DCIT, CHENNAI vs. JAGATHRAKSKAN SRINISHA, CHENNAI

302 (3,060 gms)\nAY 2016-17\n45,50,376\n39,13,497 (1,350 gms)\nTotal\n4,52,07,376\n2,18,80,032\n11. Without prejudice while before Ld CIT(A) the ‘A' submitted the value of gold\njewellery purchased by ‘A’between

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. SHRI S. MOORTHY, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3091/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

68 of the Act, said books of account ceased to exist and hence, those books cannot be relied upon to make addition towards unexplained credit u/s.68 of the Act. This legal position is 8 I.TA. No. 3091/Chny/2019 supported by the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan in the case of CIT vs. G.K. Contractor, supra, where

JAYALAKSHMI ALLOYS INDIA (P) LTD,COIMBATORE vs. ITO, CORP WARD -2, COIMBATORE

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 50/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Jayalakshmi Alloys India (P) Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, S.F. No. 190, Kurichi New Town, Vs. Corporate Ward 2, Lic Colony, Sidco, Coimbatore. Coimbatore. [Pan:Aaccj1929N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : None ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G.N. Ragavendra Rao, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 24.07.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.07.2019 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) 1, Coimbatore, Dated 07.11.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Only Effective Ground Raised In The Appeal Of The Assessee Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Addition Made Under Section 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

302/- shown against M/s. Aditya Enterprises. Since the assessee could not furnish any details against the credit, the Assessing Officer treated the same as unexplained credit under section 68

ANTHIAH PANCRAS,TIRUVANNAMALAI vs. ITO WARD 1, THIRUVANNAMALAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for ay: 2008-09 shall

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar

68,15,675/- (Rs.1,91,50,575/- - Rs.23,34,900/-) between the value shown in agreement to sell and sale deed, proposed to make additions to the income of the assessee as an unexplained investment u/s.69 of the Act , wherein it was proposed by the AO to bring to income-tax an amount of Rs.82,00,000/- as income

ANTHIAH PANCRAS,TIRUVANNAMALAI vs. ITO WARD 1, THIRUVANNAMALAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for ay: 2008-09 shall

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar

68,15,675/- (Rs.1,91,50,575/- - Rs.23,34,900/-) between the value shown in agreement to sell and sale deed, proposed to make additions to the income of the assessee as an unexplained investment u/s.69 of the Act , wherein it was proposed by the AO to bring to income-tax an amount of Rs.82,00,000/- as income

MINAL SHROFF,RS PURAM TAMILNADU vs. ITO, NON CORP WARD -2(3), COIMBATORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

302, that “if a statutory\nauthority has been vested with jurisdiction, he has to exercise it according\nto its own discretion. If discretion is exercised under the direction or in\ncompliance with some higher authority's instructions, then it will be a\ncase of failure to exercise discretion all together.” It has to be kept in\nmind that satisfaction recorded

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

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

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

SUNPENTA MINING SERVICE PVT. LTD.,SALEM vs. DCIT, CIRLCE-1(1), SALEM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Jagadishआयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3263/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

302. [PAN:AAVCS 5476L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : S/Shri P.M.Kathir, G. Akash, Advocates ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent by : Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 10.07.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement : 09.10.2025 आदेश / O R D E R MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member) The present appeal is filled

M/S. V.V.VANNIAPERUMAL & SONS,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. PCIT-2, CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

302(SC)and also Co- ordinate Bench of ITAT in the case of DCIT vs. Toyo Engineering India Ltd., ITA No.3279/Mum/2008. 4.6 The AO by applying the above ratio, recomputed the depreciation being difference between the book value of the asset and the liabilities transferred to goodwill account of the assessee company which worked out to Rs.14

M/S. V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS LTD.,,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

302(SC)and also Co- ordinate Bench of ITAT in the case of DCIT vs. Toyo Engineering India Ltd., ITA No.3279/Mum/2008. 4.6 The AO by applying the above ratio, recomputed the depreciation being difference between the book value of the asset and the liabilities transferred to goodwill account of the assessee company which worked out to Rs.14

M/S. V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS LTD.,,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

302(SC)and also Co- ordinate Bench of ITAT in the case of DCIT vs. Toyo Engineering India Ltd., ITA No.3279/Mum/2008. 4.6 The AO by applying the above ratio, recomputed the depreciation being difference between the book value of the asset and the liabilities transferred to goodwill account of the assessee company which worked out to Rs.14

M/S. V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS LTD.,,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

302(SC)and also Co- ordinate Bench of ITAT in the case of DCIT vs. Toyo Engineering India Ltd., ITA No.3279/Mum/2008. 4.6 The AO by applying the above ratio, recomputed the depreciation being difference between the book value of the asset and the liabilities transferred to goodwill account of the assessee company which worked out to Rs.14

M/S. V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS LTD.,,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

302(SC)and also Co- ordinate Bench of ITAT in the case of DCIT vs. Toyo Engineering India Ltd., ITA No.3279/Mum/2008. 4.6 The AO by applying the above ratio, recomputed the depreciation being difference between the book value of the asset and the liabilities transferred to goodwill account of the assessee company which worked out to Rs.14

M/S. V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS LTD.,,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

302(SC)and also Co- ordinate Bench of ITAT in the case of DCIT vs. Toyo Engineering India Ltd., ITA No.3279/Mum/2008. 4.6 The AO by applying the above ratio, recomputed the depreciation being difference between the book value of the asset and the liabilities transferred to goodwill account of the assessee company which worked out to Rs.14

M/S. V.V.V. & SONS EDIBLE OILS LTD.,,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

302(SC)and also Co- ordinate Bench of ITAT in the case of DCIT vs. Toyo Engineering India Ltd., ITA No.3279/Mum/2008. 4.6 The AO by applying the above ratio, recomputed the depreciation being difference between the book value of the asset and the liabilities transferred to goodwill account of the assessee company which worked out to Rs.14