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

capital\ngain on sale of mutual funds were offered to tax as income from\nCapital Gains in the year in which they were sold. We do not find any\ninfirmity in the decision of the Id.CIT(A) to intervene with the above\norder of Ld.CIT(A) and accordingly, this issue raised in the Grounds\nof appeal based on chart mentioned

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

capital\ngain on sale of mutual funds were offered to tax as income from\nCapital Gains in the year in which they were sold. We do not find any\ninfirmity in the decision of the Id.CIT(A) to intervene with the above\norder of Ld.CIT(A) and accordingly, this issue raised in the Grounds\nof appeal based on chart mentioned

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

capital\ngain on sale of mutual funds were offered to tax as income from\nCapital Gains in the year in which they were sold. We do not find any\ninfirmity in the decision of the Id.CIT(A) to intervene with the above\norder of Ld.CIT(A) and accordingly, this issue raised in the Grounds\nof appeal based on chart mentioned

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

capital\ngain on sale of mutual funds were offered to tax as income from\nCapital Gains in the year in which they were sold. We do not find any\ninfirmity in the decision of the Id.CIT(A) to intervene with the above\norder of Ld.CIT(A) and accordingly, this issue raised in the Grounds\nof appeal based on chart mentioned

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)

ia) is for a specific violation as prescribed in the Act and the disallowance does not serve its purpose if the tax holiday benefit is given to the same…..” 8.4 The assessee had raised various grounds on the issue before us for A.Y.2010-11 to A.Y.2012-13 and had also brought to our notice that for A.Y. 2010-11, there was mistake

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)

ia) is for a specific violation as prescribed in the Act and the disallowance does not serve its purpose if the tax holiday benefit is given to the same…..” 8.4 The assessee had raised various grounds on the issue before us for A.Y.2010-11 to A.Y.2012-13 and had also brought to our notice that for A.Y. 2010-11, there was mistake

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

ia) is for a specific violation as\nprescribed in the Act and the disallowance does not serve its purpose if the\ntax holiday benefit is given to the same.....\"\n\n8.4 The assessee had raised various grounds on the issue before\nus for A.Y.2010-11 to A.Y.2012-13 and had also brought to our\nnotice that for A.Y. 2010-11, there

ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 8(1)-LTU-2, , CHENNAI vs. M/S. ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

2. The present Appeal has been filed by the Revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act by raising the following purported substantial questions of law arising from the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 31.7.2008, by which the learned Tribunal upheld the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and held that

M/S. ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 8(1)-LTU-2, , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

2. The present Appeal has been filed by the Revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act by raising the following purported substantial questions of law arising from the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 31.7.2008, by which the learned Tribunal upheld the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and held that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

2. Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee did not claim additional deduction or exemption or made a fresh claim for deduction, by filing a revised computation and claiming deduction under section 37(1)?" 7.11 The Hon'ble High Court is noted to have answered

ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT NON CORP CIRCLE 8(1) LTU - II, CHENNAI

Bench: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member), SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nआयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1402/Chny/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2019-20\nM/s. Ashok Leyland Ltd.,\nNo.1, Sardar Patel Road,\nGuindy, Chennai-600 032.\n[PAN: AAAСА 4651 L]\n(अपीलार्थी/Appellant)\nv.\nThe DCIT,\nNCC-8(1),\nLTU-II,\nChennai.\n(प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)\nआयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1663/Chny/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2019-20\nThe DCIT,\nNCC-8,\nChennai.\n(अपीलार्थी/Appellant)\nv.\nM/s. Ashok Leyl

2) of the Act, which is impermissible. The Tribunal rightly took note\nof the decision in the case of Redington India Ltd. (supra), wherein it\nwas held that the provisions of Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D\nof the Income-tax Rules, 1962 cannot be made applicable in vacuum i.e\nin the absence of exempt income. Therefore

TITAN COMPANY LIMITED,HOSUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - LTU 2 (IC), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal raised by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1742/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2011-12 Titan Company Limited, Assistant Commissioner Of No.3, Sipcot Industrial Complex, Income Tax, Hosur, Krishnagiri, Ltu-2, Tamil Nadu-635126 Chennai [Pan: Aaact5131A] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri Abhay Kumar, C.A अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Ms.Komali Krishna, Cit प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10.09.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04.12.2024

10A, 10B etc. of the Act, the same shall be allowed in computing the total income of the assessee." On perusal of the said circular, it is noted that the said circular is in the context of Section 10A/10B of the Act. It does not discuss the implications of the deeming provisions laid down in the Section 80 IA