Tourism Finance Corporation of India Ltd. v. JCIT

MUTHUSAMY NAGARAJ,ERODE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ERODE RANGE ERODE

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

…he purpose of initiation of penalty proceedings under Section 271E of the Act. We have already discussed above that provisions of Section 271E and 271D of the Act are in pari materia. When there is a decision of the Supreme Court, it is the bounden (2013) 3 5 2 ITR 1 duty of an adjudicating authority, be it an income tax authority or any other civil authority or for that matter any court in the country, to comply with the decision of the Supreme Court. 9. Following the Hon’ble Courts decisions (supra), this Tribunal in several cases [T Shiju v. JCIT in ITA No.2829/Chny/2018 dated07.06.2019] has held that record…

SILUVAIKANI CHELLIAH,CHENGALPATTU vs. ITO, NCW-22(6),, TAMBARAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

…he purpose of initiation of penalty proceedings under Section 271E of the Act. We have already discussed above that provisions of Section 271E and 271D of the Act are in pari materia. When there is a decision of the Supreme Court, it is the bounden (2013) 3 5 2 ITR 1 duty of an adjudicating authority, be it an income tax authority or any other civil authority or for that matter any court in the country, to comply with the decision of the Supreme Court.” 11. Following the Hon’ble Courts decisions (supra), this Tribunal in several cases [T Shiju v. JCIT in ITA No.2829/Chny/2018 dated 07.06.2019] has held that re…

SRI SANKARANARAYANAN KRISHNAMOORTHY,CHENNAI vs. ITO-1(2) INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

…he purpose of initiation of penalty proceedings under Section 271E of the Act. We have already discussed above that provisions of Section 271E and 271D of the Act are in pari materia. When there is a decision of the Supreme Court, it is the bounden (2013) 3 5 2 ITR 1 duty of an adjudicating authority, be it an income tax authority or any other civil authority or for that matter any court in the country, to comply with the decision of the Supreme Court. 9. Following the Hon’ble Courts decisions (supra), this Tribunal in several cases [T Shiju v. JCIT in ITA No.2829/Chny/2018 dated07.06.2019] has held that record…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, NON-CORPORATE CIRCLE- vs. AKMG ALLOYS PRIVATE LTD.,, DINDIGUL

In the result, Cross-Objection filed by the assessee is allowed and

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

…he purpose of initiation of penalty proceedings under Section 271E of the Act. We have already discussed above that provisions of Section 271E and 271D of the Act are in pari materia. When there is a decision of the Supreme Court, it is the bounden (2013) 3 5 2 ITR 1 duty of an adjudicating authority, be it an income tax authority or any other civil authority or for that matter any court in the country, to comply with the decision of the Supreme Court. 9. Following the Hon’ble Courts decisions (supra), this Tribunal in several cases [T Shiju v. JCIT in ITA No.2829/Chny/2018 dated07.06.2019] has held that record…

M/S. SHRI SHI vs. HAKTHI FOUNDATIONS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAIVS.ADDL.CIT, CENTRAL RANGE-3,, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

…Section 271E of the Act. We have already M/s. Shri Shivshakthi Foundations Pvt. Ltd. :: 6 :: discussed above that provisions of Section 271E and 271D of the Act are in pari materia. When there is a decision of the Supreme Court, it is the bounden (2013) 3 5 2 ITR 1 duty of an adjudicating authority, be it an income tax authority or any other civil authority or for that matter any court in the country, to comply with the decision of the Supreme Court. 6. Following the Hon’ble Courts decisions (supra), this Tribunal in several cases [T Shiju v. JCIT in ITA No.2829/Chny/2018 dated 07.06.2019] has held that recor…

IDFC LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CO. CIRCLE - II (3),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.877/Chny/2018 & 677/Chny/2020 िनधा&रण वष& /Assessment Years: 2010-11

…entures is directly and inextricably related to the business of providing long term finance of infrastructure development. Hence, the issue is covered by the decision of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Tourism Finance Corporation of India Ltd., vs. JCIT, [2010] 2 ITR 1, wherein exactly on identical facts, the assessee was held to be eligible for claim of deduction u/s.36(1)(viii) of the Act. The Delhi Tribunal held as under:- "22…. Regarding interest on debentures, we are in agreement with the learned authorised representative for the assessee that this income is in the nature of interest on loans because debenture…

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI vs. IDFC LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.877/Chny/2018 & 677/Chny/2020 िनधा&रण वष& /Assessment Years: 2010-11

…entures is directly and inextricably related to the business of providing long term finance of infrastructure development. Hence, the issue is covered by the decision of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Tourism Finance Corporation of India Ltd., vs. JCIT, [2010] 2 ITR 1, wherein exactly on identical facts, the assessee was held to be eligible for claim of deduction u/s.36(1)(viii) of the Act. The Delhi Tribunal held as under:- "22…. Regarding interest on debentures, we are in agreement with the learned authorised representative for the assessee that this income is in the nature of interest on loans because debenture…

IDFC LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT COMPANY CIRCLE II(3), CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.877/Chny/2018 & 677/Chny/2020 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2010-11 Idfc Limited, (Erstwhile Known As Infrastructure Vs. Income Tax, Development Finance Company Circle-Ii(3), Limited), Krm Tower, 8Th Floor, No.1, Harrington Road, Chetpet, Chennai – 600 031. Pan: Aaaci 2663N (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) The Dy. Commissioner Of Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.878/Chny/2018 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Corporate Circle-2(2), Chennai Idfc Limited, (Erstwhile Known As Infrastructure Development Finance Company Vs. Limited), Krm Tower, 8Th Floor, No.1, Harrington Road, Chetpet, Chennai – 600 031. Pan: Aaaci 2663N अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Assessee By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : Shri Farookh V. Irani, Advocate : Shri A. Sasikumar, Cit : 23.07.2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2024

…entures is directly and inextricably related to the business of providing long term finance of infrastructure development. Hence, the issue is covered by the decision of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Tourism Finance Corporation of India Ltd., vs. JCIT, [2010] 2 ITR 1, wherein exactly on identical facts, the assessee was held to be eligible for claim of deduction u/s.36(1)(viii) of the Act. The Delhi Tribunal held as under:- "22.... Regarding interest on debentures, we are in agreement with the learned authorised representative for the assessee that this income is in the nature of interest on loans because debentu…

DCIT, CENTRALCIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI vs. SUBRAMANIAM THANU, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as Cross

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.785, 786, 787 & 788/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 & C.O. Nos. 40, 41, 42 & 43/Chny/2023 (In I.T.A. Nos.785 To 788/Chny/2023)

…he purpose of initiation of penalty proceedings under Section 271E of the Act. We have already discussed above that provisions of Section 271E and 271D of the Act are in pari materia. When there is a decision of the Supreme Court, it is the bounden (2013) 3 5 2 ITR 1 duty of an adjudicating authority, be it an income tax authority or any other civil authority or for that matter any court in the country, to comply with the decision of the Supreme Court. 20. The issue of legal tenability of penalty order passed u/s 271D in the absence of recording of satisfaction by the AO in the assessment order regarding the viol…

DCIT, CENTRALCIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI vs. SUBRAMANIAM THANU, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as Cross

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.785, 786, 787 & 788/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 & C.O. Nos. 40, 41, 42 & 43/Chny/2023 (In I.T.A. Nos.785 To 788/Chny/2023)

…he purpose of initiation of penalty proceedings under Section 271E of the Act. We have already discussed above that provisions of Section 271E and 271D of the Act are in pari materia. When there is a decision of the Supreme Court, it is the bounden (2013) 3 5 2 ITR 1 duty of an adjudicating authority, be it an income tax authority or any other civil authority or for that matter any court in the country, to comply with the decision of the Supreme Court. 20. The issue of legal tenability of penalty order passed u/s 271D in the absence of recording of satisfaction by the AO in the assessment order regarding the viol…

DCIT, CENTRALCIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI vs. SUBRAMANIAM THANU, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as Cross

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.785, 786, 787 & 788/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 & C.O. Nos. 40, 41, 42 & 43/Chny/2023 (In I.T.A. Nos.785 To 788/Chny/2023)

…he purpose of initiation of penalty proceedings under Section 271E of the Act. We have already discussed above that provisions of Section 271E and 271D of the Act are in pari materia. When there is a decision of the Supreme Court, it is the bounden (2013) 3 5 2 ITR 1 duty of an adjudicating authority, be it an income tax authority or any other civil authority or for that matter any court in the country, to comply with the decision of the Supreme Court. 20. The issue of legal tenability of penalty order passed u/s 271D in the absence of recording of satisfaction by the AO in the assessment order regarding the viol…

DCIT, CENTRALCIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI vs. SUBRAMANIAM THANU, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as Cross

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.785, 786, 787 & 788/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 & C.O. Nos. 40, 41, 42 & 43/Chny/2023 (In I.T.A. Nos.785 To 788/Chny/2023)

…he purpose of initiation of penalty proceedings under Section 271E of the Act. We have already discussed above that provisions of Section 271E and 271D of the Act are in pari materia. When there is a decision of the Supreme Court, it is the bounden (2013) 3 5 2 ITR 1 duty of an adjudicating authority, be it an income tax authority or any other civil authority or for that matter any court in the country, to comply with the decision of the Supreme Court. 20. The issue of legal tenability of penalty order passed u/s 271D in the absence of recording of satisfaction by the AO in the assessment order regarding the viol…