Mad) (ii) Ayesha Hospitals (P) Ltd (2007) 291 ITR 266 (Mad) (iii) CIT v. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd.

15 Taxmann.com 392High Court2011#13454 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 263

Judgments citing Mad) (ii) Ayesha Hospitals (P) Ltd (2007) 291 ITR 266 (Mad) (iii) CIT v. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd.

Hi-Style India Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Corp Circle 2(2)/CIT(A), Chennai

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

ITA 910/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.910/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 Hi-Style India Private Limited, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of 1652 G, 2Nd Avenue, Anna Nagar, Income Tax, Chennai 600 040. Corporate Circle 2(2), Chennai. [Pan: Aacch2545L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Babu Peram, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 14.08.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.08.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 06.02.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Raised 2 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration Is Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified

For Appellant: Shri Babu Peram, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एसएस िव"ने" रिव, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जगदीश, लेखा सद" के सम" । Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri Jagadish, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.910/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 Hi-Style India private Limited, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of 1652 G, 2nd Avenue, Anna Nagar, Income Tax, Chennai 600 040. Corporate Circle 2(2), Chennai. [PAN: AACCH2545L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Babu Peram, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms.…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1093/MUM/2018[1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2019AY 1997-98

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 1997-98 & Assessment Year: 1998-99 State Bank Of India Principal Commissioner Of Financial Reporting & Vs. Income Tax-2, Mumbai. Taxation Department, 3Rd Floor , Corporate Centre, Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 Pan No. Aaacs8577K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Percy J. Pardiwalla &For Respondent: Mr. B.B. Rajendra Prasad
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(2)(v)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 1997-98 & Assessment Year: 1998-99 State Bank of India Principal Commissioner of Financial Reporting and Vs. Income Tax-2, Mumbai. Taxation Department, 3rd Floor , Corporate Centre, Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 PAN No. AAACS8577K Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Percy J. Pardiwalla & Mr. Nitesh Joshi, ARs Revenue by : Mr. B.B. Rajendra Prasad Mr. Choudhary Arunkumar Singh, DRs Last Date of Hearing : 05/07/2019 Date of pronou…

DCIT, Chennai vs. N.Raghunath, Chennai

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3224/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jun 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Mrs. Pavuna Sundari, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. T.N. Seetharaman, Advocate

…A) relying on the following decisions a) CIT Vs Ayesha Hospitals P. Ltd (2007) 292 ITR 266 (Mad) b) Thiru Arooran Sugars Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2013) 350 ITR 324 (Mad) c) CIT Vs Armour Consultants P. Ltd (2013) 355 ITR 418 (Mad) d) CIT Vs. Amrutanina Ltd. (2011) 15 Taxmann.com 392 (Mad) e) M/s. Sundaram BNP Paribas Asset Management Company Ltd. Vs. ACIT ITA No. 518 & 519/Mds/2010 f) M/s. Emdee Apparels Vs. ACIT (2012) 28 Taxmann.com 10 (Bang.) and on a detailed order allowed the appeal after distinguishing the case of M/s. A B T Ltd. The CIT(A) while allowing the appeal took cognizance of how the Jurisdictional…

DCIT, Chennai vs. N.Raghunath, Chennai

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3223/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jun 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Mrs. Pavuna Sundari, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. T.N. Seetharaman, Advocate

…A) relying on the following decisions a) CIT Vs Ayesha Hospitals P. Ltd (2007) 292 ITR 266 (Mad) b) Thiru Arooran Sugars Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2013) 350 ITR 324 (Mad) c) CIT Vs Armour Consultants P. Ltd (2013) 355 ITR 418 (Mad) d) CIT Vs. Amrutanina Ltd. (2011) 15 Taxmann.com 392 (Mad) e) M/s. Sundaram BNP Paribas Asset Management Company Ltd. Vs. ACIT ITA No. 518 & 519/Mds/2010 f) M/s. Emdee Apparels Vs. ACIT (2012) 28 Taxmann.com 10 (Bang.) and on a detailed order allowed the appeal after distinguishing the case of M/s. A B T Ltd. The CIT(A) while allowing the appeal took cognizance of how the Jurisdictional…

M/S. Ripe Component Technologies Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 163/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Oct 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2007-08 Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Ripe Component Technologies Pvt. Ltd., B-8/14, Tax, Circle- 15(1), C.R. First Floor, Vasant Vihar, New Building, I.P. Estate, New Delhi Delhi Pan : Aadcr2107F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. S.K. Chaturvedi, Ca Respondent By Sh. F.R. Meena, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 23.08.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 21.10.2016 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against Order Dated 19/07/2011 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Xviii, New Delhi For Assessment Year 2007-08 Raising Following Grounds: “1. The Learned Assessing Officer Erred On Facts In Law In Making An Addition Of Rs.31,97,677/- On Account Of Depreciation Claimed On Temporary Erections & Allowing Only Rs.3,19,767/- As Depreciation. 2. The Appellant Seeks Permission To Modify And/Or Add Any Other Ground/Grounds Of Appeal As The Circumstances Might Require Or Justify Before Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

…learned Authorized Representative relied on following decisions: i. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Industrial Cables (India) Ltd., 254 ITR 267 (P&H) ii. ACIT Vs. Nippo Batteries Co. Ltd., ITA No. 1139/1140/Mds/2010 iii. CIT Vs. Amrutanjan Finance Ltd. (2011) 15 Taxmann.com 392 (Mad.) iv. Peri (India) (P.) Ltd. Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), [2016] 159 ITD 541/71 taxmann.com 79 (Mumbai-Trib.) 5. On the other hand, the learned Sr. Departmental Representative relied on the orders of the authorities below and submitted that the construction carried out was in the nature of improvement of leasehold premi…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1431/CHNY/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Apr 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Milind S. Kothari, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Madhukar Bhusari, CIT
Section 139Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजार",लेखा सद"य एवं "ीजी. पवन कुमार,"या"यकसद"यकेसम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1180, 1181, 1182, 1183 & 1184/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment years : 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-2010 M/s. Cholamandalam Investment Vs. The Assistant Commissioner and Finance Company Limited, of Income Tax, Dare House,, 1st Street, Company Circle I(3) 2, N.S.C. Bose Road, Chennai. Chennai 600 001. [PAN AAACC 1226H] अपीलाथ"/Appell…

Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1180/CHNY/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Apr 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Milind S. Kothari, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Madhukar Bhusari, CIT
Section 139Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजार",लेखा सद"य एवं "ीजी. पवन कुमार,"या"यकसद"यकेसम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1180, 1181, 1182, 1183 & 1184/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment years : 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-2010 M/s. Cholamandalam Investment Vs. The Assistant Commissioner and Finance Company Limited, of Income Tax, Dare House,, 1st Street, Company Circle I(3) 2, N.S.C. Bose Road, Chennai. Chennai 600 001. [PAN AAACC 1226H] अपीलाथ"/Appell…

Mad) (ii) Ayesha Hospitals (P) Ltd (2007) 291 ITR 266 (Mad) (iii) CIT v. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. (15 Taxmann.com 392) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax