RANE ENGINE VALVES LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

5. Trigo Imagement, Hungary Rs.22,89,796/- 2014-15 1. Ceva Logistics GMBH (TNT), Rs.25,72,651/- Germany 2. Hqm Mess Pruund Weksoffen, Rs.14,93,578/- Germany 2015-16 Rs.44,60,305/- The ld.counsel for the assessee as well as the ld. Senior DR agreed that facts and circumstances are exactly identical in all the five years and grounds raised

RANE ENGINE VALVE LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE-5(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

5. Trigo Imagement, Hungary Rs.22,89,796/- 2014-15 1. Ceva Logistics GMBH (TNT), Rs.25,72,651/- Germany 2. Hqm Mess Pruund Weksoffen, Rs.14,93,578/- Germany 2015-16 Rs.44,60,305/- The ld.counsel for the assessee as well as the ld. Senior DR agreed that facts and circumstances are exactly identical in all the five years and grounds raised

RANE ENGINE VALVE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

5. Trigo Imagement, Hungary Rs.22,89,796/- 2014-15 1. Ceva Logistics GMBH (TNT), Rs.25,72,651/- Germany 2. Hqm Mess Pruund Weksoffen, Rs.14,93,578/- Germany 2015-16 Rs.44,60,305/- The ld.counsel for the assessee as well as the ld. Senior DR agreed that facts and circumstances are exactly identical in all the five years and grounds raised

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE LTU-1, , CHENNAI vs. CARBORUNDUM UNIVERSAL LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos. 139, 140 & 117/Chny/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2018-19)

5) Depreciation on know-how fees 24,652/- 6) Brand value depreciation 83,057/- 7) Disallowance of export commission u/s. 40(a)(і) 1,40,83,245/- 8) Disallowance of excess depreciation: Printer, UPS, Scanner 3,66,828/- & Router 10,32,028/- Software 6,20,000/- 9) Excess deduction u/s.35(2AB) 10) Disallowance of Principal amount

ACIT, LTU CIRCLE 1 CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. CARBORUNDUM UNIVERSAL LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos. 139, 140 & 117/Chny/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2018-19)

5) Depreciation on know-how fees 24,652/- 6) Brand value depreciation 83,057/- 7) Disallowance of export commission u/s. 40(a)(і) 1,40,83,245/- 8) Disallowance of excess depreciation: Printer, UPS, Scanner 3,66,828/- & Router 10,32,028/- Software 6,20,000/- 9) Excess deduction u/s.35(2AB) 10) Disallowance of Principal amount

ACIT, CIRCLE LTU-1,, CHENNAI vs. CARBORUNDUM UNIVERSAL LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos. 139, 140 & 117/Chny/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2018-19)

5) Depreciation on know-how fees 24,652/- 6) Brand value depreciation 83,057/- 7) Disallowance of export commission u/s. 40(a)(і) 1,40,83,245/- 8) Disallowance of excess depreciation: Printer, UPS, Scanner 3,66,828/- & Router 10,32,028/- Software 6,20,000/- 9) Excess deduction u/s.35(2AB) 10) Disallowance of Principal amount

ALTERNATIVE FOR INDIA DEVELOPMENT,CHENNAI vs. COMMISSION OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 247 & 248/Chny/2025 धनिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2024-25 Alternative For India The Commissioner Of Development, Vs. Income Tax (Exemption), No. 1, Vgn Nagar, Chennai. Iyyappanthangal, Kattupakkam Post, Chennai – 600 056. [Pan: Aaata-4184-H] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. K.Vishwa Padmanaban, C.A. प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Bipin C.N Cit.

80G of the Income Tax Act,1961 respectively 2. The only ground raised by the assessee in these two appeals are the ld.CIT(E) has rejected the application filed by the assessee and denied the :-2-: ITA. Nos:247 & 248/Chny/2025 registration u/s.12AB and u/s.80G of the Act due to non-submission of the complete details and documents by the assessee

ALTERNATIVE FOR INDIA DEVELOPMENT,CHENNAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 247 & 248/Chny/2025 धनिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2024-25 Alternative For India The Commissioner Of Development, Vs. Income Tax (Exemption), No. 1, Vgn Nagar, Chennai. Iyyappanthangal, Kattupakkam Post, Chennai – 600 056. [Pan: Aaata-4184-H] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. K.Vishwa Padmanaban, C.A. प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Bipin C.N Cit.

80G of the Income Tax Act,1961 respectively 2. The only ground raised by the assessee in these two appeals are the ld.CIT(E) has rejected the application filed by the assessee and denied the :-2-: ITA. Nos:247 & 248/Chny/2025 registration u/s.12AB and u/s.80G of the Act due to non-submission of the complete details and documents by the assessee

MRS. MALINI RAMAKRISHNAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CC-6(2),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1187/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Mrs. Malini Ramakrishnan, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of 46, Rukmani Salai, Kalakshetra Colony, Income Tax, Besant Nagar, Chennai 600 090. Corporate Circle 6(2), Chennai. [Pan: Achpr3778B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Mrs. T.V. Muthu Abirami, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G. Suresh, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 01.03.2024 Passed By The Addl/Jcit (A)-1, Vadodara For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Ld. Ar, Mrs. T.V. Muthu Abirami, Advocate Drew Our Attention To Ground No. 8 & Requested To Adjudicate The Ground As An Effective Ground. The Ld. Ar Further Submits That The Assessee Filed An Appeal Before The Ld. Cit(A) On 12.04.2021 With A Delay Of Eight Years

5. Further, we note about the contention of the assessee that non consideration of business loss, deductions under sections 80C and 80G of the Act and non-allowance of TDS

M/S. STERLITE INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LTD.,MADURAI vs. ADDITIONAL CIT, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.318 & 319/Mds/2008 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1020/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1665/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07

80G of the Act. The Assessing Officer restricted the claim to the extent of `1,73,250/- since the donation made to Rajiv Gandhi Relief and National Welfare Trust was eligible for deduction only for 50% as against 100% claimed by the assessee. However, the CIT(Appeals) allowed the claim of the assessee under Section 37 of the Act. since

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. STERLITE INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LTD., TUTICORIN

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.318 & 319/Mds/2008 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1020/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1665/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07

80G of the Act. The Assessing Officer restricted the claim to the extent of `1,73,250/- since the donation made to Rajiv Gandhi Relief and National Welfare Trust was eligible for deduction only for 50% as against 100% claimed by the assessee. However, the CIT(Appeals) allowed the claim of the assessee under Section 37 of the Act. since

M/S STERLITE INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LTD.,TUTICORIN vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.318 & 319/Mds/2008 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1020/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1665/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07

80G of the Act. The Assessing Officer restricted the claim to the extent of `1,73,250/- since the donation made to Rajiv Gandhi Relief and National Welfare Trust was eligible for deduction only for 50% as against 100% claimed by the assessee. However, the CIT(Appeals) allowed the claim of the assessee under Section 37 of the Act. since

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. STERLITE INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LTD., TUTICORIN

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.318 & 319/Mds/2008 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1020/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1665/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07

80G of the Act. The Assessing Officer restricted the claim to the extent of `1,73,250/- since the donation made to Rajiv Gandhi Relief and National Welfare Trust was eligible for deduction only for 50% as against 100% claimed by the assessee. However, the CIT(Appeals) allowed the claim of the assessee under Section 37 of the Act. since

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S STERLITE INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LTD., TUTICORIN

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.318 & 319/Mds/2008 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1020/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1665/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07

80G of the Act. The Assessing Officer restricted the claim to the extent of `1,73,250/- since the donation made to Rajiv Gandhi Relief and National Welfare Trust was eligible for deduction only for 50% as against 100% claimed by the assessee. However, the CIT(Appeals) allowed the claim of the assessee under Section 37 of the Act. since

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S STERLITE INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LTD., CHENNAI

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.318 & 319/Mds/2008 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1020/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1665/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07

80G of the Act. The Assessing Officer restricted the claim to the extent of `1,73,250/- since the donation made to Rajiv Gandhi Relief and National Welfare Trust was eligible for deduction only for 50% as against 100% claimed by the assessee. However, the CIT(Appeals) allowed the claim of the assessee under Section 37 of the Act. since

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

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