ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, 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 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Cognizant Technology Solutions Vs 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. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Pan: Aaacd 3312M (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1262, 1263, 1264, 1265 & 1266/Chny/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs 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 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) निधारिती की ओर से/Assessee By राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit & Ms. Anitha, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.05.2025 - 2 -

capital gains, the condition, ‘transfer' of the asset has taken place. 5. The Id. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance made in the computation of ‘Book Profits' made u/s.115JB of the Act of the amount of expenditure disallowed u/s.14A r.w.Rule 8D of the Act, amounting to Rs.271,85283/- without appreciating that as clause (f) of Explanation

LOTUS FOOTWEAR ENTERPRISES LIMITED-INDIA BRANCH,TIRUVANNAMALAI vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAX 1(2), CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.: 20/Chny/2021 &

10B of the Act to sufficiently demonstrate that two units are separate and function independently of each other. Therefore, it cannot be said that new unit is formed by split up of the old unit.” 38. The Id.AR further submitted that there was no impact on the turnover and profitability of the existing business of LU1 after setting

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. TVS MOTOR COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2008-09 The The Asst. Asst. Commissioner Commissioner Of Of Vs. M/S. Tvs Motor Company Ltd., M/S. Tvs Motor Company Ltd., Income Tax, Company Circle Income Tax, Company Circle- Jayalakshmi Estates, 29 (Old Jayalakshmi Estates, 29 (Old Iii(2), New Block, 4Th Floor, 121, Iii(2), New Block, 4 No.8), Haddows Road, Chennai No.8), Haddows Road, Chennai Mahatma Mahatma Gandhi Gandhi Road, Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai Nungambakkam, Chennai Pan/Gir No.Aaacs 7032 B Aaacs 7032 B (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Ar Revenue By : Dr. S.Palanikumar, Cit ( Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 24 /2/ 2022 2 Date Of Pronouncement : 13/4/20 /2022 O R D E R Per C.M.Garg, Jm , Jm

4 | 23 Assessment Year : 2008-09 of taxable units at Mysore and Hosur. The AO has referred to-Section 80-IC(7) read with Section 80-IA(5) and has stated that the eligible income or loss of the Himachal unit cannot be set off against the profit of any other unit u/s 70(1) of the Act. He stated

PATCHIRAJAN LAKSHMANAN,MADURAI vs. PCIT, MADURAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 597/Chny/2020 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 The Principal Commissioner Of Patchirajan Lakshmanan, V. Income Tax, No. 102F,/16Z/3, Maduari -1, Dhanasekaran Nagar, Madurai – 625 002. Polepettai (West) – 628 002. [Pan:Aazpl-1396-H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. V. Nandakumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.05.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28.06.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

Section 263 of the Act and ought to have appreciated that the judicial trend in this regard would vitiate the related findings in the impugned order. 10. The CIT (Appeals) failed to appreciate that there was no proper opportunity given before passing of the impugned order and any order passed in violation of the principles of natural justice would

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. TURBO ENERGEY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

gains of the business required to be computed as per provisions of Sec.28 to 43 inclusive of 10B units and allow the deduction u/s.10B from the business income itself. There is no provision in the IT Act not to allow the set off of losses of 10B eligible units from the total income of the assessee and carry forward

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. TURBO ENERGEY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

gains of the business required to be computed as per provisions of Sec.28 to 43 inclusive of 10B units and allow the deduction u/s.10B from the business income itself. There is no provision in the IT Act not to allow the set off of losses of 10B eligible units from the total income of the assessee and carry forward

TURBO ENERGY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

gains of the business required to be computed as per provisions of Sec.28 to 43 inclusive of 10B units and allow the deduction u/s.10B from the business income itself. There is no provision in the IT Act not to allow the set off of losses of 10B eligible units from the total income of the assessee and carry forward

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. TURBO ENERGY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

gains of the business required to be computed as per provisions of Sec.28 to 43 inclusive of 10B units and allow the deduction u/s.10B from the business income itself. There is no provision in the IT Act not to allow the set off of losses of 10B eligible units from the total income of the assessee and carry forward

TURBO ENERGY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

gains of the business required to be computed as per provisions of Sec.28 to 43 inclusive of 10B units and allow the deduction u/s.10B from the business income itself. There is no provision in the IT Act not to allow the set off of losses of 10B eligible units from the total income of the assessee and carry forward

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. TURBO ENERGEY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

gains of the business required to be computed as per provisions of Sec.28 to 43 inclusive of 10B units and allow the deduction u/s.10B from the business income itself. There is no provision in the IT Act not to allow the set off of losses of 10B eligible units from the total income of the assessee and carry forward

TURBO ENERGY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

gains of the business required to be computed as per provisions of Sec.28 to 43 inclusive of 10B units and allow the deduction u/s.10B from the business income itself. There is no provision in the IT Act not to allow the set off of losses of 10B eligible units from the total income of the assessee and carry forward

POLYHOSE INDIA RUBBER PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3387, 3388 & 3389/Mds/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2008-2009, 2009-10 & 2011-12) M/S. Polyhose India (Rubber) Pvt. Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, C/O. B. Sivaraman & Associates, Ca Corporate Circle-V(2), 10, E Block, Karthik Apartments, Chennai – 34. 46, Vijayaragava Road, Chennai – 600 017. Pan: Aadcp4173F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.17/Mds/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-2010) Vs M/S. Polyhose India (Rubber) Pvt. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd., F-37 To F-42, Corporate Circle-5(2), Sipcot Industrial Park, Chennai – 34. Irungattukottai, Kanchipuram - 602105 Pan: Aadcp4173F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Smt. S. Vijayaprabha, Jcit "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : 26.09.2017 सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 22.11.2017 घोषणाक"तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement

gains. At that stage the aggregate of the incomes under other heads and the provisions for set off and carry forward contained in Sections 70, 72 and 74 of the Act would be premature for application. The & ITA No.17/Mds/2017 deductions under Section 10A therefore would be prior to the commencement of the exercise to be undertaken under Chapter

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. POLYHOSE INDIA (RUBBER) PVT. LTD., KANCHEEPURAM

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3387, 3388 & 3389/Mds/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2008-2009, 2009-10 & 2011-12) M/S. Polyhose India (Rubber) Pvt. Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, C/O. B. Sivaraman & Associates, Ca Corporate Circle-V(2), 10, E Block, Karthik Apartments, Chennai – 34. 46, Vijayaragava Road, Chennai – 600 017. Pan: Aadcp4173F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.17/Mds/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-2010) Vs M/S. Polyhose India (Rubber) Pvt. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd., F-37 To F-42, Corporate Circle-5(2), Sipcot Industrial Park, Chennai – 34. Irungattukottai, Kanchipuram - 602105 Pan: Aadcp4173F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Smt. S. Vijayaprabha, Jcit "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : 26.09.2017 सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 22.11.2017 घोषणाक"तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement

gains. At that stage the aggregate of the incomes under other heads and the provisions for set off and carry forward contained in Sections 70, 72 and 74 of the Act would be premature for application. The & ITA No.17/Mds/2017 deductions under Section 10A therefore would be prior to the commencement of the exercise to be undertaken under Chapter

POLYHOSE INDIA RUBBER PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3387, 3388 & 3389/Mds/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2008-2009, 2009-10 & 2011-12) M/S. Polyhose India (Rubber) Pvt. Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, C/O. B. Sivaraman & Associates, Ca Corporate Circle-V(2), 10, E Block, Karthik Apartments, Chennai – 34. 46, Vijayaragava Road, Chennai – 600 017. Pan: Aadcp4173F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.17/Mds/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-2010) Vs M/S. Polyhose India (Rubber) Pvt. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd., F-37 To F-42, Corporate Circle-5(2), Sipcot Industrial Park, Chennai – 34. Irungattukottai, Kanchipuram - 602105 Pan: Aadcp4173F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Smt. S. Vijayaprabha, Jcit "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : 26.09.2017 सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 22.11.2017 घोषणाक"तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement

gains. At that stage the aggregate of the incomes under other heads and the provisions for set off and carry forward contained in Sections 70, 72 and 74 of the Act would be premature for application. The & ITA No.17/Mds/2017 deductions under Section 10A therefore would be prior to the commencement of the exercise to be undertaken under Chapter

POLYHOSE INDIA RUBBER PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3387, 3388 & 3389/Mds/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2008-2009, 2009-10 & 2011-12) M/S. Polyhose India (Rubber) Pvt. Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, C/O. B. Sivaraman & Associates, Ca Corporate Circle-V(2), 10, E Block, Karthik Apartments, Chennai – 34. 46, Vijayaragava Road, Chennai – 600 017. Pan: Aadcp4173F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.17/Mds/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-2010) Vs M/S. Polyhose India (Rubber) Pvt. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd., F-37 To F-42, Corporate Circle-5(2), Sipcot Industrial Park, Chennai – 34. Irungattukottai, Kanchipuram - 602105 Pan: Aadcp4173F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Smt. S. Vijayaprabha, Jcit "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : 26.09.2017 सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 22.11.2017 घोषणाक"तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement

gains. At that stage the aggregate of the incomes under other heads and the provisions for set off and carry forward contained in Sections 70, 72 and 74 of the Act would be premature for application. The & ITA No.17/Mds/2017 deductions under Section 10A therefore would be prior to the commencement of the exercise to be undertaken under Chapter

RENAULT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,SRIPERAMBUDUR vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.361/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S Renault India Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of No.37 & 38, Fourth Floor, V. Income Tax, Asv Ramana Towers, Company Circle V(3), Venkatanarayana Road, Chennai - 600 034. T.Nagar, Chennai - 600 017. Pan : Aadcr 2042 M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

4 I.T.A. No.361/Mds/14 which is a capital asset, hence, the gain has to be classified as capital receipt, therefore, the DRP ought not have directed the Assessing Officer to treat the gain on foreign exchange fluctuation as revenue receipt. 5. On the contrary, Smt. Vijayalakshmi, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that had the assessee imported plant and machinery, the gain

COMSTAR AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGIES (P) LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 827, 828, 829 & 830/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2005-06, 2005-06, 2007-08 & 2008-09

gains from foreign exchange fluctuations was directly related with export activities and therefore liable to be included in 'export turnover' and 'total turnover' and therefore liable for deduction u/s. 10B. Additional reliance was placed on the full bench decision of the Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs Hewlett Packard Global Soft Ltd. in ITA No. 812/2007 wherein

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. COMSTAR AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGIES P LTD., CHENGALPUT

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 827, 828, 829 & 830/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2005-06, 2005-06, 2007-08 & 2008-09

gains from foreign exchange fluctuations was directly related with export activities and therefore liable to be included in 'export turnover' and 'total turnover' and therefore liable for deduction u/s. 10B. Additional reliance was placed on the full bench decision of the Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs Hewlett Packard Global Soft Ltd. in ITA No. 812/2007 wherein