Search: TDS | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

Search Judgments
Browse by Bench
Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

30 results for “TDS”+ Section 234Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi419 Mumbai389 Bangalore146 Hyderabad79 Ahmedabad44 Pune33 Jaipur31 Chennai30 Kolkata29 Karnataka28 Agra15 Indore15 Ranchi14 Chandigarh11 Lucknow9 Cochin9 Guwahati9 Dehradun8 Rajkot8 Jodhpur7 Nagpur7 Jabalpur6 Allahabad5 Surat5 Raipur4 Visakhapatnam3 SC1 Cuttack1 Telangana1 Patna1

Key Topics

Section 234E32 Section 234A30 Section 143(3)23 Section 14715 Section 234B14 Addition to Income13 Section 4012 TDS12 Disallowance10 Section 234C

GVR ASHOKA CHENNAI CORR LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ADIT, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2621/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

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

For Appellant: Mr. Dharan V. Gandhi, ARFor Respondent: 20.11.2025

Section 140A(1)Section 143(1)Section 234A

TDS was subsequently rectified, CPC continued to levy interest under section 234A up to March 2022, which the assessee disputed

HYUNDAI MOTOR INDIA LTD.,KANCHEEPURAM vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

Showing 1–20 of 30 · Page 1 of 2

7

Search & Seizure6

ITA 842/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: Disposed

ITAT Chennai

27 Apr 2017

AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar"नधा(रण वष( /Assessment Year: 2011-12 V. Hyundai Motor India Limited The Deputy Commissioner Of Plot No. H-1, Sipcot Industrial Park Income Tax, Irrungattukottai, 1775, Jawaharlal Nehru Inner Sriperumbudur Taluk, Ring Road, Kancheepuram District, Anna Nagar Western Tamil Nadu-602117 Extension, Chennai-600101 [Pan: Aaach2364M] (अपीलाथ+/Appellant) (,-यथ+/Respondent)

For Respondent: 13.11.2019

Section 234C

TDS, the learned :- 4 -: DRP directed AO to verify details and allow credit as per law, vide its directions dated 28.12.2015 passed u/s 144C(5) of the 1961 Act. The AO while passing assessment order dated 28.01.2016 u/s 143(3) read with Section 144C(13) of the 1961 Act, levied interest on ‘assessed income’ instead of ‘returned income’. We have

THINKSYNQ CONSULTING LLP,CHENNAI vs. ITO NCW E, CHENNAI

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

ITA 1530/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1530/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/S Thinksynq Consulting Llp, The Income Tax Officer, 17 (Old No.9), Seethamma Road, V. Non Corporate Ward 12(3), Alwarpet, Chennai - 600 018. Chennai - 600 006. Pan : Aagft 6098 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A. Mahesh, FCAFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, JCIT

TDS as per Form 16A and as per the return filed, was ₹6,73,257/- and the Assessing Officer has given credit only to the extent of ₹6,61,452/-, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the matter needs to be re-examined by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, orders of both the authorities below are set aside

SHANMUGASUNDARAM VENKATACHALAPATHY,TIRUNELVELI, TAMILNADU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4, TIRUNELVELI, TIRUNELVELI

In the result, grounds of appeal raised

ITA 2056/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Chennai26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayshri Shanmugasundaram I.T.O., Venkatachalapathy, Vs. Ward-4, C/O-Durv & Associates Llp, No. Tirunelveli. 10/80, Avm Avenue 3Rd Street, Virugambakkam, Chennai-600092 (Tamil Nadu) Pan No. Acapv 3414 B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234ASection 250Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69

234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act which is consequential. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, vary, omit, substitute or amend the above grounds of appeal, before commencement of during proceedings before the Hon'ble Tribunal.” 2. The assessee has also filed additional grounds of appeal which reads as under: 3 ITA2056/Chny/2024 Shri Shanmugaundaram Venkatachalapathy

CONFERENCECALL SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT,

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2010-11 & 2012-13 are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 584/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 584/Chny/2015 & 529/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2012-13 Conferencecall Services India Assistant Commissioner Of Private Ltd V. Income Tax, Rmz Titanium, No. 135, Corporate Circle -1(2), 1St Floor, Chennai – 34. Old Airport Road, Bangalore – 560 017. [Pan: Aaccc-6574-A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Soumen Adak, Ca & Shri. Ashish Poddar, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.06.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.09.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Soumen Adak, CA &For Respondent: Shri. A. Sasikumar, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C(3)

234A of the Act of 2,86,124/-. 17. That on the facts & circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO on direction issued by the Ld. DRP erred in proposing to levy interest under section 234B of the Act of Rs. 1,07,06,266/-. 18. That on the facts & circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO on direction issued

CONFERENCECALL SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2010-11 & 2012-13 are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 529/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 584/Chny/2015 & 529/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2012-13 Conferencecall Services India Assistant Commissioner Of Private Ltd V. Income Tax, Rmz Titanium, No. 135, Corporate Circle -1(2), 1St Floor, Chennai – 34. Old Airport Road, Bangalore – 560 017. [Pan: Aaccc-6574-A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Soumen Adak, Ca & Shri. Ashish Poddar, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.06.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.09.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Soumen Adak, CA &For Respondent: Shri. A. Sasikumar, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C(3)

234A of the Act of 2,86,124/-. 17. That on the facts & circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO on direction issued by the Ld. DRP erred in proposing to levy interest under section 234B of the Act of Rs. 1,07,06,266/-. 18. That on the facts & circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO on direction issued

S R RAGHVIR,CHENNAI vs. TDS-CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 198/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jul 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Abraham P George & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Mr.G.Seetharaman,C.AFor Respondent: Mr.Aroon Prasad,JCIT,D.R

TDS for Q1, Q2, Q3 & Q4 for assessment year 2014-15 on 01.03.2017. It was a submission that the due dates to file the returns for the above quarters were 15.07.2014, 15.10.2014, 15.01.2015 and 15.05.2015 respectively. Late fee had been levied on the assessee as per the provisions of the section 234E of the Act. It was a submission that

S R RAGHVIR,CHENNAI vs. TDS-CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 196/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jul 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Abraham P George & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Mr.G.Seetharaman,C.AFor Respondent: Mr.Aroon Prasad,JCIT,D.R

TDS for Q1, Q2, Q3 & Q4 for assessment year 2014-15 on 01.03.2017. It was a submission that the due dates to file the returns for the above quarters were 15.07.2014, 15.10.2014, 15.01.2015 and 15.05.2015 respectively. Late fee had been levied on the assessee as per the provisions of the section 234E of the Act. It was a submission that

S R RAGHVIR,CHENNAI vs. TDS-CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 195/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jul 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Abraham P George & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Mr.G.Seetharaman,C.AFor Respondent: Mr.Aroon Prasad,JCIT,D.R

TDS for Q1, Q2, Q3 & Q4 for assessment year 2014-15 on 01.03.2017. It was a submission that the due dates to file the returns for the above quarters were 15.07.2014, 15.10.2014, 15.01.2015 and 15.05.2015 respectively. Late fee had been levied on the assessee as per the provisions of the section 234E of the Act. It was a submission that

S R RAGHVIR,CHENNAI vs. TDS-CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 197/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jul 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Abraham P George & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Mr.G.Seetharaman,C.AFor Respondent: Mr.Aroon Prasad,JCIT,D.R

TDS for Q1, Q2, Q3 & Q4 for assessment year 2014-15 on 01.03.2017. It was a submission that the due dates to file the returns for the above quarters were 15.07.2014, 15.10.2014, 15.01.2015 and 15.05.2015 respectively. Late fee had been levied on the assessee as per the provisions of the section 234E of the Act. It was a submission that

M/S VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS SINGAPORE PTE. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed whereas Cross objections are dismissed

ITA 1507/CHNY/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Shri. N. Venkatraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. G.M. Doss, IRS,CIT

Section 234ASection 234BSection 260ASection 9(1)

section 234A, 234B and 234D of the Income Tax Act, as the case may be, we remand this issue alone to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for its consideration on merits and in accordance with law. Accordingly, the above Tax Case (Appeals) are disposed of. No Cost. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petitions are closed’’. ITA Nos1311/06, 164/07, :- 3 -: 1507/10 & 1722/11

M/S VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS SINGAPORE PVT. LTD.(FORMERLY MCI WORLDCOM ASIA PVT. LTD.),CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed whereas Cross objections are dismissed

ITA 1311/CHNY/2006[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Shri. N. Venkatraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. G.M. Doss, IRS,CIT

Section 234ASection 234BSection 260ASection 9(1)

section 234A, 234B and 234D of the Income Tax Act, as the case may be, we remand this issue alone to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for its consideration on merits and in accordance with law. Accordingly, the above Tax Case (Appeals) are disposed of. No Cost. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petitions are closed’’. ITA Nos1311/06, 164/07, :- 3 -: 1507/10 & 1722/11

M/S VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS SINGAPORE PVT. LTD.(FORMERLY MCI WORLDCOM ASIA PVT. LTD.),CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed whereas Cross objections are dismissed

ITA 164/CHNY/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Shri. N. Venkatraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. G.M. Doss, IRS,CIT

Section 234ASection 234BSection 260ASection 9(1)

section 234A, 234B and 234D of the Income Tax Act, as the case may be, we remand this issue alone to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for its consideration on merits and in accordance with law. Accordingly, the above Tax Case (Appeals) are disposed of. No Cost. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petitions are closed’’. ITA Nos1311/06, 164/07, :- 3 -: 1507/10 & 1722/11

VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS SINGAPORE PTE LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed whereas Cross objections are dismissed

ITA 1722/CHNY/2011[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Shri. N. Venkatraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. G.M. Doss, IRS,CIT

Section 234ASection 234BSection 260ASection 9(1)

section 234A, 234B and 234D of the Income Tax Act, as the case may be, we remand this issue alone to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for its consideration on merits and in accordance with law. Accordingly, the above Tax Case (Appeals) are disposed of. No Cost. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petitions are closed’’. ITA Nos1311/06, 164/07, :- 3 -: 1507/10 & 1722/11

J RAY MCDERMOTT ENGINEERING SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED ,CHENNAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI

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

ITA 2016/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl. CIT

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

234A of the Act of INR 12,86,768 not appreciating the fact that the return of income was filed by the Appellant on or before the due date prescribed under section 139(1) of the Act. Further, the CIT(A) has erred in upholding the said order. 11. That on the facts, and circumstances of the case

SNJ DISTILLERS PVT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for Asst

ITA 2194/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2703, 2704, 2705/Chny/2019, ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15,2015-16 & 2016-17) The Dcit, Vs M/S. Snj Distillers Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle 2(1), Old No.47, New No.99, Chennai – 600 034. Canal Bank Road, Cit Nagar, Nandanam, Chenani – 600 035. Pan: Aalcs9312F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2194, 2195 & 2993/Chny/2019, ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Vs The Acit, M/S. Snj Distillers Pvt. Ltd. Old No.47, New No.99, Central Circle 2(1), Canal Bank Road, Chennai – 600 034. Cit Nagar, Nandanam, Chenani – 600 035. Pan: Aalcs9312F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate : राज"कीओरसे /Revenue By Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.Cit : सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 13.10.2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04.11.2020

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, Advocate

Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 14ASection 234A

234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. 6. The Appellant craves leave to file additional grounds/arguments at the time of hearing. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of manufacturing and sales of distillery products. The assessee company manufactured and sold goods only to Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation

DCIT, CC-2(1),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. SNJ DISTILLERS PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for Asst

ITA 2703/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2703, 2704, 2705/Chny/2019, ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15,2015-16 & 2016-17) The Dcit, Vs M/S. Snj Distillers Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle 2(1), Old No.47, New No.99, Chennai – 600 034. Canal Bank Road, Cit Nagar, Nandanam, Chenani – 600 035. Pan: Aalcs9312F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2194, 2195 & 2993/Chny/2019, ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Vs The Acit, M/S. Snj Distillers Pvt. Ltd. Old No.47, New No.99, Central Circle 2(1), Canal Bank Road, Chennai – 600 034. Cit Nagar, Nandanam, Chenani – 600 035. Pan: Aalcs9312F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate : राज"कीओरसे /Revenue By Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.Cit : सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 13.10.2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04.11.2020

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, Advocate

Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 14ASection 234A

234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. 6. The Appellant craves leave to file additional grounds/arguments at the time of hearing. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of manufacturing and sales of distillery products. The assessee company manufactured and sold goods only to Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation

DCIT, CC-2(1),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. SNJ DISTILLERS PVT. LTD.,, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for Asst

ITA 2704/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2703, 2704, 2705/Chny/2019, ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15,2015-16 & 2016-17) The Dcit, Vs M/S. Snj Distillers Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle 2(1), Old No.47, New No.99, Chennai – 600 034. Canal Bank Road, Cit Nagar, Nandanam, Chenani – 600 035. Pan: Aalcs9312F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2194, 2195 & 2993/Chny/2019, ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Vs The Acit, M/S. Snj Distillers Pvt. Ltd. Old No.47, New No.99, Central Circle 2(1), Canal Bank Road, Chennai – 600 034. Cit Nagar, Nandanam, Chenani – 600 035. Pan: Aalcs9312F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate : राज"कीओरसे /Revenue By Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.Cit : सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 13.10.2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04.11.2020

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, Advocate

Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 14ASection 234A

234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. 6. The Appellant craves leave to file additional grounds/arguments at the time of hearing. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of manufacturing and sales of distillery products. The assessee company manufactured and sold goods only to Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation

SNJ DISTILLERS PVT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for Asst

ITA 2993/CHNY/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2020AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2703, 2704, 2705/Chny/2019, ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15,2015-16 & 2016-17) The Dcit, Vs M/S. Snj Distillers Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle 2(1), Old No.47, New No.99, Chennai – 600 034. Canal Bank Road, Cit Nagar, Nandanam, Chenani – 600 035. Pan: Aalcs9312F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2194, 2195 & 2993/Chny/2019, ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Vs The Acit, M/S. Snj Distillers Pvt. Ltd. Old No.47, New No.99, Central Circle 2(1), Canal Bank Road, Chennai – 600 034. Cit Nagar, Nandanam, Chenani – 600 035. Pan: Aalcs9312F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate : राज"कीओरसे /Revenue By Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.Cit : सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 13.10.2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04.11.2020

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, Advocate

Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 14ASection 234A

234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. 6. The Appellant craves leave to file additional grounds/arguments at the time of hearing. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of manufacturing and sales of distillery products. The assessee company manufactured and sold goods only to Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation

DCIT, CC-2(1),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. SNJ DISTILLERS PVT. LTD.,, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for Asst

ITA 2705/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2703, 2704, 2705/Chny/2019, ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15,2015-16 & 2016-17) The Dcit, Vs M/S. Snj Distillers Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle 2(1), Old No.47, New No.99, Chennai – 600 034. Canal Bank Road, Cit Nagar, Nandanam, Chenani – 600 035. Pan: Aalcs9312F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2194, 2195 & 2993/Chny/2019, ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Vs The Acit, M/S. Snj Distillers Pvt. Ltd. Old No.47, New No.99, Central Circle 2(1), Canal Bank Road, Chennai – 600 034. Cit Nagar, Nandanam, Chenani – 600 035. Pan: Aalcs9312F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate : राज"कीओरसे /Revenue By Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.Cit : सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 13.10.2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04.11.2020

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, Advocate

Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 14ASection 234A

234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. 6. The Appellant craves leave to file additional grounds/arguments at the time of hearing. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of manufacturing and sales of distillery products. The assessee company manufactured and sold goods only to Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation