YCH LOGISTICS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,KANCHEEPURAM vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

depreciation allowance under section 10(2)(vi) of the Act." Therefore, the Supreme Court clearly said that the Tribunal could permit additional grounds to be raised for the first time before it so long as these additional grounds were the subject-matter of the proceedings; because, quite clearly, the court has interpreted the subject- matter of the appeal widely

MOSBACHER INDIA LLC,CHENNAI vs. ADDL. DIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed in the terms indicated above

depreciation is admissible under section 32" had been omitted; and] (c) to the depletion of mineral oil in the mining area in respect of the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which commercial production is begun and for such succeeding year or years as may be specified in the agreement; and such allowances shall be computed and made

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME CORPORATE CIRCLE 1-1, CHENNAI vs. FL SMIDTH PRIVATE LIMITED, KANCHIPURAM

144C", "Section 43(1)", "Section 43(6)", "Section 14A", "Rule 8D", "Section 32(1)(ii)", "Section 92CA(3)", "Section 92C(3)" ], "issues": "1. Whether depreciation

R STAHL PRIVATE LIMITED,KANCHEEPURAM vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-5(2), CHENNAI

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Rahul Chaudharyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A No.:55/Chny/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2013 - 2014

Section 92CA(4) and 144C(1) of the Act prosing transfer pricing addition of INR 2,63,22,674/-. In addition, the Assessing Officer, rejected the claim of carry forward of unabsorbed depreciation

M/S. EID PARRY INDIA LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, LTU-1,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathait(Tp)A. Nos.:105, 106, 107/Chny/2024 & Ita No.3113/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. E.I.D. Parry India Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 234, Dare House, Nsc Vs. Income Tax, Bose Road, Parrys Corner, Large Taxpayer Unit -1, Chennai 600 001. Chennai. [Pan: Aaace-0702-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

144C(3) r.w.s. 92CA of the Act dated 29.05.2015, the Assessing Officer disallowed a sum of ₹. 7,35,900/- as TP adjustment. On appeal, the CIT(A) confirmed the above TP adjustment. The assessee contended that Tribunal is consistently holding that TP adjustment in respect of guarantee given to AE shall be at 0.5% and prayed to restrict the disallowance

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LTU CIRCLE 1 CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. E I D PARRY INDIA LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathait(Tp)A. Nos.:105, 106, 107/Chny/2024 & Ita No.3113/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. E.I.D. Parry India Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 234, Dare House, Nsc Vs. Income Tax, Bose Road, Parrys Corner, Large Taxpayer Unit -1, Chennai 600 001. Chennai. [Pan: Aaace-0702-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

144C(3) r.w.s. 92CA of the Act dated 29.05.2015, the Assessing Officer disallowed a sum of ₹. 7,35,900/- as TP adjustment. On appeal, the CIT(A) confirmed the above TP adjustment. The assessee contended that Tribunal is consistently holding that TP adjustment in respect of guarantee given to AE shall be at 0.5% and prayed to restrict the disallowance

M/S. STANADYNE INDIA PVT. LTD.,TIRUVALLUR vs. ACIT, CC-IV(4), CHENNA

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

144C(3) of the Income-tax\nAct, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) on 28.01.2011.\n2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under:\n1. The order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)\n[“CIT(A)"] is contrary to law, facts and circumstances of the case.\n2. Set off of unabsorbed depreciation before allowing deduction\nunder Section

FORD INDIA (P) LTD,CHENNAI vs. DY CIT LTU, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2344 & 2345/Mds/2012 "नधा*रण वष* /Assessment Year: 2005-06 & 2008-09

144C. (1) The Assessing Officer shall, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Act, in the first instance, forward3a a draft of the proposed order of assessment (hereafter in this section referred to as the draft order) to the eligible assessee if he proposes to make, on or after the 1st day of October, 2009, any variation

FORD INDIA (P) LTD,CHENNAI vs. DY CIT LTU, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2344 & 2345/Mds/2012 "नधा*रण वष* /Assessment Year: 2005-06 & 2008-09

144C. (1) The Assessing Officer shall, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Act, in the first instance, forward3a a draft of the proposed order of assessment (hereafter in this section referred to as the draft order) to the eligible assessee if he proposes to make, on or after the 1st day of October, 2009, any variation

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE - 3(1), CHENNAI vs. M/S. TRIUMPH INTERNATIONAL (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, KANCHEEPURAM

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

144C\non 30.11.2021, computing the book profit under Section 115JB at Rs.\n5,40,53,120, disallowing the assessee's claim of set-off of brought\nforward losses/unabsorbed depreciation

DOOWON AUTOMOTIVE SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KNACHEEPURAM vs. ACIT (OSD) CORPORATE RANGE 1, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3061/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Doowon Automotive Systems The Assistant Commissioner Of India Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. B-19 & 20, Vs. Income Tax (Osd), Sipcot Industrial Park, Oragadam, Corporate Range – 1, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Chennai. Kancheepuram District 602 105. [Pan:Aaccd4172F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S.P. Chidambaram, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri B. Jayaragahvan, Cit : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 16.09.2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 23.11.2021 : आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.S. 92Ca Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short], Dated 13.10.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. Besides Challenging Transfer Pricing Issues Of Custom Duty, Working Capital Adjustment, Foreign Exchange Loss, Provision For Doubtful Debts, Confirming Hanon Climate Systems India Pvt. Ltd. Is A Comparable Company, The Assessee Has Also Challenged Corporate Tax Issue Of Brought Forward Business Losses From The Previous Years.

section 144C(5) dated 18.09.2017, the ld. DRP confirmed the transfer pricing adjustment as proposed in the draft assessment order. Accordingly, the TP adjustment as confirmed by the ld. DRP was added back to the income returned by the assessee. 3 I.T.A. No.3061/Chny/17 3. On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal for both TP issues

HOSPIRA HEALTHCARE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.469/Chny/2017 िनधा<रण वष< /Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Hospira Healthcare India The Dy. Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Income Tax, Sri-Nivas, New No.86 (Old No.89), Corporate Circle-2(2), Gn Chetty Road, T Nagar, Chennai. Chennai – 600 017. [Pan: Aaabco 2190F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Sriram Seshadri, C.A Jkथ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Shri A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25.04.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.07.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Jagadish, A.M : Aforesaid Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Assessment Order Passed By The Dcit, Corporate Circle-2(2), Chennai U/S.143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2012-13, In Pursuance Of The Directions Issued By The Dispute Resolution Panel, Bengalore (Hereinafter ‘Drp’) Vide Directions Dated 09.11.2016. :- 2 -:

144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) for the assessment year 2012-13, in pursuance of the directions issued by the Dispute Resolution Panel, Bengalore (hereinafter ‘DRP’) vide directions dated 09.11.2016. :- 2 -: 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in manufacturing and selling of generic injectable drugs to its group

ASSISSTANT COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX CORPORATE CIRCLE 1 1, CHENNAI vs. FL SMITH PRIVATE LIMITED, KANCHIPURAM

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA

144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act') for the\n assessment years 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2017-18 dated 29.03.2024,\n29.03.2024 and 29.03.2024 respectively. The CO has been raised by the\nassessee for the A.Y.2015-16 only. Since the facts are common/identical and\nthe issue of assessee's claim of depreciation on goodwill arising on\namalgamation

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CORPORATE CIRCLE 1 1, CHENNAI vs. FL SMITH PRIVATE LIMITED, KANCHIPURAM

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA

144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act') for the\n assessment years 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2017-18 dated 29.03.2024,\n29.03.2024 and 29.03.2024 respectively. The CO has been raised by the\nassessee for the A.Y.2015-16 only. Since the facts are common/identical and\nthe issue of assessee's claim of depreciation on goodwill arising on\namalgamation

EAST WIND FOOTWEAR COMPANY LIMITED - INDIA BRANCH ,THIRUVANNAMALAI vs. DCIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 1(1) & 1(2) , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1655/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2014-15 M/S. East Wind Footwear Company The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Limited – India Branch, Plot No. 3, Income Tax, D&E, Sipcot Industrial Park, Mathur, International Taxation 1(1) & 1(2), Mangal Village, Cheyyar T.K., Chennai. Thiruvannamalai, Tamil Nadu 631 701. [Pan: Aacce5043N] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Ashik Shah, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Ramakrishnan, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 29.01.2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.01.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvurul Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Final Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] Dated 28.04.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Effective Grounds Raised In The Appeal Of The Assessee Are That The Assessing Officer & The Drp Have Erred In Law In Not Allowing The Deduction Under Section 10Aa Of The Act & Computation Of Tax Payable & Levy Of Interest Under Section 234D Of The Act.

144C(1) of the Act by disallowing the claim of exemption under section 10AA of the Act while allowing to carry forward the unabsorbed depreciation

PRECISION HYDRAULICS PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(2), CHENNAI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Rahul Chaudharyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A No.:1841/Chny/2017 िनधा&रणवष&/Assessment Year: 2013 - 2014

Section 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’] in pursuance of the directions issued by the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) on 24.04.2017. I.T.A. No.1841/CHNY/2017 Assessment Year :2013 - 2014 2. The brief fact of the case are that the Appellant, a private limited company, was engaged in the business of manufacturing hydraulic cylinders

FLEXTRONICS TECHNOLOGIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,KANCHEEPURAM vs. ACIT (OSD), CHENNAI

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.322/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Flextronics Technologies (India) Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited [Appeal By Flexpower India Income Tax (Osd), Private Limited, That Has Merged With Corporate Range 2, Room No. 403, Flextronics Technologies (India) Private Wanaparthy Block, No. 121, Limited, Plot No. 3, Phase Ii, Sipcot Mahatma Gandhi Road, Industrial Park, Sandavellure C Village, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District, Tamil Nadu 602 106. [Pan:Aaacf5248E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Ajit Kumar Jain, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Dr. S. Palanikumar, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 10.01.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.01.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C (13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961[“Act” In Short] Relevant To The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Has Not Pressed Ground Nos. 1

section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Act dated 30.11.2016 by making adjustment in accordance with the directions given by the ld. DRP. 7. On being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the TPO determined the ALP at NIL, which is not correct

WATANMAL (INDIA) PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T(Tp).A. No. 4/Chny/2018 & I.T.A. No. 2407/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2006-07 & 2008-09 Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Watanmal (India) Pvt. Ltd., Old No. 12, New No. 14, Ground Floor, Income Tax, Sripuram Second Street, Royapettah, Corporate Circle 3(2), Chennai 600 014. Chennai. [Pan:Aaacw6624B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T. Banusekar, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Dr. S. Palanikumar, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 05.09.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 16.09.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao,: The Appeal Filed By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2006- 07 Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel -2, Bengaluru Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 R.W.S. 92Ca(3) R.W.S. 144C(5) R.W.S. 254 R.W.S. 144C(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] Dated 27.12.2017. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2008-09 Is Directed Against The Order Of The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 R.W.S. 92Ca(3) R.W.S.

144C(5) dated 12.07.2017. Since both the appeals are filed by the same assessee, heard together and are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of brevity. I.T(TP).A. No. 4/Chny/2018 [Assessment Year 2006-07]: 2. Facts are, in brief, that the assessee company is engaged in the business of providing logistics and business support services

SELLA SYNERGY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2052/Mds/2011 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08

144C(13) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Act”) is not in accordance with the law and is contrary to the facts and circumstances of the present case and in any case in violation of principles of equity and natural justice. Adjustment under section 92CA of the Act in respect of software development services 2. The Honourable