ALZARAFA TRAVEL & MANPOWER CONSULTANTS (P) LTD,ERNAKULAM vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, , KOCHI

Accordingly, Additional\nGround No. 1.1 raised by the Assessee vide Letter dated 15/08/2025\nis allowed

66,600/-. The CIT(A) rejected the\ncontention of the Assessee that the assessment should have been\nframed under Section 153A of the Act on the ground that the search\nwarrant was not in the name of the Assessee. The Assessee was not\nsatisfied with the relief granted by the Commission of Income Tax\n(Appeals), and therefore, challenged

VRINDAVAN BUILDERS PVT LTD,NAGALAND vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2012-13 to 2017-18 are allowed and the appeals filed by Revenue for assessment years 2013-14 to 2017-18 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

section 142(1), 142(2) and 142(3) of the Act. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding addition of Rs. 25,00,000/- made by the Ld. A.O on account of transfer made by P.S. Enterprise ignoring the submissions and evidences filed by the Appellant company. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred

VRINDAVAN BUILDERS PVT KTD,NAGALAND vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2012-13 to 2017-18 are allowed and the appeals filed by Revenue for assessment years 2013-14 to 2017-18 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

section 142(1), 142(2) and 142(3) of the Act. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding addition of Rs. 25,00,000/- made by the Ld. A.O on account of transfer made by P.S. Enterprise ignoring the submissions and evidences filed by the Appellant company. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred

VRINDAVAN BUILDERS PVT LTD,NAGALAND vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2012-13 to 2017-18 are allowed and the appeals filed by Revenue for assessment years 2013-14 to 2017-18 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

section 142(1), 142(2) and 142(3) of the Act. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding addition of Rs. 25,00,000/- made by the Ld. A.O on account of transfer made by P.S. Enterprise ignoring the submissions and evidences filed by the Appellant company. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KERALA vs. VRINDAVAN BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED, PATHANAMTHITTA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2012-13 to 2017-18 are allowed and the appeals filed by Revenue for assessment years 2013-14 to 2017-18 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

section 142(1), 142(2) and 142(3) of the Act. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding addition of Rs. 25,00,000/- made by the Ld. A.O on account of transfer made by P.S. Enterprise ignoring the submissions and evidences filed by the Appellant company. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM vs. VRINDAVAN BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED, PATHANAMTHITTA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2012-13 to 2017-18 are allowed and the appeals filed by Revenue for assessment years 2013-14 to 2017-18 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

section 142(1), 142(2) and 142(3) of the Act. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding addition of Rs. 25,00,000/- made by the Ld. A.O on account of transfer made by P.S. Enterprise ignoring the submissions and evidences filed by the Appellant company. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM vs. VRINDAVAN BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED, PATHANAMTHITTA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2012-13 to 2017-18 are allowed and the appeals filed by Revenue for assessment years 2013-14 to 2017-18 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

section 142(1), 142(2) and 142(3) of the Act. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding addition of Rs. 25,00,000/- made by the Ld. A.O on account of transfer made by P.S. Enterprise ignoring the submissions and evidences filed by the Appellant company. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred

VRINDAVAN BUILDERS PVT LTD,NAGALAND vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2012-13 to 2017-18 are allowed and the appeals filed by Revenue for assessment years 2013-14 to 2017-18 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

section 142(1), 142(2) and 142(3) of the Act. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding addition of Rs. 25,00,000/- made by the Ld. A.O on account of transfer made by P.S. Enterprise ignoring the submissions and evidences filed by the Appellant company. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred

VRINDAVAN BHAVAN PVT LTD,NAGALAND vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2012-13 to 2017-18 are allowed and the appeals filed by Revenue for assessment years 2013-14 to 2017-18 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

section 142(1), 142(2) and 142(3) of the Act. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding addition of Rs. 25,00,000/- made by the Ld. A.O on account of transfer made by P.S. Enterprise ignoring the submissions and evidences filed by the Appellant company. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred

VRINDAVAN BUILDERS PVT LTD,NAGALAND vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2012-13 to 2017-18 are allowed and the appeals filed by Revenue for assessment years 2013-14 to 2017-18 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

section 142(1), 142(2) and 142(3) of the Act. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding addition of Rs. 25,00,000/- made by the Ld. A.O on account of transfer made by P.S. Enterprise ignoring the submissions and evidences filed by the Appellant company. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM vs. VRINDAVAN BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED, KERALA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2012-13 to 2017-18 are allowed and the appeals filed by Revenue for assessment years 2013-14 to 2017-18 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

section 142(1), 142(2) and 142(3) of the Act. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding addition of Rs. 25,00,000/- made by the Ld. A.O on account of transfer made by P.S. Enterprise ignoring the submissions and evidences filed by the Appellant company. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM vs. VRINDAVAN BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED, PATHANAMTHITTA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2012-13 to 2017-18 are allowed and the appeals filed by Revenue for assessment years 2013-14 to 2017-18 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

section 142(1), 142(2) and 142(3) of the Act. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding addition of Rs. 25,00,000/- made by the Ld. A.O on account of transfer made by P.S. Enterprise ignoring the submissions and evidences filed by the Appellant company. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

66,172,146 - Varun Raj, Son of Assessee 17,456,000 12,639,629 4,657,243 4,000,000 8,415,500 • 47,168,372 - Arun Raj, Son of Assessee 500,000 -- - 4,950,000 13,900,000 13,544,460 32,894,460 - Pooja Raj, Daughter of Assessee -- -- 5,638.000 2,000,000 2,600,000 1

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

66,172,146 - Varun Raj, Son of Assessee 17,456,000 12,639,629 4,657,243 4,000,000 8,415,500 • 47,168,372 - Arun Raj, Son of Assessee 500,000 -- - 4,950,000 13,900,000 13,544,460 32,894,460 - Pooja Raj, Daughter of Assessee -- -- 5,638.000 2,000,000 2,600,000 1

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

66,172,146 - Varun Raj, Son of Assessee 17,456,000 12,639,629 4,657,243 4,000,000 8,415,500 • 47,168,372 - Arun Raj, Son of Assessee 500,000 -- - 4,950,000 13,900,000 13,544,460 32,894,460 - Pooja Raj, Daughter of Assessee -- -- 5,638.000 2,000,000 2,600,000 1

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

66,172,146 - Varun Raj, Son of Assessee 17,456,000 12,639,629 4,657,243 4,000,000 8,415,500 • 47,168,372 - Arun Raj, Son of Assessee 500,000 -- - 4,950,000 13,900,000 13,544,460 32,894,460 - Pooja Raj, Daughter of Assessee -- -- 5,638.000 2,000,000 2,600,000 1

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

66,172,146 - Varun Raj, Son of Assessee 17,456,000 12,639,629 4,657,243 4,000,000 8,415,500 • 47,168,372 - Arun Raj, Son of Assessee 500,000 -- - 4,950,000 13,900,000 13,544,460 32,894,460 - Pooja Raj, Daughter of Assessee -- -- 5,638.000 2,000,000 2,600,000 1

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

66,172,146 - Varun Raj, Son of Assessee 17,456,000 12,639,629 4,657,243 4,000,000 8,415,500 • 47,168,372 - Arun Raj, Son of Assessee 500,000 -- - 4,950,000 13,900,000 13,544,460 32,894,460 - Pooja Raj, Daughter of Assessee -- -- 5,638.000 2,000,000 2,600,000 1

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

66,172,146 - Varun Raj, Son of Assessee 17,456,000 12,639,629 4,657,243 4,000,000 8,415,500 • 47,168,372 - Arun Raj, Son of Assessee 500,000 -- - 4,950,000 13,900,000 13,544,460 32,894,460 - Pooja Raj, Daughter of Assessee -- -- 5,638.000 2,000,000 2,600,000 1