CITY UNION BANK LIMITED,KUMBAKONAM vs. JCIT, KUMBAKONAM

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

TDS deduction by Surat Branch on MICR payments to SBI. We have dealt on the legal issue in assessment year 2007-08 in ITA No. 2034/2014, where the disputed matter was remitted to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the legal issue and pass the order on merits and we find disputed issue in the present assessment year

ACIT, KUMBAKONAM vs. CITY UNION BANK LIMITED, KUMBAKONAM

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

TDS deduction by Surat Branch on MICR payments to SBI. We have dealt on the legal issue in assessment year 2007-08 in ITA No. 2034/2014, where the disputed matter was remitted to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the legal issue and pass the order on merits and we find disputed issue in the present assessment year

ACIT, KUMBAKONAM vs. CITY UNION BANK LIMITED, KUMBAKONAM

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

TDS deduction by Surat Branch on MICR payments to SBI. We have dealt on the legal issue in assessment year 2007-08 in ITA No. 2034/2014, where the disputed matter was remitted to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the legal issue and pass the order on merits and we find disputed issue in the present assessment year

ACIT, KUMBAKONAM vs. CITY UNION BANK LIMITED, KUMBAKONAM

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

TDS deduction by Surat Branch on MICR payments to SBI. We have dealt on the legal issue in assessment year 2007-08 in ITA No. 2034/2014, where the disputed matter was remitted to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the legal issue and pass the order on merits and we find disputed issue in the present assessment year

ACIT, KUMBAKONAM vs. CITY UNION BANK LIMITED, KUMBAKONAM

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

TDS deduction by Surat Branch on MICR payments to SBI. We have dealt on the legal issue in assessment year 2007-08 in ITA No. 2034/2014, where the disputed matter was remitted to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the legal issue and pass the order on merits and we find disputed issue in the present assessment year

ACIT, KUMBAKONAM vs. CITY UNION BANK LIMITED, KUMBAKONAM

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

TDS deduction by Surat Branch on MICR payments to SBI. We have dealt on the legal issue in assessment year 2007-08 in ITA No. 2034/2014, where the disputed matter was remitted to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the legal issue and pass the order on merits and we find disputed issue in the present assessment year

DCIT, CC-2,, MADURAI vs. SHRI V. MANOHARAN,, RAMNAD

In the result, 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.3246/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 & C.O. No. 2/Chny/2021 [In I.T.A. No.3246/Chny/2019] The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shri V. Manoharan, Income Tax, D. No. 99/2, Maharnonbu Ground Road, Central Circle 2, Madurai. Near Velumanickam Theatre, Ramnad 632 501. [Pan: Acspm0189J] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) Department By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit Assessee By : None सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 27.06.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.07.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: The Appeal Filed By The Revenue & The Cross Objection Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai, Dated 14.08.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2016-17. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: “1. The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Is Erroneous On Facts Of The Case & In Law.

43D as stipulated by Section 29 of the Act. The deduction on account of payment of interest in respect of capital borrowed is provided in Section-36(1). If a provision for deduction is allowable for the computation of income in the Act, then the same has to be allowed and there cannot be any alternate view on that account

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MADURAI vs. SMT RAJPRIYAM, RAJAPALAYAM

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2047/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Smt. Rajpriyam The Dcit, Non-Corporate Circle-2, 506-C, Thenkasi Road, Madurai. Rajapalayam-626 117. [Pan: Arzpr-4762-N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

TDS reflected in 26AS and thus satisfies the condition stipulated in sec 44AD to adopt rate @ 6% instead of 8%. And since, the AO has adopted the gross-receipts at Rs.20,47,87,318/- as appearing in Form 26AS, the Ld.CIT(A) rightly concluded that the AO might have erred in determining the gross-receipts based only on data from

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. PCIT-3, CHENNAI

43D of the Act are not\napplicable for the computation of income of insurance companies. She\nsubmits that in respect of general insurance companies, profits are\ncomputed as per the annual accounts maintained in accordance with\nInsurance Act, 1938 or the Rules there under or the provisions of\nInsurance Regulatory and Development Authority Act, 1999 [IRDAA] or\nthe regulations made

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD,CHENNAI vs. PCIT, CHENNAI

43D of the Act are not\napplicable for the computation of income of insurance companies. She\nsubmits that in respect of general insurance companies, profits are\ncomputed as per the annual accounts maintained in accordance with\nInsurance Act, 1938 or the Rules there under or the provisions of\nInsurance Regulatory and Development Authority Act, 1999 [IRDAA] or\nthe regulations made

UNITED INDIA INSUANCE CO LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. PCIT 3, CHENNAI

43D of the Act are not\napplicable for the computation of income of insurance companies. She\nsubmits that in respect of general insurance companies, profits are\ncomputed as per the annual accounts maintained in accordance with\nInsurance Act, 1938 or the Rules there under or the provisions of\nInsurance Regulatory and Development Authority Act, 1999 [IRDAA] or\nthe regulations made

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. PCIT-3, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals for AY 2014-15, 2016-17 & 2017-18 are partly allowed and appeals for AY 2015-16 & 2017-18 (in ITA No

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1759/Chny/2019, 182 & 183/Chny/2021, 430/Chny/2022 & 683/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of O/O The Chief Manager, Cfac Income Tax – 3, Department, Head Office, United India Chennai 600 034. Nalanda, Door No. 19, Ground Floor, 4Th Lane, Utamar Gandhi Salai, Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aaacu5552C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sundararaman, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. V. Pushpa, Sr. Standing Counsel (Virtual) सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 07.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 05.01.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: The Appeal In Ita No. 1759/Chny/2019 Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.03.2019 Passed By The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2014- 15. The Appeals In Ita No. 182 & 183/Chny/2021 Are Filed By The Assessee Against Different Orders Both Dated 28.03.2021 Passed By The Ld. Pcit-3, Chennai For The Assessment 2015-16 & 2016-17. The 2

43D of the Act are not applicable for the computation of income of insurance companies. She submits that in respect of general insurance companies, profits are computed as per the annual accounts maintained in accordance with Insurance Act, 1938 or the Rules there under or the provisions of Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority Act, 1999 [IRDAA] or the regulations made

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD,CHENNAI vs. PCIT-3,, CHENNAI

43D of the Act are not\napplicable for the computation of income of insurance companies. She\nsubmits that in respect of general insurance companies, profits are\ncomputed as per the annual accounts maintained in accordance with\nInsurance Act, 1938 or the Rules there under or the provisions of\nInsurance Regulatory and Development Authority Act, 1999 [IRDAA] or\nthe regulations made

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. KAVITHTALAYA PRODUCTIONS PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1287/Chny/2013 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-2010 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Kavithalaya Productions Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, Media Circle 1, Vs. No. 34, Warren Road, Mylapore, Chennai. Chennai – 4. [Pan: Aaack2996E] (Appellant) (Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. S. Vijayaprabha, Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 31.07.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12.10.2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Vi, Chennai Dated 28.12.2012 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2009-10. The Revenue Has Raised Two Grounds Viz., (I) The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Disallowance Made Under Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“ Act” In Short] On The Sum Of ₹.3 Crores On The Ground That The Said Sum Was Directly Paid By M/S. Pyramid Saimira Entertainment Ltd. To M/S. Seven Arts Film & (Ii) The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Holding That ₹.75 Lakhs Repaid To M/S. Pyramid Saimira

43D of the Act and therefore, every receipt that comes under section 28 of the Act is subject to the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act in view of the provisions of section 29 of the Act. It was further submission that the exclusion part given in Explanation 2 to section

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. ADD ALBATROSS PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 377/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Add Albatross Properties Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, Vs. No. 1/4A, Rajiv Gandhi Road (Omr), Corporate Circle 1(1), Egattur, Thiruporur, Chennai 600 130. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aahca8036E] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri A.V. Sreekanth, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri K.N. Mohandass, Ca सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 26.04.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.06.2017 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Chennai Dated 11.11.2016 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. The Only Effective Ground Raised In The Appeal Of The Revenue Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Allowing The Disallowance Of Business Loss Of ₹.3,24,05,339/- Claimed By The Assessee To Be Carried Forward For Future Years.

TDS was not deducted. 3. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and made various submissions. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) has allowed the appeal filed by the assessee by observing as under: “8. I have carefully considered the facts, order of the AO, submissions made by the appellant

THE LAKSHMI VILAS BANK LIMITED,KARUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE 2(1), TRICHY

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

TDS Credit. The assessee is also aggrieved by the fact that revised return as filed on 21.03.2014 was not considered by the lower authorities. ITA Nos.671 & 899/Chny/2019 The subject matter of revenue’s appeal is (i) Ex-gratia payments; (ii) Interest accrued on NPAs; (iii) Rural Debts advances while computing deduction u/s 36(1)(viia) and adoption of Census

DCIT CIRCLE 2(1), TRICHY vs. THE LAKSHMI VILAS BANK LTD., KARUR

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

TDS Credit. The assessee is also aggrieved by the fact that revised return as filed on 21.03.2014 was not considered by the lower authorities. ITA Nos.671 & 899/Chny/2019 The subject matter of revenue’s appeal is (i) Ex-gratia payments; (ii) Interest accrued on NPAs; (iii) Rural Debts advances while computing deduction u/s 36(1)(viia) and adoption of Census

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. AVALON TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD.,, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2009-10 in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. M.L. Meena

43D of the Act do not change the nature of the 'income’ that is arrived at. The AO is therefore directed to take into 14 I.T.A. Nos. 1775 & 445/Chny/2016 & 214/Chny/2017 consideration the disallowances aggregating Rs.45,55,909 as being part of the profits and gains of business while computing the deductions u/s 10A. This issue of appeal is allowed.” Aggrieved

AVALON TECHNOLOGIES (P) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2009-10 in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. M.L. Meena

43D of the Act do not change the nature of the 'income’ that is arrived at. The AO is therefore directed to take into 14 I.T.A. Nos. 1775 & 445/Chny/2016 & 214/Chny/2017 consideration the disallowances aggregating Rs.45,55,909 as being part of the profits and gains of business while computing the deductions u/s 10A. This issue of appeal is allowed.” Aggrieved