THE CRAFTS COUNCIL OF INDIA,CHENNAI vs. JCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CHENNAI

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.943, 944, 945 & 946/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-2012, 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-2017) The Crafts Council Of India, Vs. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Gf Temple Trees, Tax, Venkatnarayanana Road, (Exemptions) T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. Chennai. [Pan: Aaatc 1433B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Irs, Jcit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 01.08.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14.08.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manu Kumar Giri ()

section 2(15), as per the decision of the Apex Court. The AO and CIT(A) has disallowed depreciation claimed by the Appellant on the ground that the investments depreciable capital assets have been allowed as deduction in the year of investment and hence granting depreciation on the same assets would amount to double deduction. This issue has been considered

THE CRAFTS COUNCIL OF INDIA,CHENNAI vs. JCIT(EXEMPTIONS) , CHENNAI

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.943, 944, 945 & 946/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-2012, 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-2017) The Crafts Council Of India, Vs. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Gf Temple Trees, Tax, Venkatnarayanana Road, (Exemptions) T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. Chennai. [Pan: Aaatc 1433B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Irs, Jcit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 01.08.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14.08.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manu Kumar Giri ()

section 2(15), as per the decision of the Apex Court. The AO and CIT(A) has disallowed depreciation claimed by the Appellant on the ground that the investments depreciable capital assets have been allowed as deduction in the year of investment and hence granting depreciation on the same assets would amount to double deduction. This issue has been considered

THE CRAFTS COUNCIL OF INDIA,CHENNAI vs. JCIT(EXEMPTIONS) , CHENNAI

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.943, 944, 945 & 946/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-2012, 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-2017) The Crafts Council Of India, Vs. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Gf Temple Trees, Tax, Venkatnarayanana Road, (Exemptions) T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. Chennai. [Pan: Aaatc 1433B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Irs, Jcit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 01.08.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14.08.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manu Kumar Giri ()

section 2(15), as per the decision of the Apex Court. The AO and CIT(A) has disallowed depreciation claimed by the Appellant on the ground that the investments depreciable capital assets have been allowed as deduction in the year of investment and hence granting depreciation on the same assets would amount to double deduction. This issue has been considered

BRAKES INDIA LIMITED,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT (LTU), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.758/Chny/2012 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03) M/S. Brakes India Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Ltu) Padi, Chennai-600 101. Chennai-600 050. Pan: Aaacb 2533Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

2) Whether the Tribunal was right in law in not following the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. H.E.G. Ltd. (324 ITR 331) holding that interest component will partake of the character of the amount due u/s 244A of the Act which becomes an integral part of the principal amount and assessee would

SHRIRAM INSIGHT SHARE BROKERS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.733, 734 & 735/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2011-12

2) of the Act, this Tribunal do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the lower authority and accordingly the same is confirmed. 24. The next ground of appeal is with regard to deduction of interest under Section 244A of the Act to the extent of `16,51,266/-. 25. Shri R. Sivaraman, the Ld.counsel

SHRIRAM INSIGHT SHARE BROKERS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.733, 734 & 735/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2011-12

2) of the Act, this Tribunal do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the lower authority and accordingly the same is confirmed. 24. The next ground of appeal is with regard to deduction of interest under Section 244A of the Act to the extent of `16,51,266/-. 25. Shri R. Sivaraman, the Ld.counsel

SHRIRAM INSIGHT SHARE BROKERS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.733, 734 & 735/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2011-12

2) of the Act, this Tribunal do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the lower authority and accordingly the same is confirmed. 24. The next ground of appeal is with regard to deduction of interest under Section 244A of the Act to the extent of `16,51,266/-. 25. Shri R. Sivaraman, the Ld.counsel

INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

244A(2) of the Act excluding the delay period attributable to the assessee. The return of income filed manually alongwith TDS certificate before due date of return if any TDS certificates could not filed alongwith return, it is duty cast on the assessee to file its separately alongwith corresponding letters at the earliest. As per the provisions, TDS credit

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. SHRI NACHIMUTHU PALANISWAMY, CHENNAI

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1032/Chny/2022 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Acit Shri Nachimuthu Palaniswamy, बनाम/ Central Circle-3(3), 82, Cathedral Road, Vs. Chennai. Gopalapuram, Chennai-600 086. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Adopp-9910-F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal (Jcit)-Ld. Sr. Dr " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Y.Sridhar (Fca) -Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16-05-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 16-05-2023 आदेश / O R D E R

section 244A reads as under: "In the interest of fairness and equity, it is further provided that an assessee shall be eligible to interest on refund of self-assessment tax for the period beginning from the date of payment of tax or filing of return, whichever is later, to the date on which the refund is granted. For the purpose

PANDYAN GRAMA BANK,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1, VIRUDHUNAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 685, 684, 687 & 688/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Pandyan Grama Bank, The Assistant Commissioner Of Admn. Office, Vs. Income Tax, No. 2-70-1, Collectroate Complex, Katcheri Road, Virudhunagar, 626 002. Virundhunagar, 626 001. [Pan: Aaaaap 0895P] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

2)(a)(i) for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10. The AO gave effect to the orders of the ITAT on 13.05.2013, 14.03.2013 & 08.03.2013 for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10, respectively. Since, there were mistakes in the quantification of interest u/s. 244A, giving credit to TDS ie., to rectify the shortfall in credit of TDS

PANDYAN GRAMA BANK,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1, VIRUDHUNAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 685, 684, 687 & 688/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Pandyan Grama Bank, The Assistant Commissioner Of Admn. Office, Vs. Income Tax, No. 2-70-1, Collectroate Complex, Katcheri Road, Virudhunagar, 626 002. Virundhunagar, 626 001. [Pan: Aaaaap 0895P] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

2)(a)(i) for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10. The AO gave effect to the orders of the ITAT on 13.05.2013, 14.03.2013 & 08.03.2013 for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10, respectively. Since, there were mistakes in the quantification of interest u/s. 244A, giving credit to TDS ie., to rectify the shortfall in credit of TDS

PANDYAN GRAMA BANK,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1, VIRUDHUNAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 685, 684, 687 & 688/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Pandyan Grama Bank, The Assistant Commissioner Of Admn. Office, Vs. Income Tax, No. 2-70-1, Collectroate Complex, Katcheri Road, Virudhunagar, 626 002. Virundhunagar, 626 001. [Pan: Aaaaap 0895P] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

2)(a)(i) for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10. The AO gave effect to the orders of the ITAT on 13.05.2013, 14.03.2013 & 08.03.2013 for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10, respectively. Since, there were mistakes in the quantification of interest u/s. 244A, giving credit to TDS ie., to rectify the shortfall in credit of TDS

PANDYAN GRAMA BANK,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1, VIRUDHUNAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 685, 684, 687 & 688/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Pandyan Grama Bank, The Assistant Commissioner Of Admn. Office, Vs. Income Tax, No. 2-70-1, Collectroate Complex, Katcheri Road, Virudhunagar, 626 002. Virundhunagar, 626 001. [Pan: Aaaaap 0895P] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

2)(a)(i) for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10. The AO gave effect to the orders of the ITAT on 13.05.2013, 14.03.2013 & 08.03.2013 for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10, respectively. Since, there were mistakes in the quantification of interest u/s. 244A, giving credit to TDS ie., to rectify the shortfall in credit of TDS

PANDYAN GRAMA BANK,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. ACIT, VIRUDHUNAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 685, 684, 687 & 688/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Pandyan Grama Bank, The Assistant Commissioner Of Admn. Office, Vs. Income Tax, No. 2-70-1, Collectroate Complex, Katcheri Road, Virudhunagar, 626 002. Virundhunagar, 626 001. [Pan: Aaaaap 0895P] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

2)(a)(i) for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10. The AO gave effect to the orders of the ITAT on 13.05.2013, 14.03.2013 & 08.03.2013 for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10, respectively. Since, there were mistakes in the quantification of interest u/s. 244A, giving credit to TDS ie., to rectify the shortfall in credit of TDS

PANDYAN GRAMA BANK,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. ACIT, VIRUDHUNAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 685, 684, 687 & 688/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Pandyan Grama Bank, The Assistant Commissioner Of Admn. Office, Vs. Income Tax, No. 2-70-1, Collectroate Complex, Katcheri Road, Virudhunagar, 626 002. Virundhunagar, 626 001. [Pan: Aaaaap 0895P] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

2)(a)(i) for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10. The AO gave effect to the orders of the ITAT on 13.05.2013, 14.03.2013 & 08.03.2013 for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10, respectively. Since, there were mistakes in the quantification of interest u/s. 244A, giving credit to TDS ie., to rectify the shortfall in credit of TDS

PANDYAN GRAMA BANK,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. ACIT, VIRUDHUNAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 685, 684, 687 & 688/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Pandyan Grama Bank, The Assistant Commissioner Of Admn. Office, Vs. Income Tax, No. 2-70-1, Collectroate Complex, Katcheri Road, Virudhunagar, 626 002. Virundhunagar, 626 001. [Pan: Aaaaap 0895P] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

2)(a)(i) for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10. The AO gave effect to the orders of the ITAT on 13.05.2013, 14.03.2013 & 08.03.2013 for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10, respectively. Since, there were mistakes in the quantification of interest u/s. 244A, giving credit to TDS ie., to rectify the shortfall in credit of TDS

IDUMBEN KNITTERS, ,TIRUPUR CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1TIRUPUR, TIRUPUR, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 711/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Idumban Knitters Assistant Commissioner Of S.F. No. 440, 443, Sbi Colony, V. Income Tax, Gandhi Nagar Post, Circle-1, Tirupur – 641 603. Tirupur. [Pan: Aaafi-7635-P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. M A Srinivasan, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.08.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.08.2023

TDS, as per the provisions of Section 194 J, stating the same as payment to Mr.U.S.Dinesh, for the services rendered by him which amounts to duplication of addition and taxing twice on one transaction, and hence illegal and not sustainable in law. Therefore, the appellant / assessee herein, humbly pray before the Hon'ble Members of ITAT, to allow this Appeal

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

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

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)

2. The first issue arises for consideration is with regard to addition of ₹14,27,208/- being the difference in the tax deducted at source and the income disclosed by the assessee. 3. Shri A. Mahesh, the Ld. representative for the assessee, submitted that M/s Aircel Cellular Limited erroneously uploaded TDS in the name of the assessee. According