ITO, CHENNAI vs. TVS SHRIRAM GRWOTH FUND, CHENNAI

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the Revenue’s appeals dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

183/- and assessed business loss at Rs.11,26,98,263/-. 3.0 The assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) allowed the assessee’s appeal. However, the Ld.CIT(A) brought to tax the income in respect of income from investment in Venture Capital Undertaking (in short ‘VCU’) amounting to Rs.2,69,38,526/- stating that

T vs. SHRIRAM GROWTH FUND,CHENNAIVS.ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the Revenue’s appeals dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

183/- and assessed business loss at Rs.11,26,98,263/-. 3.0 The assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) allowed the assessee’s appeal. However, the Ld.CIT(A) brought to tax the income in respect of income from investment in Venture Capital Undertaking (in short ‘VCU’) amounting to Rs.2,69,38,526/- stating that

ITO, CHENNAI vs. TVS SHRIRAM GROWTH FUND, CHENNAI

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the Revenue’s appeals dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

183/- and assessed business loss at Rs.11,26,98,263/-. 3.0 The assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) allowed the assessee’s appeal. However, the Ld.CIT(A) brought to tax the income in respect of income from investment in Venture Capital Undertaking (in short ‘VCU’) amounting to Rs.2,69,38,526/- stating that

T vs. SHRIRAM GROWTH FUND,CHENNAIVS.ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the Revenue’s appeals dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

183/- and assessed business loss at Rs.11,26,98,263/-. 3.0 The assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) allowed the assessee’s appeal. However, the Ld.CIT(A) brought to tax the income in respect of income from investment in Venture Capital Undertaking (in short ‘VCU’) amounting to Rs.2,69,38,526/- stating that

T vs. SHRIRAM GROWTH FUND,CHENNAIVS.ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the Revenue’s appeals dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

183/- and assessed business loss at Rs.11,26,98,263/-. 3.0 The assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) allowed the assessee’s appeal. However, the Ld.CIT(A) brought to tax the income in respect of income from investment in Venture Capital Undertaking (in short ‘VCU’) amounting to Rs.2,69,38,526/- stating that

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. B.V.REDDY ENTERPRISES PVT LTD., CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1914/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. B.V. Reddy Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, New No. 21/Old No. 10A, First Floor, Corporate Circle 1(2), Umayal Road, Kilpauk, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 010. [Pan:Aaccn2252L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 04.11.2022 : आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Chennai, Dated 29.03.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Facts Are, In Brief, That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2010-11 On 13.10.2010 Admitting Total Income Of ₹.15,50,25,060/-. The Assessing Officer Has Completed The Assessment Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] Dated

Gains (as returned): 2,24,07,388 Less: Short term capital loss b/f from A.Y. 09-10 : 1,62,91,313 61,16,075 Gross Total Income 20,79,06,183 Less: Deduction u/g 80G (as per return) 78,37,315 TAXABLE INCOME 20,00,68,868 As against this, total income assessed is Rs.15,50,25,060/-. Short assessment

SMT. JAYANTHI SEEMAN,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW - 1 (2),, CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Gain on sale of immovable property at T.Nagar,\nChennai\"\nThe assessment was completed and order u/s.143(3) r.w.s.147 of\nthe Act on 29.12.2017 for the A.Y. 2010-11, wherein the following\nadditions were made:\nSl.No. Details\nAmount Rs.\nIncome admitted in return of income\n2,08,400\nAdditions:\n1\nDisallowance of Rent payment\n18,00,000\n2\nDifference in cash

SMT. JAYANTHI SEEMAN,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW - 1 (2),, CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Gain on sale of immovable property at T.Nagar,\nChennai\"\nThe assessment was completed and order u/s.143(3) r.w.s.147 of\nthe Act on 29.12.2017 for the A.Y. 2010-11, wherein the following\nadditions were made:\nSl.No. Details\nAmount Rs.\n1\nIncome admitted in return of income\n2,08,400\nAdditions:\n2\nDisallowance of Rent payment\n18,00,000\n3\nDifference

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. M. MAHADEVAN, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are decided as under:-

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1824/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2013-14 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1825/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1826/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2019-20

capital gain on sale of shares — As regards the issue of Tax residency of the assessee, during the course of assessment proceedings, upon verification of the documents, Information obtained from the FRRO, copies of Visa and Passport etc, Ld.AO noted that Shri. Mahadevan had stayed / resided in India as per below mentioned details:- Total No. of days Total

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INOCME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), CHENNAI vs. M. MAHADEVAN , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are decided as under:-

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1824/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2013-14 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1825/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1826/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2019-20

capital gain on sale of shares — As regards the issue of Tax residency of the assessee, during the course of assessment proceedings, upon verification of the documents, Information obtained from the FRRO, copies of Visa and Passport etc, Ld.AO noted that Shri. Mahadevan had stayed / resided in India as per below mentioned details:- Total No. of days Total

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

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

Capital gains\") for—\n(i) the transfer of all or any rights (including the granting of a licence)\nin respect of a patent, invention, model, design, secret formula or\nprocess or trade mark or similar property ;\n(ii) the imparting of any information concerning the working of, or the\nuse of, a patent, invention, model, design, secret formula or process

SOWMYA SRIKANTH,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 2(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1335/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Smt. Sowmya Srikanth, Vs The Income Tax Officer, No.34/8, Sadhullah Street, Non Corporate Ward 2(1), T. Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. Chennai. Pan: Aegps0056Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri K. Balasubramanian, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Dr.S. Pandian, Jcit

183 and handed over possession of the flat on 15-2-2015. Thus in all respects CIT erred in holding that the exemption of Rs.51,79,147 allowed u/s 54 is not order. 2. The Ld.AR submitted that the Ld.AO after collecting and verifying all the details with regard to the long term capital gain and the claim U/s.54, passed

RAJKUMAR IMPEX PRIVATE LIMITED ,CHENNAI vs. PCIT - 4, CHENAI

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

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

183 Taxman 436) wherein it was held that if the view taken by Ld. AO was one of possible views, the assessment order could not be held to be prejudicial to interest of revenue and therefore, Tribunal was quite justified in setting aside revisionary order. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of case records including documents placed

M/S ENRICA ENTERPRISES PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Das

gains were computed and the assessee requested for deduction under Section 54F of the Act, as the sale consideration received was utilized for purchase of a new flat, in which, the name of the assessee's wife was also included as a purchaser. The assessee further stated about the sale of livestock and standing crops. The assessee also stated that

M/S.ENRICA ENTERPRISES PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Das

gains were computed and the assessee requested for deduction under Section 54F of the Act, as the sale consideration received was utilized for purchase of a new flat, in which, the name of the assessee's wife was also included as a purchaser. The assessee further stated about the sale of livestock and standing crops. The assessee also stated that

SMT. JAYANTHI SEEMAN,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW - 1 (2), , CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Gain on sale of immovable property at T.Nagar,\nChennai\"\nThe assessment was completed and order u/s.143(3) r.w.s.147 of\nthe Act on 29.12.2017 for the A.Y. 2010-11, wherein the following\nadditions were made:\nSl.No. Details\nIncome admitted in return of income\nAdditions:\nDisallowance of Rent payment\nDifference in cash flow statement treated\nas unexplained

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

capital R&D expenditure of Rs. 100,21,22,016/- u/s 35(1)(iv) of the Act, and resultantly delete disallowance to the extent of Rs.70,14,85,411/- (Rs.100,21,22,016/- minus Rs.30,06,36,605/-). This ground therefore stands partly allowed. 5. Ground Nos.7 to 15 of the assessee’s appeal and Ground No.3 of the Revenue

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

capital R&D expenditure of Rs. 100,21,22,016/- u/s 35(1)(iv) of the Act, and resultantly delete disallowance to the extent of Rs.70,14,85,411/- (Rs.100,21,22,016/- minus Rs.30,06,36,605/-). This ground therefore stands partly allowed. 5. Ground Nos.7 to 15 of the assessee’s appeal and Ground No.3 of the Revenue