DOLLARS & POUNDS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC TDS, GHAZIABAD

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

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

250 of the Act is further appealable before the Tribunal under section 253 of the Act. Hence, we admit the present appeals filed by the assessee even on this preliminary issue. We have already adjudicated the issue of charging fees under section 234E of the Act by the Assessing Officer 7 I.T.A. No.2015 to 2030/Chny/18 while processing returns / statements

DOLLARS & POUNDS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC TDS, GHAZIABAD

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

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

250 of the Act is further appealable before the Tribunal under section 253 of the Act. Hence, we admit the present appeals filed by the assessee even on this preliminary issue. We have already adjudicated the issue of charging fees under section 234E of the Act by the Assessing Officer 7 I.T.A. No.2015 to 2030/Chny/18 while processing returns / statements

DOLLARS & POUNDS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC TDS, GHAZIABAD

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

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

250 of the Act is further appealable before the Tribunal under section 253 of the Act. Hence, we admit the present appeals filed by the assessee even on this preliminary issue. We have already adjudicated the issue of charging fees under section 234E of the Act by the Assessing Officer 7 I.T.A. No.2015 to 2030/Chny/18 while processing returns / statements

DOLLARS & POUNDS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC TDS, GHAZIABAD

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

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

250 of the Act is further appealable before the Tribunal under section 253 of the Act. Hence, we admit the present appeals filed by the assessee even on this preliminary issue. We have already adjudicated the issue of charging fees under section 234E of the Act by the Assessing Officer 7 I.T.A. No.2015 to 2030/Chny/18 while processing returns / statements

ALFHA COACH BUILDERS,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all six these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 32 & 33/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Alfha Coach Builders, The Income Tax Officer, Sf No.596’3, Andan Kovil East, Vs. Ward -1, Pudhur, Covai Road, Karur. Karur – 639 002. [Pan: Aaofa-8970-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

250 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Act) dated 13.06.2024 is erroneous, bad in law, and was passed ignoring the facts and merits of the case. B. For that the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that late fee u/s 234E of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Act) for a period prior to 01.06.2015 is not leviable, even

ALFHA COACH BUILDERS,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all six these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 32 & 33/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Alfha Coach Builders, The Income Tax Officer, Sf No.596’3, Andan Kovil East, Vs. Ward -1, Pudhur, Covai Road, Karur. Karur – 639 002. [Pan: Aaofa-8970-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

250 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Act) dated 13.06.2024 is erroneous, bad in law, and was passed ignoring the facts and merits of the case. B. For that the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that late fee u/s 234E of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Act) for a period prior to 01.06.2015 is not leviable, even

CLASSIC LINEN INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee in iTA

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar"नधा$रण वष$ /Assessment Year: 2011-12

section 32, the written down value of any asset used for the purposes of the business of the undertaking shall be computed as if the assessee had claimed and been actually allowed the deduction in respect of depreciation for each of the relevant assessment year. (7) The provisions of sub-section (8) and sub-section (10) of section

VNC STEEL DISTRIBUTORS,,KARUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), TRICHY

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 1937/Chny/2024 & Stay Petition No: 40/Chny/2024 [In Ita No: 1937/Chny/2024)] िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vnc Steel Distributors, Deputy Commissioner Of No.2, Industrial Estate, V. Income Tax, S. Vellalapatti, Circle -1(1), Karur – 639 004. Trichy. [Pan: Aadfv-9137-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. Abhinov Vaidyanathan, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.08.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14.11.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

250 of the IT Act by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ('Ld. CIT(A)'), National Faceless Appeal Centre for the Assessment Year ('AY') 2017-18. Issue 1: Disallowance of Rs.3,03,99,796/- under Section 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act in respect of incentives provided to dealers for reason that tax was not deducted under Section

M/S. BINNY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, TDS,CIRCLE -1(1), CHENNAI

In the result the\norder of Ld

250 dated 07.11.2023 passed by CIT(A), Chennai.\n2.0 The afore mentioned two appeals are contesting the order u/s\n201 / 201A passed by the Ld. AO in the case of the assessee for the\n assessment years 2015-16 & 2016-17. Both the appeals are having\nnearly common grounds and hence are adjudicated together.\n3.0 The only issue arising

ITO TDS WARD, TIRUPUR vs. SHANTHI FORTUNE (INDIA) PVT. LTD., TIRUPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue and the CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2385/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Shanthi Fortune (India) Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited, Income Tax, Door No. 38, Trichy Road, Tds Circle, Coimbatore. Palladam 641 664. [Pan: Aajcs4289D] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2557/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 & C.O. No. 88/Chny/2019 [In I.T.A. No.2557/Chny/2018] The Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/S. Shanthi Fortune (India) Tds Ward, No. 121, Private Limited, Sixty Feet Road, Tirupur 641 602. Door No. 38, Trichy Road, Palladam 641 664. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) Department By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit Assessee By : Shri N Arjun Raj, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 2, Coimbatore, Dated 25.06.2018 Relevant To The Assessment

4. On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal challenging that the order giving effect to the order of the ITAT passed by the Assessing Officer is barred by limitation. The Revenue also filed an appeal against the decision of the ld. CIT(A) in respect of TDS under 5 I.T.A. Nos.2385 & 2557/Chny/18 & C.O. No.88/Chny/19 section 194A

SHANTHI FORTUNE (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,TIRUPUR vs. ACIT TDS CIRCLE, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue and the CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2385/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Shanthi Fortune (India) Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited, Income Tax, Door No. 38, Trichy Road, Tds Circle, Coimbatore. Palladam 641 664. [Pan: Aajcs4289D] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2557/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 & C.O. No. 88/Chny/2019 [In I.T.A. No.2557/Chny/2018] The Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/S. Shanthi Fortune (India) Tds Ward, No. 121, Private Limited, Sixty Feet Road, Tirupur 641 602. Door No. 38, Trichy Road, Palladam 641 664. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) Department By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit Assessee By : Shri N Arjun Raj, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 2, Coimbatore, Dated 25.06.2018 Relevant To The Assessment

4. On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal challenging that the order giving effect to the order of the ITAT passed by the Assessing Officer is barred by limitation. The Revenue also filed an appeal against the decision of the ld. CIT(A) in respect of TDS under 5 I.T.A. Nos.2385 & 2557/Chny/18 & C.O. No.88/Chny/19 section 194A

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

4. The substantial questions of law raised for consideration were answered\nagainst the Revenue in the case of Marg Ltd. v. CIT [2020] 120\ntaxmann.com 84/275 Taxman 502 (Mad.). The operative portion of the\njudgment reads as follows:\n\"9. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, in the case of CIT v. Tidel Park Ltd.\n[TCA Nos.732

COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI

4. The substantial questions of law raised for consideration were answered\nagainst the Revenue in the case of Marg Ltd. v. CIT [2020] 120\ntaxmann.com 84/275 Taxman 502 (Mad.). The operative portion of the\njudgment reads as follows:\n"9. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, in the case of CIT v. Tidel Park Ltd.\n[TCA Nos.732

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SIVA VENTURES LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA No 1392/2016 for the

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

4 -: ITA Nos.1417 & 1421/Chny/2016 Grounds of appeal in ITA No.1392/2016 A Y 2007-08 1. The order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax Appeals [“CIT(A)”j under section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“ the Act”) confirming the order of the Assessing Officer (“AO”) passed is not in accordance with law, contrary to the facts

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SIVA VENTURES LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA No 1392/2016 for the

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

4 -: ITA Nos.1417 & 1421/Chny/2016 Grounds of appeal in ITA No.1392/2016 A Y 2007-08 1. The order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax Appeals [“CIT(A)”j under section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“ the Act”) confirming the order of the Assessing Officer (“AO”) passed is not in accordance with law, contrary to the facts

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SIVA VENTURES LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA No 1392/2016 for the

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

4 -: ITA Nos.1417 & 1421/Chny/2016 Grounds of appeal in ITA No.1392/2016 A Y 2007-08 1. The order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax Appeals [“CIT(A)”j under section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“ the Act”) confirming the order of the Assessing Officer (“AO”) passed is not in accordance with law, contrary to the facts

SIVA INDUSTRIES AND HOLDINGS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA No 1392/2016 for the

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

4 -: ITA Nos.1417 & 1421/Chny/2016 Grounds of appeal in ITA No.1392/2016 A Y 2007-08 1. The order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax Appeals [“CIT(A)”j under section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“ the Act”) confirming the order of the Assessing Officer (“AO”) passed is not in accordance with law, contrary to the facts

COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1),, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1193, 1194, 1205, 1206 & 1207/Chny/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs Cognizant Technology Solutions The Asst. Commissioner India Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, No.5/535, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Central Circle 1(1), Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 096. Pan : Aaacd 3312M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1262, 1263, 1264, 1265 & 1266/Chny/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Cognizant Technology Income Tax, Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle 1(1), No.5/535, Okkiam Chennai. Thoraipakkam, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai – 600 096. Pan : Aaacd 3312M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

250 5,00,738 Technologies - 23 - ITA Nos.1193, 1194, 1205 to 1207, 1262 to 1266/CHNY/2024 Riverbed 2 Technology Pte Singapore USD 12,275 5,42,901 Ltd Sparx System 3 Australia USD 3,337 1,47,984 Pty Ltd Xenos Group 4 Canada USD 20,132 8,97,686 Inc Total of payments (with ‘make available