AADARSH SURANA, CHENNAI,CHENNAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as \"the\nAct\"]. The impugned order arises from the assessment order dated 29.12.2019\npassed u/s.143(3) of the Act by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,\nCorporate Circle-1(1), Chennai [hereinafter referred to as \"the Assessing\nOfficer\" or \"AO\"], pertaining to the Assessment Year 2017-18.\n2. The assessee

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

section 68. They are 1. Identity of creditor 2. Creditworthiness of creditor and 3. Genuineness of transaction. Only when these three things are established prima facie by placing relevant documentary evidence, the department is required to undertake further exercise. Merely proving identity of lender does not discharge the onus of assessee, if the capacity or creditworthiness has not been

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

section 68. They are 1. Identity of creditor 2. Creditworthiness of creditor and 3. Genuineness of transaction. Only when these three things are established prima facie by placing relevant documentary evidence, the department is required to undertake further exercise. Merely proving identity of lender does not discharge the onus of assessee, if the capacity or creditworthiness has not been

SHANTHI FORTUNE (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,TIRUPUR vs. ACIT TDS CIRCLE, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue and the CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2385/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Shanthi Fortune (India) Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited, Income Tax, Door No. 38, Trichy Road, Tds Circle, Coimbatore. Palladam 641 664. [Pan: Aajcs4289D] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2557/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 & C.O. No. 88/Chny/2019 [In I.T.A. No.2557/Chny/2018] The Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/S. Shanthi Fortune (India) Tds Ward, No. 121, Private Limited, Sixty Feet Road, Tirupur 641 602. Door No. 38, Trichy Road, Palladam 641 664. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) Department By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit Assessee By : Shri N Arjun Raj, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 2, Coimbatore, Dated 25.06.2018 Relevant To The Assessment

68,784/- 194A ₹.85,31,078/- ₹.1,19,84,247/- ₹.2,05,15,325/- Total ₹.91,45,957/- ₹.1,30,38,152/- ₹.2,21,84,109/- 3. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and besides challenging on merits, the assessee also disputed that the order giving effect to the order of the ITAT passed

ITO TDS WARD, TIRUPUR vs. SHANTHI FORTUNE (INDIA) PVT. LTD., TIRUPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue and the CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2385/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Shanthi Fortune (India) Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited, Income Tax, Door No. 38, Trichy Road, Tds Circle, Coimbatore. Palladam 641 664. [Pan: Aajcs4289D] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2557/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 & C.O. No. 88/Chny/2019 [In I.T.A. No.2557/Chny/2018] The Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/S. Shanthi Fortune (India) Tds Ward, No. 121, Private Limited, Sixty Feet Road, Tirupur 641 602. Door No. 38, Trichy Road, Palladam 641 664. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) Department By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit Assessee By : Shri N Arjun Raj, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 2, Coimbatore, Dated 25.06.2018 Relevant To The Assessment

68,784/- 194A ₹.85,31,078/- ₹.1,19,84,247/- ₹.2,05,15,325/- Total ₹.91,45,957/- ₹.1,30,38,152/- ₹.2,21,84,109/- 3. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and besides challenging on merits, the assessee also disputed that the order giving effect to the order of the ITAT passed

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

254 (Hyderabad - Trib.):\nShare premium received from non-residents can neither be assessed under Section 56(1) or 56(2)(viib).\n7.5.18 I have considered the order of the AO and the submissions made by the assessee. The general scheme of the Income tax Act is that only revenue receipts have to be taxed; capital receipts cannot be taxed

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

254 (Hyderabad\nTrib.):\nShare premium received from non-residents can neither\nbe assessed under Section 56(1) or 56(2)(viib).\n7.5.18 I have considered the order of the AO and the\nsubmissions made by the assessee. The general scheme\nof the Income tax Act is that only revenue receipts have\nto be taxed; capital receipts cannot be taxed

M/S. TAFE MOTORS AMD TRACTORS LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-3(1), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1511, 1512 & 1513/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2017-18 & 2018-19 V. M/S.Tafe Motors & Tractors Ltd., The Dcit, New No.77, Old No.35, Corporate Cirlce-3(1), Pottipati Plaza, Chennai. Nungambakkam High Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034. [Pan: Aacct 2459 B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

68,49,425 Rs.15,23,62,000) for which weighted deduction claim amounting to Rs.72,43,713/- was to be disallowed. 2) Further, seen from the details to miscellaneous expenditure, Rs.3,64,30,458/-and Rs.2,85,29,647/- was spent on product development and tool development cost respectively. The above expenditure on tool development was not incurred

M/S. TAFE MOTORS AMD TRACTORS LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-3(1), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1511, 1512 & 1513/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2017-18 & 2018-19 V. M/S.Tafe Motors & Tractors Ltd., The Dcit, New No.77, Old No.35, Corporate Cirlce-3(1), Pottipati Plaza, Chennai. Nungambakkam High Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034. [Pan: Aacct 2459 B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

68,49,425 Rs.15,23,62,000) for which weighted deduction claim amounting to Rs.72,43,713/- was to be disallowed. 2) Further, seen from the details to miscellaneous expenditure, Rs.3,64,30,458/-and Rs.2,85,29,647/- was spent on product development and tool development cost respectively. The above expenditure on tool development was not incurred

M/S. TAFE MOTORS AMD TRACTORS LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-3(1), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1511, 1512 & 1513/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2017-18 & 2018-19 V. M/S.Tafe Motors & Tractors Ltd., The Dcit, New No.77, Old No.35, Corporate Cirlce-3(1), Pottipati Plaza, Chennai. Nungambakkam High Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034. [Pan: Aacct 2459 B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

68,49,425 Rs.15,23,62,000) for which weighted deduction claim amounting to Rs.72,43,713/- was to be disallowed. 2) Further, seen from the details to miscellaneous expenditure, Rs.3,64,30,458/-and Rs.2,85,29,647/- was spent on product development and tool development cost respectively. The above expenditure on tool development was not incurred

ACIT NON CORP CIRCLE 1 (1) FORMERLY KNOWN AS BUSINESS CIRCLE 1, CHENNAI vs. M/S DEOLITE HASKINS & SELLS, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri A.Mohan Alankamony

254 CTR 228 (SC), affirming the decision of Madras High Court in (2008) 300 ITR 157 (Mad.), the whole addition was made solely on the basis of statement u/s 133A and no other material was found, in that situation, it was held that the such statement has no evidentiary value. 5.26. In the case of Aradhna Estate

ACIT NON CORP CIRCLE 1 (1) FORMERLY KNOWN AS BUSINESS CIRCLE 1, CHENNAI vs. M/S DEOLITE HASKINS & SELLS, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri A.Mohan Alankamony

254 CTR 228 (SC), affirming the decision of Madras High Court in (2008) 300 ITR 157 (Mad.), the whole addition was made solely on the basis of statement u/s 133A and no other material was found, in that situation, it was held that the such statement has no evidentiary value. 5.26. In the case of Aradhna Estate

ACIT NON CORP CIRCLE 1 (1) FORMERLY KNOWN AS BUSINESS CIRCLE 1, CHENNAI vs. M/S DEOLITE HASKINS & SELLS, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri A.Mohan Alankamony

254 CTR 228 (SC), affirming the decision of Madras High Court in (2008) 300 ITR 157 (Mad.), the whole addition was made solely on the basis of statement u/s 133A and no other material was found, in that situation, it was held that the such statement has no evidentiary value. 5.26. In the case of Aradhna Estate

THE INDIA CEMENTS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1) CHENNAI, CHENNAI

Section 801Α.\n10.1 Aggrieved by the above order, the assessee is now in appeal before\nus.\n10.2 Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee, contended that the\nissue stands squarely covered by the decision of this Tribunal in the\nassessee's own case for AY 2018-19 by this Tribunal in IT(TP)A No.\n66/Chny/2022, vide order

M/S SNJ DISTILLERS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 154/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Snj Distillers Pvt Ltd., Assistant Commissioner Of No. 72, Greams Road, V. Income Tax, Thousand Light, Central Circle 3(2), Chennai – 600 006. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aalcs-9312-F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. D. Anand, Advocate : Shri. Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.07.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.08.2023

254 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act dated 12.01.2021, and has made additions towards unexplained seized cash of Rs. 3,68,74,080/-, by observing that since additions made by the AO towards cash receipts has been deleted by the ITAT, the source for the cash found and seized amounting to Rs. 3,68,74,080/- remains unexplained and needs

LAKSHMI GAYATHRI ARVAPALLI,CHENNAI vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.847 & 848/Chny/2023 िनधा<रण वष< /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & 2008-09 M/S. Lakshmi Gayathri Arvapalli, The Asst. Commissioner Of No.1, Palat Madhavan Road, Vs. Income Tax, Mahalingapuram, Central Circle-1(2), Chennai – 600 034. Chennai. [Pan: Aaipa 3035F]

254(1) of the ITA Nos.847 & 848/Chny/2023 :- 2 -: Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) vide orders dated 23.12.2019 & 24.12.2019, respectively. 2. The facts in both the appeals of the assessee are identical and issue is common hence, we proceed to pass a common order. For brevity, we shall take up the appeal in ITA No.847/Chny/2023

LAKSHMI GAYATHRI ARVAPALLI,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIR-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.847 & 848/Chny/2023 िनधा<रण वष< /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & 2008-09 M/S. Lakshmi Gayathri Arvapalli, The Asst. Commissioner Of No.1, Palat Madhavan Road, Vs. Income Tax, Mahalingapuram, Central Circle-1(2), Chennai – 600 034. Chennai. [Pan: Aaipa 3035F]

254(1) of the ITA Nos.847 & 848/Chny/2023 :- 2 -: Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) vide orders dated 23.12.2019 & 24.12.2019, respectively. 2. The facts in both the appeals of the assessee are identical and issue is common hence, we proceed to pass a common order. For brevity, we shall take up the appeal in ITA No.847/Chny/2023

TR PCHAMUTHU NOW KNOWN AS TR PAARIVENDHAR,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

68 or atleast under section 69. It is incumbent on the Revenue authorities to first determine with exactitude the nature of income. Thereafter its exigibility with reference to the particular provision of law. This was not done. No categorical finding is rendered in the impugned order apropos the same. We, therefore, in the interest of justice set aside

SUNDARAM SANKAR ANAND,KARUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COIMBATORE

In the result the appeals of the assessee are disposed of as below:

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2850,2851,2852 & 2853/Chny/2024, 2910, 2911 & 2912/Chny/2024 धनिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Sundaram Sankar Anand, The Assistant Commissioner Of No.63-B-7, Mayanur, Vs Income Tax, M Kaspa Sandai Peatai, . Central Circle – 2, Coimbatore. Krishnarayapuram Taluk, Karur – 639 102 [Pan:Bvips-1149-E] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. V. Alagappa, C.A. प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Mr. M.Murali, Cit (Virtual) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25.06.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am:

section 68. 7.3.18 In view of above, I am of considered view that AO has rightly added Rs.28,75,856/- towards Sundry Creditors, in hands of appellant for the year. Consequently, grounds of appeal of appellant related to the issue are Dismissed. 7.4.2 It is noticed that appellant failed to furnish any details with regard to gift