HINDUJA FOUNDRIES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1590, 1591, 1592 & 1593/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2010-11

gains of business or profession" of any one previous year." 10. We have also carefully gone through the Second Proviso to section 32(1)(ii) of the Act, which reads as follows: "Provided further that where an asset referred to clause (i) or clause (ii) or clause (iia), as the case may be, is acquired by the assessee during

HINDUJA FOUNDRIES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1590, 1591, 1592 & 1593/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2010-11

gains of business or profession" of any one previous year." 10. We have also carefully gone through the Second Proviso to section 32(1)(ii) of the Act, which reads as follows: "Provided further that where an asset referred to clause (i) or clause (ii) or clause (iia), as the case may be, is acquired by the assessee during

HINDUJA FOUNDRIES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1590, 1591, 1592 & 1593/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2010-11

gains of business or profession" of any one previous year." 10. We have also carefully gone through the Second Proviso to section 32(1)(ii) of the Act, which reads as follows: "Provided further that where an asset referred to clause (i) or clause (ii) or clause (iia), as the case may be, is acquired by the assessee during

ACIT, LTU-2,, CHENNAI vs. ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

iia) of the Act on the same. The Ld. CIT, DR appearing before us are was unable to controvert the same. We therefore do not see any reason to interfere with the order of Ld. CIT(A) in this regard and accordingly dismiss this ground of the Revenue.” 5.2 The Ld. CIT, DR was not able to distinguish the above

DDIT, CHENNAI vs. VELS INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY & ADVANCED STUDIES,, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue and the cross- objection of the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1759/Mds/2013 & C.O. No.15/Mds/2014 (In I.T.A. No.1759/Mds/2013) "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11

32 (1) In respect of depreciation of-- (i) buildings, machinery, plant or furniture being tangible assets ; 13 I.T.A. No.1759/Mds/13 C.O. No.15/Mds/14 (ii) know-how, patents, copyrights, trade marks, licences, franchises or any other business or commercial rights of similar nature, being intangible assets acquired on or after the 1st day of April, 1998, owned, wholly or partly, by the assessee

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1), CHENNAI vs. FIXIT PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P.George

iia); or (iic) the amount of income, being the share of the assessee in the income of an association of persons or body of individuals, on which no income-tax is payable in accordance with the provisions of section 86, if any, such amount is credited to the 80[statement of profit and loss]; or (iid) the amount of income

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. TAMIL NADU CRICKET ASSOCIATION, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue as well as the cross-objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2556 & 2557/Mds/2016 & C.O. Nos.158 & 159/Mds/2016 (In Ita Nos.2556 & 2557/Mds/2016) "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13

32 (1) In respect of depreciation of-- (i) buildings, machinery, plant or furniture being tangible assets ; (ii) know-how, patents, copyrights, trade marks, licences, franchises or any other business or commercial rights of similar nature, being intangible assets acquired on or after the 1st day of April, 1998, owned, wholly or partly, by the assessee and used for the purposes

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. TAMIL NADU CRICKET ASSOCIATION, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue as well as the cross-objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2556 & 2557/Mds/2016 & C.O. Nos.158 & 159/Mds/2016 (In Ita Nos.2556 & 2557/Mds/2016) "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13

32 (1) In respect of depreciation of-- (i) buildings, machinery, plant or furniture being tangible assets ; (ii) know-how, patents, copyrights, trade marks, licences, franchises or any other business or commercial rights of similar nature, being intangible assets acquired on or after the 1st day of April, 1998, owned, wholly or partly, by the assessee and used for the purposes

ACIT CIRCLE 1, TRICHY vs. DALMIA CEMENT BHARAT LTD., DALMIAPURAM

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2013-14] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.63/Chny/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.3157/Chny2017) [Assessment Year: 2013-14] M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. The Assistant Commissioner Of Dalmiapuram, Income Tax, Circle-1, Tamilnadu-621651 Vs Williams Road, Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan- Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2014-15] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue

Gains of Business or Profession(Not being a loss sustained in speculation Loss is only mentioned. THE LOSS SUCH AS LOSS ON HOUSE PROPERTY/LOSS ON CAPITAL IS NOT INCLUDED. 5.2) Further in the Sec.74 dealing with capital loss, carry forward/set off of capital loss by the amalgamating company/amalgamated company is not discussed and the applicability of the Section is subject

ACIT CIRCLE 1, TRICHY vs. DALMIA CEMENT BHARAT LTD., DALMIAPURAM

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2013-14] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.63/Chny/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.3157/Chny2017) [Assessment Year: 2013-14] M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. The Assistant Commissioner Of Dalmiapuram, Income Tax, Circle-1, Tamilnadu-621651 Vs Williams Road, Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan- Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2014-15] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue

Gains of Business or Profession(Not being a loss sustained in speculation Loss is only mentioned. THE LOSS SUCH AS LOSS ON HOUSE PROPERTY/LOSS ON CAPITAL IS NOT INCLUDED. 5.2) Further in the Sec.74 dealing with capital loss, carry forward/set off of capital loss by the amalgamating company/amalgamated company is not discussed and the applicability of the Section is subject

WHEELS INDIA LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT LARGE TAX PAYER UMIT-1, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment years 2013-14 & 2014-15 are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1604 & 1605/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

gain Rs. 75.56 Lakhs and realized loss Rs. 179.57 lakhs) 5.1 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) erred in directing the AO that while considering the realized loss Rs. 1,04,01,0020/-, whether the forward contract was in excess of the export turnover of the Appellant and also examine whether there was any premature cancellation of forward contract following

WHEELS INDIA LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT LARGE TAX PAYER UMIT-1, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment years 2013-14 & 2014-15 are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1604 & 1605/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

gain Rs. 75.56 Lakhs and realized loss Rs. 179.57 lakhs) 5.1 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) erred in directing the AO that while considering the realized loss Rs. 1,04,01,0020/-, whether the forward contract was in excess of the export turnover of the Appellant and also examine whether there was any premature cancellation of forward contract following

ACIT LTU 1 CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. WHEELS INDIA LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment years 2013-14 & 2014-15 are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1604 & 1605/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

gain Rs. 75.56 Lakhs and realized loss Rs. 179.57 lakhs) 5.1 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) erred in directing the AO that while considering the realized loss Rs. 1,04,01,0020/-, whether the forward contract was in excess of the export turnover of the Appellant and also examine whether there was any premature cancellation of forward contract following

ACIT LTU 1 CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. WHEELS INDIA LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment years 2013-14 & 2014-15 are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1604 & 1605/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

gain Rs. 75.56 Lakhs and realized loss Rs. 179.57 lakhs) 5.1 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) erred in directing the AO that while considering the realized loss Rs. 1,04,01,0020/-, whether the forward contract was in excess of the export turnover of the Appellant and also examine whether there was any premature cancellation of forward contract following

DDIT, CHENNAI vs. THE BOOKSELLERS & PUBLISHERS ASSOCIATION OF SOUTH INDIA, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1602/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S The Booksellers & Publishers The Deputy Director Of Income Association Of South India, No.8, Sun Plaza, 2Nd Floor, Tax (Exemptions) – I, V. Chennai - 600 034. G.N. Chetty Road, T. Nagar, Chennai - 600 006. Pan : Aabta 2098 R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

32 (1) In respect of depreciation of-- (i) buildings, machinery, plant or furniture being tangible assets ; (ii) know-how, patents, copyrights, trade marks, licences, franchises or any other business or commercial rights of similar nature, being intangible assets acquired on or after the 1st day of April, 1998, owned, wholly or partly, by the assessee and used for the purposes

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

capital of the appellant. It was held by the Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Canara Bank (63 ITR 328) that the loss on account of fluctuation of exchange which arise in the course of business operations and which is incidental to trading operations is allowable as deduction. In the instant case the loss has arisen

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

capital of the appellant. It was held by the Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Canara Bank (63 ITR 328) that the loss on account of fluctuation of exchange which arise in the course of business operations and which is incidental to trading operations is allowable as deduction. In the instant case the loss has arisen

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

capital of the appellant. It was held by the Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Canara Bank (63 ITR 328) that the loss on account of fluctuation of exchange which arise in the course of business operations and which is incidental to trading operations is allowable as deduction. In the instant case the loss has arisen