ACIT,, CHENNAI vs. SRI. K.SRIKANTH,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the four appeals adjudicated by us in this order are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

section 28 by Finance Act, 2002 effective from 1.4.2003. Prior to amendment, it was held to be not taxable where the non-compete fee related to a business as a whole, as for example decided in CIT v. Rai Bahadur Jairam Valji [1959] 35 ITR 148 (SC). In such cases, it would be a capital receipt. In a case, where

SRI K.SRIKANTH,,CHENNAI vs. ACIT,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the four appeals adjudicated by us in this order are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

section 28 by Finance Act, 2002 effective from 1.4.2003. Prior to amendment, it was held to be not taxable where the non-compete fee related to a business as a whole, as for example decided in CIT v. Rai Bahadur Jairam Valji [1959] 35 ITR 148 (SC). In such cases, it would be a capital receipt. In a case, where

SHRI K.SRIKANTH,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the four appeals adjudicated by us in this order are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

section 28 by Finance Act, 2002 effective from 1.4.2003. Prior to amendment, it was held to be not taxable where the non-compete fee related to a business as a whole, as for example decided in CIT v. Rai Bahadur Jairam Valji [1959] 35 ITR 148 (SC). In such cases, it would be a capital receipt. In a case, where

SRI K.SRIKANTH,,CHENNAI vs. ACIT,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the four appeals adjudicated by us in this order are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

section 28 by Finance Act, 2002 effective from 1.4.2003. Prior to amendment, it was held to be not taxable where the non-compete fee related to a business as a whole, as for example decided in CIT v. Rai Bahadur Jairam Valji [1959] 35 ITR 148 (SC). In such cases, it would be a capital receipt. In a case, where

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SICAGEN INDIA LIMITED, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

gains tax on sale of shares and sale of property. With these observations, the Ld.A.O disallowed the entire capital loss on sale of debts claimed by the assessee to the tune of ₹.56,48,55,180/-. 13. The learned CIT(A) granted relied to the assessee by observing as under:- “5.2.2. Having gone through the various submissions and paper books

REVATHI SAMUEL,SALEM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-2(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1285/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Revathi Samuel, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 10A, Ramakrishna Road, International Taxation 2(1) Sreerangapalayam, Chennai. Salem 636 007. [Pan: Acxps 8637C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. G. Baskar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. Arv Srinivasan, Addl. Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 14.05.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.05.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

section 153(3) is directory instead of mandatory. 1.4. The CIT(A) after having noted that the order was passed beyond the period of limitation, ought to have held it a nullity. 2. Adoption of FMV of land and non-reference u/s 55A 2.1. The CIT(A) erred in upholding the rejection by the AO of the reasonable FMV adopted

ITO, CORPORATE WARD - 2 (2),, CHENNAI vs. SMT. REKHA SHETTY, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the Cross Objections filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S.Jayaraman & C.O. No.106/Chny/2019 Assessment Year : 2016-17

433(Chennai), which are in favour of Revenue. Further, the Ld. D.R. submitted that learned CIT (A) erred in directing the A.O. to allow deduction under Section 54 by holding that the assessee is eligible to claim deduction under Section 54 as she has utilized the amount before the due date for filing the return of income under Section

SHRI K. SHANMUGAM,,PUDUKKOTTAI vs. ITO, WARD-1, , PUDUKKOTTAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.462/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 K. Shanmugam, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 76-77, Sathya Sai Illam, Ward 1, Charles Nagar, Pudukkottai 622 001. Pudukkottai. [Pan:Aamps8456Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Ashok Sundaresan, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 10.08.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.08.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Trichy, Dated 10.12.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Filed With A Delay Of 14 Days In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay In The Form Of An Affidavit Mentioning The Reasons For Delay In Filing The Appeal. By Referring To The Above Affidavit, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Has Submitted That There Is Reasonable Cause

section 28 of the Act at ₹.7,97,79,654/-, long term capital gain at ₹.4,85,540/- and income under the head ‘other source at ₹.6,46,841/-. 5. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and challenged determination of fair market value of the property towards earning of business income. After considering

REJI ABRAHAM,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the Revenue and the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A.Mohan Alankamony

433 and the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case CIT Vs. L. Alagu Sundaram Chettiyar reported in 109 ITR 508. While doing so, the Ld.AO was of the view that M/s. Aban Ventures Ltd., was used as a conduit company to transfer funds from M/s. Tuticorin Power Company Ltd., to Mr. Reji Abraham. When

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1 (1), CHENNAI vs. M/S ABAN VENTURES PVT LTD, CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the Revenue and the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A.Mohan Alankamony

433 and the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case CIT Vs. L. Alagu Sundaram Chettiyar reported in 109 ITR 508. While doing so, the Ld.AO was of the view that M/s. Aban Ventures Ltd., was used as a conduit company to transfer funds from M/s. Tuticorin Power Company Ltd., to Mr. Reji Abraham. When

M/S. AMBATTUR DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD-1(1), CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2601/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Ambattur Developers Private Limited, (Amalgamated With Ambattur Hotels Private Limited) No. 86/E2, Industrial Estate, Ambattur, Chennai - 600 058. Tamil Nadu. [Pan: Aaeca-7490-D] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Corporate Ward- 1(1), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate : Shri. Bipin, C.N., Cit सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.09.2025 : 11.11.2025 आदेश /Order Per S.R.Raghunatha, Am : This Appeal By The Assessee Is Filed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), Nfac, Delhi, (In Short Ld.Cit(A)) For The Assessment Year 2015-16, Vide Order Dated 12.08.2024. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows: :-2-:

gains computation under Section 50C. 13) The combined value of the land and the Hotel building with the facilities is well worth the Rs.365.12 Crores and the total tangible assets Rs.470.11 Crores as taken by the Appellant and the value of intangible assets at Rs.26 Crores as given by Registered valuers. Neither the AO or the CIT(A) have

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

capital gains, would be entitled to be set off against income from any other sources under the same head. The claim to set off the loss cannot be deferred to subsequent years as held by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Milling Trading Co. P. Ltd., 211ITR 690 (Gut.). Hence, the appellant has rightly

LIFECELL INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3334/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Lifecell International Assistant Commissioner Of Private Ltd., V. Income Tax, No. 26, Vandalur Corporate Circle 4(1), Kelambakkam Main Road, Chennai. Keelakkottaiyur, Chennai. [Pan: Aaeca-7997-B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Ajith Kumar Choradia, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. S. Senthil Kumaran, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04.01.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

capital expenditure disallowed under section 35(2AB) under the provisions of Section 35(l)(iv) read with Section 35(2)(ia) of the Act. In connection with computation of tax: 23. The CIT(A) failed to note that the Appellant was entitled to credit of tax paid u/s 115JAA of the Act which was not provided

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(1), CHENNAI vs. REPCO HOME FINANCE P LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA no

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

capital and of the general reserves of the specified entity, no allowance under this clause shall be made in respect of such excess. Explanation.- in this clause, (a) "specified entity" means,- (i) a financial corporation specified in section 4A of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956) ; (ii) a financial corporation which is a public sector company ; (iii) a banking

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM vs. THRIVENI EARTHMOVERS PVT. LTD., SALEM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

gain of Rs.225,843/. Assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of Income lax Act, 1961 on 28.02.2014 by assessing income at Rs.242,82,49,494/- & STCG at Rs. 2,25,843/-. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle XXI, Kolkata has informed vide his letter dated 18.03.2014 that during the assessment proceedings in the case of M/s.Sakshi Trade Link

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM vs. THRIVENI EARTHMOVERS PVT. LTD., SALEM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

gain of Rs.225,843/. Assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of Income lax Act, 1961 on 28.02.2014 by assessing income at Rs.242,82,49,494/- & STCG at Rs. 2,25,843/-. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle XXI, Kolkata has informed vide his letter dated 18.03.2014 that during the assessment proceedings in the case of M/s.Sakshi Trade Link

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM vs. THRIVENI EARTHMOVERS PVT. LTD., SALEM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

gain of Rs.225,843/. Assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of Income lax Act, 1961 on 28.02.2014 by assessing income at Rs.242,82,49,494/- & STCG at Rs. 2,25,843/-. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle XXI, Kolkata has informed vide his letter dated 18.03.2014 that during the assessment proceedings in the case of M/s.Sakshi Trade Link

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM vs. THRIVENI EARTHMOVERS PVT. LTD., SALEM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

gain of Rs.225,843/. Assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of Income lax Act, 1961 on 28.02.2014 by assessing income at Rs.242,82,49,494/- & STCG at Rs. 2,25,843/-. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle XXI, Kolkata has informed vide his letter dated 18.03.2014 that during the assessment proceedings in the case of M/s.Sakshi Trade Link