THE ERODE CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION EMP CO-OP T& C LIMITED,ERODE vs. ITO, WARD 1(1), ERODE

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.509 & 510/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2018-2019 & 2020-2021)

378/- on account of filing of return of income beyond the due date specified u/s 139(1) is hereby upheld. Grounds no. A & B are hereby dismissed’’. 5. On further appeal before us, Ld. Counsel submitted that a petition u/s 119(2)(b) dated 26.12.2023 for condonation of delay in filing claim of deduction u/s 80P is still pending adjudication

ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE LTU 1 CHENNAI, NUNGAMBAKKAM vs. SIFY TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1458, 1950 & 2889/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2020-21, 2017-18 & 2012-13 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Sify Technologies Limited, Income Tax/Acit, Ii Floor, Tidel Park No. 4, Ttt1 Large Taxpayer Unit Circle 1, Taramani S.O., Taramani, Chennai. Chennai 600 113. [Pan:Aaacs9032R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Shivanand K Kalakeri, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S.P. Chidambaram, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 13.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.04.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Three Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Separate Orders Dated 19.02.2024, 07.08.2023 & 08.08.2023 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Years 2020-21, 2017-18 & 2012-13. 2. Since Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed

378 days. The Appellant-Revenue filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, we find the reasons stated by the Revenue are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication. 37. Ground

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LTU CIRCLE 1 , NUNGAMBAKKAM CHENNAI vs. SIFY TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED , TARAMANI CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1458, 1950 & 2889/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2020-21, 2017-18 & 2012-13 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Sify Technologies Limited, Income Tax/Acit, Ii Floor, Tidel Park No. 4, Ttt1 Large Taxpayer Unit Circle 1, Taramani S.O., Taramani, Chennai. Chennai 600 113. [Pan:Aaacs9032R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Shivanand K Kalakeri, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S.P. Chidambaram, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 13.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.04.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Three Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Separate Orders Dated 19.02.2024, 07.08.2023 & 08.08.2023 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Years 2020-21, 2017-18 & 2012-13. 2. Since Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed

378 days. The Appellant-Revenue filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, we find the reasons stated by the Revenue are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication. 37. Ground

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. SIFY TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1458, 1950 & 2889/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2020-21, 2017-18 & 2012-13 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Sify Technologies Limited, Income Tax/Acit, Ii Floor, Tidel Park No. 4, Ttt1 Large Taxpayer Unit Circle 1, Taramani S.O., Taramani, Chennai. Chennai 600 113. [Pan:Aaacs9032R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Shivanand K Kalakeri, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S.P. Chidambaram, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 13.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.04.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Three Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Separate Orders Dated 19.02.2024, 07.08.2023 & 08.08.2023 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Years 2020-21, 2017-18 & 2012-13. 2. Since Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed

378 days. The Appellant-Revenue filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, we find the reasons stated by the Revenue are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication. 37. Ground

SARAVANA REALITY PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3 (4), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.696 & 697/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08 & 2013-14 ) M/S. Saravana Realty Pvt.Ltd Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Kgs Corporate House, Income Tax, 63, Kamaraj Avenue Road 1St Street, Central Circle-3(4) Adyar,Chennai-600 020. Chennai-600 034. Pan: Aakcs0474R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

378 ITR 84 (Bom.) as also the decision of the Gujarat High Court in Kamaleshbhai Supreme Court. 5. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should have found that in the present case the enhancement made by him to the extent of Rs.15,000/- and Rs.47,053/- is not on the basis of any material seized during the search

MOHAMED THAJUDEEN ABUTHAHIR,SIRKALI CHENNAI vs. ITO WARD 2, , NAGAPATTINAM CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 650/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Mohamed Thajudeen Abuthahir, The Income Tax Officer, 17, Railway Road, V. Ward-2, Sirkali – 609 110. Nagapattinam. Tamilnadu. [Pan: Afdpa-4979-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. N. Arjun Raj, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.08.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.08.2023

delay in filing of appeal is condoned and appeal filed by the assessee is admitted for adjudication. :-4-: ITA. No: 650/Chny/2023 5. The brief facts of the case are that, the appellant is engaged in the business of retail trading of readymade garments under the name of style of M/s. National Readymade at Sirkali. The appellant has filed his return

ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6 (2), CHENNAI vs. M/S SUNDARAM BNP PARIBAS HOME FINANCE LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee and

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1888/Chny/2018, 929, 2149 & 2150/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17) M/S. Sundaram Bnp Paribas Home Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Finance Ltd., Income Tax, Sundaram Towers, 46,Whites Road Corporate Circle-6(2) Chennai-600 014. Chennai-34. Pan: Aadcs 4826J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3219 & 1513/Chny/2018, 301, 829, 2077 & 2078/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2012-13, 2014-15 To 2016-17) Vs M/S. Sundaram Bnp Paribas The Assistant / Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Home Finance Ltd., Corporate Circle-6(2) Sundaram Towers, Chennai-34 46,Whites Road Chennai-600 014. Pan: Aadcs 4826J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

delay in filing of these two appeals is condoned and appeals filed by the assessee & the Revenue are admitted for adjudication. 5. The Revenue has raised more or less common grounds of appeal for all assessment years, however, major issues challenged by the Revenue for all assessment years are disallowance of deduction u/s.36(1)(viii) of Income

SUNDARAM BNP PARIBAS HOME FINANCE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(2), CHENNAI

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee and

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1888/Chny/2018, 929, 2149 & 2150/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17) M/S. Sundaram Bnp Paribas Home Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Finance Ltd., Income Tax, Sundaram Towers, 46,Whites Road Corporate Circle-6(2) Chennai-600 014. Chennai-34. Pan: Aadcs 4826J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3219 & 1513/Chny/2018, 301, 829, 2077 & 2078/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2012-13, 2014-15 To 2016-17) Vs M/S. Sundaram Bnp Paribas The Assistant / Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Home Finance Ltd., Corporate Circle-6(2) Sundaram Towers, Chennai-34 46,Whites Road Chennai-600 014. Pan: Aadcs 4826J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

delay in filing of these two appeals is condoned and appeals filed by the assessee & the Revenue are admitted for adjudication. 5. The Revenue has raised more or less common grounds of appeal for all assessment years, however, major issues challenged by the Revenue for all assessment years are disallowance of deduction u/s.36(1)(viii) of Income

M/S SUNDARAM BNP PARIBAS HOME FINANCE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6 (2), CHENNAI

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee and

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1888/Chny/2018, 929, 2149 & 2150/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17) M/S. Sundaram Bnp Paribas Home Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Finance Ltd., Income Tax, Sundaram Towers, 46,Whites Road Corporate Circle-6(2) Chennai-600 014. Chennai-34. Pan: Aadcs 4826J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3219 & 1513/Chny/2018, 301, 829, 2077 & 2078/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2012-13, 2014-15 To 2016-17) Vs M/S. Sundaram Bnp Paribas The Assistant / Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Home Finance Ltd., Corporate Circle-6(2) Sundaram Towers, Chennai-34 46,Whites Road Chennai-600 014. Pan: Aadcs 4826J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

delay in filing of these two appeals is condoned and appeals filed by the assessee & the Revenue are admitted for adjudication. 5. The Revenue has raised more or less common grounds of appeal for all assessment years, however, major issues challenged by the Revenue for all assessment years are disallowance of deduction u/s.36(1)(viii) of Income

ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6 (2), CHENNAI vs. M/S SUNDARAM BNP PARIBAS HOME FINANCE LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee and

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1888/Chny/2018, 929, 2149 & 2150/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17) M/S. Sundaram Bnp Paribas Home Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Finance Ltd., Income Tax, Sundaram Towers, 46,Whites Road Corporate Circle-6(2) Chennai-600 014. Chennai-34. Pan: Aadcs 4826J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3219 & 1513/Chny/2018, 301, 829, 2077 & 2078/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2012-13, 2014-15 To 2016-17) Vs M/S. Sundaram Bnp Paribas The Assistant / Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Home Finance Ltd., Corporate Circle-6(2) Sundaram Towers, Chennai-34 46,Whites Road Chennai-600 014. Pan: Aadcs 4826J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

delay in filing of these two appeals is condoned and appeals filed by the assessee & the Revenue are admitted for adjudication. 5. The Revenue has raised more or less common grounds of appeal for all assessment years, however, major issues challenged by the Revenue for all assessment years are disallowance of deduction u/s.36(1)(viii) of Income

ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(2), CHENNAI vs. SUNDARAM BNP PARIBAS HOME FINANCE LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee and

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1888/Chny/2018, 929, 2149 & 2150/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17) M/S. Sundaram Bnp Paribas Home Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Finance Ltd., Income Tax, Sundaram Towers, 46,Whites Road Corporate Circle-6(2) Chennai-600 014. Chennai-34. Pan: Aadcs 4826J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3219 & 1513/Chny/2018, 301, 829, 2077 & 2078/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2012-13, 2014-15 To 2016-17) Vs M/S. Sundaram Bnp Paribas The Assistant / Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Home Finance Ltd., Corporate Circle-6(2) Sundaram Towers, Chennai-34 46,Whites Road Chennai-600 014. Pan: Aadcs 4826J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

delay in filing of these two appeals is condoned and appeals filed by the assessee & the Revenue are admitted for adjudication. 5. The Revenue has raised more or less common grounds of appeal for all assessment years, however, major issues challenged by the Revenue for all assessment years are disallowance of deduction u/s.36(1)(viii) of Income

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. SUNDARAM BNP PARIBAS HOME FINANCE, CHENNAI

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee and

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1888/Chny/2018, 929, 2149 & 2150/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17) M/S. Sundaram Bnp Paribas Home Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Finance Ltd., Income Tax, Sundaram Towers, 46,Whites Road Corporate Circle-6(2) Chennai-600 014. Chennai-34. Pan: Aadcs 4826J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3219 & 1513/Chny/2018, 301, 829, 2077 & 2078/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2012-13, 2014-15 To 2016-17) Vs M/S. Sundaram Bnp Paribas The Assistant / Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Home Finance Ltd., Corporate Circle-6(2) Sundaram Towers, Chennai-34 46,Whites Road Chennai-600 014. Pan: Aadcs 4826J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

delay in filing of these two appeals is condoned and appeals filed by the assessee & the Revenue are admitted for adjudication. 5. The Revenue has raised more or less common grounds of appeal for all assessment years, however, major issues challenged by the Revenue for all assessment years are disallowance of deduction u/s.36(1)(viii) of Income

ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6 (2), CHENNAI vs. M/S SUNDARAM BNP PARIBAS HOME FINANCE LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee and

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1888/Chny/2018, 929, 2149 & 2150/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17) M/S. Sundaram Bnp Paribas Home Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Finance Ltd., Income Tax, Sundaram Towers, 46,Whites Road Corporate Circle-6(2) Chennai-600 014. Chennai-34. Pan: Aadcs 4826J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3219 & 1513/Chny/2018, 301, 829, 2077 & 2078/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2012-13, 2014-15 To 2016-17) Vs M/S. Sundaram Bnp Paribas The Assistant / Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Home Finance Ltd., Corporate Circle-6(2) Sundaram Towers, Chennai-34 46,Whites Road Chennai-600 014. Pan: Aadcs 4826J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

delay in filing of these two appeals is condoned and appeals filed by the assessee & the Revenue are admitted for adjudication. 5. The Revenue has raised more or less common grounds of appeal for all assessment years, however, major issues challenged by the Revenue for all assessment years are disallowance of deduction u/s.36(1)(viii) of Income

M/S SUNDARAM BNP PARIBAS HOME FINANCE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6 (2), CHENNAI

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee and

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1888/Chny/2018, 929, 2149 & 2150/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17) M/S. Sundaram Bnp Paribas Home Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Finance Ltd., Income Tax, Sundaram Towers, 46,Whites Road Corporate Circle-6(2) Chennai-600 014. Chennai-34. Pan: Aadcs 4826J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3219 & 1513/Chny/2018, 301, 829, 2077 & 2078/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2012-13, 2014-15 To 2016-17) Vs M/S. Sundaram Bnp Paribas The Assistant / Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Home Finance Ltd., Corporate Circle-6(2) Sundaram Towers, Chennai-34 46,Whites Road Chennai-600 014. Pan: Aadcs 4826J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

delay in filing of these two appeals is condoned and appeals filed by the assessee & the Revenue are admitted for adjudication. 5. The Revenue has raised more or less common grounds of appeal for all assessment years, however, major issues challenged by the Revenue for all assessment years are disallowance of deduction u/s.36(1)(viii) of Income

SUNDARAM BNP PARIBAS HOME FINANCE LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORP CIR -6(2), CHENNAI

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee and

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1888/Chny/2018, 929, 2149 & 2150/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17) M/S. Sundaram Bnp Paribas Home Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Finance Ltd., Income Tax, Sundaram Towers, 46,Whites Road Corporate Circle-6(2) Chennai-600 014. Chennai-34. Pan: Aadcs 4826J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3219 & 1513/Chny/2018, 301, 829, 2077 & 2078/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2012-13, 2014-15 To 2016-17) Vs M/S. Sundaram Bnp Paribas The Assistant / Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Home Finance Ltd., Corporate Circle-6(2) Sundaram Towers, Chennai-34 46,Whites Road Chennai-600 014. Pan: Aadcs 4826J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

delay in filing of these two appeals is condoned and appeals filed by the assessee & the Revenue are admitted for adjudication. 5. The Revenue has raised more or less common grounds of appeal for all assessment years, however, major issues challenged by the Revenue for all assessment years are disallowance of deduction u/s.36(1)(viii) of Income

ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6 (2), CHENNAI vs. M/S SUNDARAM BNP PARIBAS HOME FINANCE LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee and

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1888/Chny/2018, 929, 2149 & 2150/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17) M/S. Sundaram Bnp Paribas Home Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Finance Ltd., Income Tax, Sundaram Towers, 46,Whites Road Corporate Circle-6(2) Chennai-600 014. Chennai-34. Pan: Aadcs 4826J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3219 & 1513/Chny/2018, 301, 829, 2077 & 2078/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2012-13, 2014-15 To 2016-17) Vs M/S. Sundaram Bnp Paribas The Assistant / Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Home Finance Ltd., Corporate Circle-6(2) Sundaram Towers, Chennai-34 46,Whites Road Chennai-600 014. Pan: Aadcs 4826J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

delay in filing of these two appeals is condoned and appeals filed by the assessee & the Revenue are admitted for adjudication. 5. The Revenue has raised more or less common grounds of appeal for all assessment years, however, major issues challenged by the Revenue for all assessment years are disallowance of deduction u/s.36(1)(viii) of Income

UNIPRES INDIA PVT. LTD.,KANCHEEPURAM vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD - 3 (2),, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar"नधा'रण वष' /Assessment Year: 2014-15

condone aforesaid delay and admit this appeal. We order accordingly 4 Briefly stated facts of case are that assessee is engaged in business of manufacturing and supplying automotive ancillary parts. It was observed by AO from Balance Sheet of the assessee that assessee has made investments to the tune of ` 5,17,44,000/- in equity share of group company

ACIT,CORPORATE CORPORATE CIRCLE -1 (1), CHENNAI vs. FL SMIDTH PRIVATE LIMITED, KANCHIPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection filed by the assessee is partly-allowed

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunatha

condone the delay and proceed to dispose off the cross objection on merits. 4. Brief facts of the case are as follows: & CO No.67/CHNY/2024 The assessee is a company. It is engaged in the business of design and engineering contract, turnkey contract for cement plants. For the assessment year 2011-12, the return of income was filed on 29.11.2011 declaring