ACIT, CHENNAI vs. SRI BALAJI EDUCATIONAL AMD TRUST CHARITABLE PUBLIC TRUST , CHENNA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee and that of the Department are dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1249/Chny/2025 िनधा$रण वष$ / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Sri Balaji Educational & Acit, Charitable Public Trust, Vs. Central Circle 3(4), No. 60, First Avenue, Chennai. Jai Durga Complex, Ashok Nagar, Chennai – 600 083. Tamil Nadu. (&'थ"/Respondent) [Pan: Aacts-1386-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1471/Chny/2025 िनधा$रण वष$ / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Acit, M/S. Sri Balaji Educational & Central Circle 3(4), Vs. Charitable Public Trust, Chennai. No. 60, First Avenue, Jai Durga Complex, Ashok Nagar, Chennai – 600 083. Tamil Nadu. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) [Pan: Aacts-1386-D] (&'थ"/Respondent) िनधा$)रती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri. Y.Sridhar, Fca राज4 की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 01.12.2025

245D(4) and hence contested the same through a writ of certiorari before the Hon’ble High Court at Madras. On hearing the case of the assessee and that of the Department, the Hon’ble Court had set aside the order for fresh examination in the light of the grounds fostered by both the litigants and pass necessary orders

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. KISHORE KUMAR JAIN, CHENNAI

In the result the three appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2847, 2848 & 2849 /Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2016-17 Assistant Commissioner Of Kishore Kumar Jain, Income Tax, Vs. 62, Bvk Sampath Road, Central Circle -2 (2), Vepery, Chennai. Chennai – 600 007. [Pan: Aahpj-0401-H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

1) & 245D(2C) of the Act is enclosed as item nos. 2,3 & 4 respectively of the paper book filed by the assessee). 16. Then, the final order u/s.245D(4) of the Act was passed by the ITSC on 11.06.2020, rejecting the application on the following grounds (Copy of the said order enclosed as item no. 5 of the paper

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. KISHORE KUMAR JAIN, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2847, 2848 & 2849 /Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2016-17 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle -2 (2), Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement Kishore Kumar Jain, Vs.62, Bvk Sampath Road, Vepery, Chennai - 600 007. [Pan: Aahpj-0401-H] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Mr. Shivanand K Kalakeri, Cit Mr. B.Ramakrishnan, F.C.A. 13.03.2025 26.05.2025 आदेश /Order Per S. R. Raghunatha: These Three Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai, All Dated 10.09.2024 & Pertains To Assessment Years 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2016-17. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Being Heard Together & Disposed Of, By This Consolidated Order. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Common Grounds Of Appeal For All The

1) & 245D(2C) of the Act is enclosed as item nos.2,3 & 4 respectively of the paper book filed by the assessee). 16. Then, the final order u/s.245D(4) of the Act was passed by the ITSC on 11.06.2020, rejecting the application on the following grounds (Copy of the said order enclosed as item no. 5 of the paper book

M/S. LALITHA JEWELLERY MART LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), CHENNAI

1) is only\nto make enquiries and investigation and is not meant to obtain voluntary\ndisclosure or surrender of concealed income. As per section 31 of the\nIndian Evidence Act, 1878, admissions are not conclusively proved as\nagainst admitted proof. In the absence of rebuttable conclusion,\nadmission bind the maker when these are not rebuttable or retracted. It\nwas

M/S. LALITHA JEWELLERY MART LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shrimanoj Kumar Aggarwal

1 to 3 are noted to be general in nature which are are noted to be general in nature which are 6. Ground Nos. 1 to 3 noted to be subsumed in the subsequent grounds taken separately in noted to be subsumed in the subsequent grounds taken separately in noted to be subsumed in the subsequent grounds taken separately

M/S. LALITHA JEWELLERY MART LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shrimanoj Kumar Aggarwal

1 to 3 are noted to be general in nature which are are noted to be general in nature which are 6. Ground Nos. 1 to 3 noted to be subsumed in the subsequent grounds taken separately in noted to be subsumed in the subsequent grounds taken separately in noted to be subsumed in the subsequent grounds taken separately

M/S. LALITHA JEWELLERY MART LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shrimanoj Kumar Aggarwal

1 to 3 are noted to be general in nature which are are noted to be general in nature which are 6. Ground Nos. 1 to 3 noted to be subsumed in the subsequent grounds taken separately in noted to be subsumed in the subsequent grounds taken separately in noted to be subsumed in the subsequent grounds taken separately