BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

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.

552 results for “TDS”+ Section 41clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,087Mumbai1,866Bangalore990Chennai552Kolkata369Hyderabad258Ahmedabad238Indore198Chandigarh174Jaipur166Karnataka156Raipur152Cochin151Pune116Surat70Visakhapatnam64Lucknow64Cuttack46Rajkot45Dehradun42Ranchi40Nagpur35Jabalpur30Amritsar25Guwahati24Agra22Patna21Jodhpur17Telangana15Allahabad15Panaji10SC9Varanasi8Kerala6Calcutta2Uttarakhand2Himachal Pradesh1Bombay1Punjab & Haryana1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 4089Addition to Income74Section 143(3)62Disallowance62Section 19559Deduction56Section 14A55TDS40Section 80H36Section 80

RAMAMURTHY D.P.,PUDUCHERRY vs. ITO, TDS WARD,, PUDUCHERRY

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1742/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1741 & 1742/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)(c)Section 234E

41 days). Since the returns were filed belatedly, the A.O while processing return u/s 200A , charged late fee under section 234E at Rs. 200/- per day of default, subject to the amount of TDS

Showing 1–20 of 552 · Page 1 of 28

...
30
Section 529
Depreciation18

RAMAMURTHY D.P.,PUDUCHERRY vs. ITO, TDS WARD,, PUDUCHERRY

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1741/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1741 & 1742/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)(c)Section 234E

41 days). Since the returns were filed belatedly, the A.O while processing return u/s 200A , charged late fee under section 234E at Rs. 200/- per day of default, subject to the amount of TDS

ABAN OFFSHORE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, INTL, TAX 1(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 1240/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Apr 2025AY 2014-15
Section 115ASection 195(2)Section 250Section 44BSection 9(1)Section 9(1)(vi)Section 90

41\nand sections 43 and 43A. The aggregate amounts are quantified in sub-\nsection (2) of section 44BB to be the amount paid or payable, received or\ndeemed to be received, etc. As per sub-section (3) of section 44BB the non-\nresident can claim a lower profit. It is for the purpose of claiming lower\nprofits that

ABAN SINGAPORE PTE LIMITED ,CHENNAI vs. DCIT INTL TAX 1(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 1329/CHNY/2023[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 May 2024AY 2021-2022

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1329/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) & 2. Stay Application No.9/Chny/2024 (In Ita No.1329/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2021-22) M/S. Aban Singapore Pte. Limited Dcit बनाम/ 113, Pantheon Road, Egmore S.O International Taxation-1(1), Vs. Egmore, Chennai-600 008. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaqca-2845-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao (Ca)-Ld. Ar !"थ"कीओरसे/ Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit)- Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03-04-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17-05-2024

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao (CA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT)- Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 28Section 40Section 44ASection 44B

41 and therefore, impugned disallowance is not called for. 3.2 The Ld. DRP noted that the assessee had taken three rigs on hire as bareboat from Asian offshore Ltd. (AOL) and from another group entity namely deep drilling 8 Pte. Ltd. (DDPL) The assessee paid bareboat charges to the two entities. The assessee deducted TDS on payment made

M/S. T vs. AUTO ASSIST (INDIA) LTD.,,CHENNAIVS.ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE - 3 (1),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in I

ITA 1734/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Mr. N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. ARV. Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 199

41,750/- as reflecting in Form 26AS but restricting the same to Rs.41,65,734/- resulting in short credit of Rs.6,76,016/-. 3. The CIT(A) erred in holding that TDS is allowable only to the extent income is offered as per section

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

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

ITA 1937/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri. Abhinov Vaidyanathan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT
Section 194CSection 194HSection 2Section 250Section 253(1)Section 30Section 40

TDS u/s.194H of the Act, which are provided as target incentive to increase the volume of sales. Since, these payments are made by the assessee towards a promotional activities to increase the sales volume of the products on Principal-Principal basis, we are of the considered view that, there is no relationship of Principal- Agent between the assessee

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

In the result the\norder of Ld

ITA 24/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Dec 2024AY 2015-16
Section 194Section 201Section 250

TDS survey was conducted upon its\npremise on 26.10.2021. During the course of the survey it was noted\nthat the assessee had entered into a transaction for purchase of land\nadmeasuring about 7.07 acres of land during financial year with one M/s.\nMohan Breweries and distilleries Limited(MBDL), a sister concern of the\nassessee. For the purpose the assessee

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

In the result the\norder of Ld

ITA 25/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Dec 2024AY 2016-17
Section 194Section 201Section 250

TDS survey was conducted upon its\npremise on 26.10.2021.\nDuring the course of the survey it was noted\nthat the assessee had entered into a transaction for purchase of land\nadmeasuring about 7.07 acres of land during financial year with one M/s.\nMohan Breweries and distilleries Limited(MBDL), a sister concern of the\nassessee. For the purpose the assessee

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. FRONTIER OFFSHORE EXPLORATION (INDIA) LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1006/CHNY/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Jan 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1006/Chny/2016 धनिाजरण वर्ज Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Mr. A. Sundararajan, Addl.CITFor Respondent: None
Section 44B

41 and sections 43 and 43A. The aggregate amounts are quantified in sub-section (2) of sec. 44BB to be the amount paid or payable, received or deemed to be received etc. As per the sub-section (3) of sec. 44BB the non-resident can claim a lower profit. It is for the purpose of claiming lower profits that

ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT COMPANY CIRCLE 1 (1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 748/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.748/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Sh. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V.M. Mahidar, JCIT
Section 41Section 41(1)Section 43B

Section 41 cannot be applied as amounts were disallowed in earlier year: 3.1 The CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of the AO to make an addition of reversal of generation tax as income u/s 41(1) of the Act without understanding the facts that the same were disallowed in the earlier assessment year

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CHENNAI vs. NAPC PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 623/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Aug 2024AY 2018-19
Section 143(1)Section 145(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 41(1)Section 43C

Section 145 of the Act and allegations made in\nthe AO's order is dehors the facts.\n9.6 Further, it is noted that the Assessee has furnished the\ndetails of all the projects giving true picture of turnover and the\ncorresponding loss / profit earned in the respective projects in\nthe consolidated statement showing the percentage of\ncompletion method by offering

SHRIRAM CREDIT COMPANY LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 1307/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1199/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Shriram Credit Company Income Tax, Corporate Circle 6(1) I/C, Limited, Shriram House, No. 4, Aayakar Bhavan, Wanaparthy Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Block, 7Th Floor, 121, M.G. Road, Chennai 600 042. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aagcs4497N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1307/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Shriram Credit Company Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, Mookambika Complex, Income Tax, No. 4, Lady Desika Road, Corporate Circle 6(1), Mylapore, Chennai 600 004. Chennai 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit Assessee By : Shri R.Sivaraman, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 30.03.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.04.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 15, Chennai Dated 26.12.2017 Relevant To The Assessment

For Appellant: Shri R.Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 14A

41,454/- on account of disallowance under section 14A of the Act. On appeal, by following the decision of the Tribunal, the ld. CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to exclude the disallowance under section 14A of the Act while computing the book profit under section 115JB of the Act and allowed the ground raised by the assessee, against which

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(1) (I/C) , CHENNAI vs. SHRIRAM CREDIT COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

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

ITA 1199/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1199/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Shriram Credit Company Income Tax, Corporate Circle 6(1) I/C, Limited, Shriram House, No. 4, Aayakar Bhavan, Wanaparthy Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Block, 7Th Floor, 121, M.G. Road, Chennai 600 042. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aagcs4497N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1307/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Shriram Credit Company Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, Mookambika Complex, Income Tax, No. 4, Lady Desika Road, Corporate Circle 6(1), Mylapore, Chennai 600 004. Chennai 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit Assessee By : Shri R.Sivaraman, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 30.03.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.04.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 15, Chennai Dated 26.12.2017 Relevant To The Assessment

For Appellant: Shri R.Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 14A

41,454/- on account of disallowance under section 14A of the Act. On appeal, by following the decision of the Tribunal, the ld. CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to exclude the disallowance under section 14A of the Act while computing the book profit under section 115JB of the Act and allowed the ground raised by the assessee, against which

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

ITA 1193/CHNY/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 May 2025AY 2010-11

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)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT
Section 10ASection 14ASection 40Section 9(1)

41. Having regard to the language of section 14A(2) of the Act, read with rule 8D of the Rules, we also make it clear that before applying the theory of apportionment, the AO needs to record satisfaction that having regard to the kind of the assessee, suo moto disallowance under section 14A was not - 10 - ITA Nos.1193

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

ITA 1207/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 May 2025AY 2014-15

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)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT
Section 10ASection 14ASection 40Section 9(1)

41. Having regard to the language of section 14A(2) of the Act, read with rule 8D of the Rules, we also make it clear that before applying the theory of apportionment, the AO needs to record satisfaction that having regard to the kind of the assessee, suo moto disallowance under section 14A was not - 10 - ITA Nos.1193

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SRM ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION LIMITED, CHENNAI

Appeal stand allowed

ITA 1084/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.489/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S.Srm Engineering Construction Dcit बनाम/ Corporation Ltd. Central Circle-1(3) No.24, G.N. Chetty Road, T. Nagar, Chennai. Vs. Chennai-600 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafcs-5856-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.1084/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit M/S.Srm Engineering बनाम/ Central Circle-1(3) Construction Corporation Ltd. Chennai. No.24, G.N. Chetty Road, T. Nagar Vs. Chennai-600 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafcs-5856-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri D. Anand (Advocate)- Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Revenue By : Shri N. Balakrishnan (Cit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12-03-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12-03-2024

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri N. Balakrishnan (CIT)-Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 41(1)

41(1) could be made out against the assessee. Therefore, concurring with uncontroverted factual findings rendered in the impugned order in terms of remand report of Ld. AO, we are of the considered opinion that no interference is called for in the impinged order, on this issue. In the result, the corresponding grounds raised by the revenue stand dismissed

SRM ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION CORORATION LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), CHENNAI

Appeal stand allowed

ITA 489/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.489/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S.Srm Engineering Construction Dcit बनाम/ Corporation Ltd. Central Circle-1(3) No.24, G.N. Chetty Road, T. Nagar, Chennai. Vs. Chennai-600 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafcs-5856-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.1084/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit M/S.Srm Engineering बनाम/ Central Circle-1(3) Construction Corporation Ltd. Chennai. No.24, G.N. Chetty Road, T. Nagar Vs. Chennai-600 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafcs-5856-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri D. Anand (Advocate)- Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Revenue By : Shri N. Balakrishnan (Cit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12-03-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12-03-2024

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri N. Balakrishnan (CIT)-Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 41(1)

41(1) could be made out against the assessee. Therefore, concurring with uncontroverted factual findings rendered in the impugned order in terms of remand report of Ld. AO, we are of the considered opinion that no interference is called for in the impinged order, on this issue. In the result, the corresponding grounds raised by the revenue stand dismissed

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

ITA 1262/CHNY/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 May 2025AY 2010-11
Section 10ASection 14ASection 40Section 9(1)

41 as under:\n\"40 We note from the facts in the State Bank of Patiala cases that the AO,\nwhile passing the assessment order, had already restricted the disallowance\nto the amount which was claimed as exempt income by applying the formula\ncontained in rule 8D of the Rules and holding that section 144 of the Act\nwould

TEMENOS INDIA PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 2(2), CHENNAI

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1955/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri C.J. Yeswanth Ram (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. R. Helan Ruby Jesintha (Addl. CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 195Section 201(1)

Section 195. 4. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that there is no dispute on the fact that the payment was made only for the purchase of software. 2. Drawing attention to grounds of appeal, Ld. AR submitted that the issue of requirement of deduction of tax at source (TDS) on royalty payment now stand covered

V.ANBURAJ,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 546/CHNY/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. A.V. Sreekanth, IRS, JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

41,42,995 described as TDS reimbursement on the wrong understanding that since it was borne by the bank from whom the amount was received for professional services, it would not be liable to tax. The explanation for the omission under the circumstances should have been accepted when the particulars including the amounts received and tax deduction certificates were. filed