circle I, Vellore. [PAN:AAAFV1917D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri R.K.V. Sundar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 08.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement 24.02.2026 : आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal filed

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

68,89,922 | 1,15,25,809\nPAGE-23\n:-23-:\nITA Nos: 991, 992, 993,\n1639 & 1644/Chny/2025\nGreat Hills. Respectfully following the aforesaid binding judicial precedents, we\nare of the considered view that the action of the Ld.CIT(A) in treating the advance\nrental receipts as income of the year under consideration is contrary to the settled\nprinciples governing

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. MENAKURU SUKUMAR REDDY , CHENNAI

68,89,922 1,15,25,809\nThe settled legal position that the same income cannot be subjected to tax twice\nis no longer res integra and stands affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in\nBerger Paints India Ltd. as well as by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Skyline\nGreat Hills. Respectfully following the aforesaid binding judicial

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

68,89,922 1,15,25,809 The settled legal position that the same income cannot be subjected to tax twice is no longer res integra and stands affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Berger Paints India Ltd. as well as by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Skyline :-24-: ITA Nos: 991, 992, 993, 1639 & 1644/Chny/2025

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

68,89,922 1,15,25,809 The settled legal position that the same income cannot be subjected to tax twice is no longer res integra and stands affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Berger Paints India Ltd. as well as by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Skyline :-24-: ITA Nos: 991, 992, 993, 1639 & 1644/Chny/2025

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. AL-AMEEN INTERNATIONAL LTD, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

202. [PAN AAFCA 7728M] (Respondent/Cross Objector ) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) Department by : Ms. R. Anitha, IRS, JCIT. Assessee by : Mr. M. Razzack, C.A. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 13-02-2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement : 24-02-2020 आदेश / O R D E R PER INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER This is an appeal filed

ACIT, LTU-2,, CHENNAI vs. ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

68,333 9.15 The above computation of capital gains is also supported by Form 3CEA issued by Chartered Accountant, which is available at Page 2 of Paper Book-III. It is noticed that the AO has not disputed the above computation, from which we find that, actually the net impact of the deferred consideration on the value of capital gains

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. JOHNSON LIFTS PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.47/Chny/2024 & Ita No.48/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2016-17 & 2017-18

202 ITR 393, that in Mercantile system profit arises/ accurse on the date of transaction i.e, the receipt of income refers to the first occasion when the recipient gets the money under his own control. ITA No.47/Chny/2024 & ITA No.48/Chny/2024 :- 3 -: 5. The CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) in respect of overseas commission paid without

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TIRUPUR vs. SRI SHANMUGAVEL MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED, TIRUPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

68,67,372/- for the whole of the year. 6. It may be noted that the assessee claimed a deduction u/s.80-IA of the Act to the tune of Rs.18,41,58,470/- and the AO vide assessment order passed u/s.143(3)r.w.s.144C(3)r.w.s.144B dated 11.06.2021 in accordance with the value determined by TPO determined the ALP of the inter