ITO, NCW - I (4),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. NITHYASUDHA COMBINES,, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as Cross Objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.576 & 577/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 & C.O. Nos. 06 & 07/Chny/2021 [In I.T.A. No. 576 & 577/Chny/2020] The Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/S. Nithyasudha Combines, Non Corporate Ward 1(4), No. 8/20, Second Cross Street, Chennai – 600 034. Nandanam Extension, Nandanam, Chennai 600 085. [Pan: Aakfn6811A] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) Department By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit Assessee By : Shri R. Venkata Raman, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 25.04.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.05.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 2, Chennai, Both Dated 16.12.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2015-16 Passed Against Deletion Of Quantum Addition Made Under Section 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] As Well As Deletion Of Penalty Levied Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Act. The First

c) of the Act. The first 2 I.T.A. Nos.576 & 577/Chny/20 & C.O. Nos.06 & 07/Chny/21 effective ground raised in the appeal of the Revenue [ground No. 2 to 4] is against the delay condoned by the ld. CIT(A). 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income for the assessment year

ITO, NCW - I (4),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. NITHYASUDHA COMBINES,, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as Cross Objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.576 & 577/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 & C.O. Nos. 06 & 07/Chny/2021 [In I.T.A. No. 576 & 577/Chny/2020] The Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/S. Nithyasudha Combines, Non Corporate Ward 1(4), No. 8/20, Second Cross Street, Chennai – 600 034. Nandanam Extension, Nandanam, Chennai 600 085. [Pan: Aakfn6811A] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) Department By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit Assessee By : Shri R. Venkata Raman, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 25.04.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.05.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 2, Chennai, Both Dated 16.12.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2015-16 Passed Against Deletion Of Quantum Addition Made Under Section 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] As Well As Deletion Of Penalty Levied Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Act. The First

c) of the Act. The first 2 I.T.A. Nos.576 & 577/Chny/20 & C.O. Nos.06 & 07/Chny/21 effective ground raised in the appeal of the Revenue [ground No. 2 to 4] is against the delay condoned by the ld. CIT(A). 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income for the assessment year

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

c) & (e), the CIT has been empowered to take an appropriate action under section 263 of the Act In category of cases falling under clause (d) and (f), appropriate action under section 147 of the Act can be taken to tax the income which has escaped assessment or had remained to be taxed. There can be situations where

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-:

c) & (e), the CIT has been empowered to take an appropriate action under section 263 of the Act In category of cases falling under clause (d) and (f), appropriate action under section 147 of the Act can be taken to tax the income which has escaped assessment or had remained to be taxed. There can be situations where

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

c) & (e), the CIT has been empowered to take an appropriate action under section 263 of the Act In category of cases falling under clause (d) and (f), appropriate action under section 147 of the Act can be taken to tax the income which has escaped assessment or had remained to be taxed. There can be situations where

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

c) & (e), the CIT has been empowered to take an appropriate action under section 263 of the Act In category of cases falling under clause (d) and (f), appropriate action under section 147 of the Act can be taken to tax the income which has escaped assessment or had remained to be taxed. There can be situations where

PARRY INFRASTRUCTURE CO P LTD. ,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(1) , CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

251 of the Act were not confined to the matter, which had been considered by the Income Tax Officer, as the first appellate authority is vested with all the wide powers of the assessing officer may have while making the assessment, but the issue whether these wide powers also include the power to discover a new source of income

M/S. CEEBROS HOTELS PVT. LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CC - 1 (2),, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

251 ITR 61. The sum and substance of arguments of the assessee before the learned CIT(A) are that interest paid on loan borrowed for the purpose of business cannot be disallowed u/s.36(1)(iii) of the Act, when such business has been commenced and further revenue has been recognized 11 from the business. The assessee further contended that

SUNDARAM SUBRAMANIAN REP. BY LEGAL HEIR S SUNDARAM,PUDUKKOTTAI vs. ITO, CIRCLE-2(1), TRICHY

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed

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

1), 2/8, Manimaheser, Trichy. Isuherary Agraharam, Aranthangi, Pudukkottai – 614 616. [PAN: AOXPS-6354-Q] (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) (()यथ'/Respondent) अपीलाथ' क* ओर से/Appellant by : Shri. Y. Sridhar, F.C.A. ()यथ' क* ओर से/Respondent by : Shri. Shiva Srinivas, C.I.T. सुनवाई क* तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 02.12.2025 घोषणा क* तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 12.01.2026 आदेश

SUNDARAM SUBRAMANIAN,PUDUKKOTTAI vs. ITO, CIRCLE-2(1), TRICHY

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed

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

1), 2/8, Manimaheser, Trichy. Isuherary Agraharam, Aranthangi, Pudukkottai – 614 616. [PAN: AOXPS-6354-Q] (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) (()यथ'/Respondent) अपीलाथ' क* ओर से/Appellant by : Shri. Y. Sridhar, F.C.A. ()यथ' क* ओर से/Respondent by : Shri. Shiva Srinivas, C.I.T. सुनवाई क* तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 02.12.2025 घोषणा क* तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 12.01.2026 आदेश

SHRI. MOOLCHAND KIRAN KUMAR JAIN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment years 2020-21 & 2021-22 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1417 & 1418/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2020-21 & 2021-22 Shri. Moolchand Kiran Kumar Deputy Commissioner Of Jain, V. Income-Tax, No. 123, Usman Road, Central Circle 1(4), T. Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Achpm-2247-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. D. Anand, Advocate : Shri. V. Nandakumar, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26.03.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.04.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

251/-, which was the same income as declared in the return of income filed for the relevant assessment year u/s. 139(1) of the Act. 4. The case was selected for scrutiny and during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer on analysis :-5-: ITA. No: 511/Chny/2022 of financial statements of the assessee noticed that, the assessee has borrowed

SHRI. MOOLCHAND KIRAN KUMAR JAIN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment years 2020-21 & 2021-22 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1417 & 1418/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2020-21 & 2021-22 Shri. Moolchand Kiran Kumar Deputy Commissioner Of Jain, V. Income-Tax, No. 123, Usman Road, Central Circle 1(4), T. Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Achpm-2247-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. D. Anand, Advocate : Shri. V. Nandakumar, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26.03.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.04.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

251/-, which was the same income as declared in the return of income filed for the relevant assessment year u/s. 139(1) of the Act. 4. The case was selected for scrutiny and during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer on analysis :-5-: ITA. No: 511/Chny/2022 of financial statements of the assessee noticed that, the assessee has borrowed

K.SUNDARARAJ,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.936, 937, 938, 939, 940, 941 & 942 /Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003- 04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07)

68,303/- 01.07.2009 2001-02 "27,77,737/- 23.06.2008 2002-03 "67,448/- 30.03.2010 2003-04 "6,57,200/- 19.06.2009 2004-05 "2,78,965/- 19.06.2009 2005-06 "4,83,541/- 30.03.2010 2006-07 "6,53,121/- 30.03.2010 Against this, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 2.2 Against sustenance of penalty, the assessee

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. K.SUNDARAJ, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.936, 937, 938, 939, 940, 941 & 942 /Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003- 04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07)

68,303/- 01.07.2009 2001-02 "27,77,737/- 23.06.2008 2002-03 "67,448/- 30.03.2010 2003-04 "6,57,200/- 19.06.2009 2004-05 "2,78,965/- 19.06.2009 2005-06 "4,83,541/- 30.03.2010 2006-07 "6,53,121/- 30.03.2010 Against this, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 2.2 Against sustenance of penalty, the assessee

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. K.SUNDARAJ, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.936, 937, 938, 939, 940, 941 & 942 /Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003- 04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07)

68,303/- 01.07.2009 2001-02 "27,77,737/- 23.06.2008 2002-03 "67,448/- 30.03.2010 2003-04 "6,57,200/- 19.06.2009 2004-05 "2,78,965/- 19.06.2009 2005-06 "4,83,541/- 30.03.2010 2006-07 "6,53,121/- 30.03.2010 Against this, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 2.2 Against sustenance of penalty, the assessee

K.SUNDARARAJ,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.936, 937, 938, 939, 940, 941 & 942 /Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003- 04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07)

68,303/- 01.07.2009 2001-02 "27,77,737/- 23.06.2008 2002-03 "67,448/- 30.03.2010 2003-04 "6,57,200/- 19.06.2009 2004-05 "2,78,965/- 19.06.2009 2005-06 "4,83,541/- 30.03.2010 2006-07 "6,53,121/- 30.03.2010 Against this, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 2.2 Against sustenance of penalty, the assessee

K.SUNDARARAJ,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.936, 937, 938, 939, 940, 941 & 942 /Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003- 04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07)

68,303/- 01.07.2009 2001-02 "27,77,737/- 23.06.2008 2002-03 "67,448/- 30.03.2010 2003-04 "6,57,200/- 19.06.2009 2004-05 "2,78,965/- 19.06.2009 2005-06 "4,83,541/- 30.03.2010 2006-07 "6,53,121/- 30.03.2010 Against this, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 2.2 Against sustenance of penalty, the assessee

K.SUNDARARAJ,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.936, 937, 938, 939, 940, 941 & 942 /Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003- 04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07)

68,303/- 01.07.2009 2001-02 "27,77,737/- 23.06.2008 2002-03 "67,448/- 30.03.2010 2003-04 "6,57,200/- 19.06.2009 2004-05 "2,78,965/- 19.06.2009 2005-06 "4,83,541/- 30.03.2010 2006-07 "6,53,121/- 30.03.2010 Against this, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 2.2 Against sustenance of penalty, the assessee