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

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

234B and section 234C of the Act. I.T.A. No. 1085/CHNY/2015 Assessment year: 2010-11 Page 7 of 21 [9] We will take up all these grounds of appeal as all these grounds are on the same issue and interconnected. In substance, in our considered view, the questions actually required to be adjudicated by us are as follows: - Whether

LOTUS FOOTWEAR ENTERPRISES LIMITED-INDIA BRANCH,TIRUVANNAMALAI vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAX 1(2), CHENNAI

In the result all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

depreciation. IV. Allowance of MAT credit 12. The lower authorities have erred in not allowing the credit of taxes paid under section 115JB of INR 46,54,86,95 as disclosed in the return of income of the Appellant. V. Consequential Relief 13. The respondent erred in charging interest under Section 234B of the Act which is consequential in nature

SANTECH SOLUTONS PVT LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as 9

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1036/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2008-2009

3. We should have claimed Rs:l,44,30,052.22 as depreciation instead of writing off ₹80,16,696.00 4. Therefore kindly allow us Rs:l,44,30,052.22 in the place of Rs:80,16,696.00 5. We are enclosing sales invoice and Sales Details for having sold the products 6.We are producing the sample expenses vouchers

SHRI V. NATARAJAN (INDIVIDUAL),RASIPURAM vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, SALEM

In the result, both the appeals of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1535 & 1801/Chny/2024 ननिाारण वर्ा/Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2015-16 V. Varadappan Natarajan/ The Acit, V. Natarajan (Individual), Central Circle, No.64-C, Rotary Nagar, Salem. Rasipuram Tamil Nadu-637 408. [Pan: Acgpn1477Q] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, Fca (Virtual) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Shiva Srinivas, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2025 घोर्णाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2025

Depreciation Rs. 1,18,895/- - 3. Interest expenses Rs. 8,93,642/- Rs. 12,99,120/- Net professional income (-)Rs. 3,59,150/- Add: Disallowance of interest unrelated to Rs. 8,93,642/- profession Income assessed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 153A Rs. 5,35,492/- Tuition income as undisclosed income u/s 68 Rs. 10,65,970/- Gift received as undisclosed

VARADAPPAN NATARAJAN,RASIPURAM vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, SALEM

In the result, both the appeals of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1535 & 1801/Chny/2024 ननिाारण वर्ा/Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2015-16 V. Varadappan Natarajan/ The Acit, V. Natarajan (Individual), Central Circle, No.64-C, Rotary Nagar, Salem. Rasipuram Tamil Nadu-637 408. [Pan: Acgpn1477Q] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, Fca (Virtual) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Shiva Srinivas, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2025 घोर्णाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2025

Depreciation Rs. 1,18,895/- - 3. Interest expenses Rs. 8,93,642/- Rs. 12,99,120/- Net professional income (-)Rs. 3,59,150/- Add: Disallowance of interest unrelated to Rs. 8,93,642/- profession Income assessed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 153A Rs. 5,35,492/- Tuition income as undisclosed income u/s 68 Rs. 10,65,970/- Gift received as undisclosed

J RAY MCDERMOTT ENGINEERING SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED ,CHENNAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri Jagadish

3) read with section 147 of the Act is bad in law and liable to be quashed as the same was passed manually without the issuance of the Document Identification Number ("DIN"), as mandated by the CBDT Circular No. 19/2019. 6. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO/ CIT(A) have erred

HARLAND CLARKE HOLDING SOFTWARE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT COMPANY CIRCLE 2(2), CHENN

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S.Jayaraman

3— Erroneous levy of interest under section 234B and 234C Ground of objection 14 — Erroneous levy of interest under Section 234B and Section 234C The learned AO and the Hon’ble DRP have erred in levying interest under section 234B and 234C of the Act despite the fact that the additions to the income were un-anticipated and there would

M/S. ARUN EXCELLO URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE - 1(1),, CHENNAI

In the result appeal filed by Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunatha

234B of the Act in consequence to the above disallowance” 3. Brief facts of the case extracted from ITA No.537/Chny/2020 are that the assessee is engaged in the business of industrial civil and mechanical constructions. The assessee has filed its return of income for assessment year 2014-15 on 29.11.2014 admitting total loss of Rs.2,71,24,844/- The case

ARUN EXCELLO URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result appeal filed by Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunatha

234B of the Act in consequence to the above disallowance” 3. Brief facts of the case extracted from ITA No.537/Chny/2020 are that the assessee is engaged in the business of industrial civil and mechanical constructions. The assessee has filed its return of income for assessment year 2014-15 on 29.11.2014 admitting total loss of Rs.2,71,24,844/- The case

LOTUS FOOTWEAR ENTERPRISES LIMITED-INDIA BRANCH,TIRUVANNAMALAI vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAX 1(2), CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.: 20/Chny/2021 &

depreciation. IV. Allowance of MAT credit 12. The lower authorities have erred in not allowing the credit of taxes paid under Section 115JB of INR 46,54,86,95 as disclosed in the return of income of the Appellant. V. Consequential Relief 13. The respondent erred in charging interest under Section 234B of the Act which is consequential in nature

PLR TEXTILES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. THE ACIT ,CORPORATE CIRCLE-5(2), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 133/Chny/2021 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06 Plr Textiles Ltd., The Acit, 8K, Century Plaza, V. Corporate Circle -5(2), 560-562, Mount Road, Chennai – 641 034. Chennai – 600 018. [Pan: Aaacp-6536-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Anitha, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Filed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Chennai, Vide Ita No.153/Cit(A)-3/2018-19For The Assessment Year 2005-06, Dated 13.03.2020. 2. At The Outset, We Find That There Is A Delay Of 346 Days In Appeal Filed By The Assessee, For Which Petition For Condonation Of Delay Along With Reasons For Delay Has Been Filed. After Considering The Petition Filed By The Assessee, Reason For Delay In Filing The Appeal Was Due To Covid-19 Pandemic & Also Hearing Both The :-2-:

234B and 234C are charged as per law. Demand notice u/s 156 is enclosed. 7. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) – 3, Chennai. Before the ld.CIT(A), the assessee filed a detailed written submission in respect of delay in passing the order giving effect by the AO and hence

PENTA MEDIA GRAPHICS LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result , appeal in ITA no

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Duvvuru R.L.Reddy

Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act”) and secondly for ay: 2009-10 dated 15.12.2011 passed u/s 143(3) of the 1961 Act. There are common issues involved in these appeals and hence these two appeals were heard together and disposed of by this common order. These two appeals are filed late by 4 days

PENTA MEDIA GRAPHICS LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result , appeal in ITA no

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Duvvuru R.L.Reddy

Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act”) and secondly for ay: 2009-10 dated 15.12.2011 passed u/s 143(3) of the 1961 Act. There are common issues involved in these appeals and hence these two appeals were heard together and disposed of by this common order. These two appeals are filed late by 4 days

ACIT, MADURAI vs. A.N.PALANISAMY (HUF), SIVAKASI

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri S.S. Godara

depreciation 99,878 and interest on car loan as discussed in Para 3(a) (ii) Difference in capital gain admitted as discussed in Para 3(b) 8,11,632 (iii) Undisclosed gold jewellery as 40,27,036 discussed in Para 3(c) (iv) Unaccounted cash found as 8,06,414 discussed in Para 3(d) ------------- 57,44,960 Total income

ACIT, MADURAI vs. G.SHANMUGARAJ (HUF), SIVAKASI

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri S.S. Godara

depreciation 99,878 and interest on car loan as discussed in Para 3(a) (ii) Difference in capital gain admitted as discussed in Para 3(b) 8,11,632 (iii) Undisclosed gold jewellery as 40,27,036 discussed in Para 3(c) (iv) Unaccounted cash found as 8,06,414 discussed in Para 3(d) ------------- 57,44,960 Total income

TAMILNADU SMALL AND TINY INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD 4, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1415/Chny/2024 िनधा9रण वष9 /Assessment Year: 2015-16 Tamilnadu Small & Tiny Industries The Income Tax Officer Association, Vs. (Exemptions), No.10, Gst Road, Guindy, Ward-4, Chennai – 600 032. Chennai. [Pan: Aaatt 2207J]

234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 3. Grounds No.1 & 2 are general in nature hence, no adjudication is required. :- 3 -: 4. Grounds No.2 to 7 are relating to denial of exemption u/s. 11 of the Act invoking the provisio of section 2(15) and section 13(8) of income tax. 5. The assessee is an association registered u/s. 12AA

AMBATTUR CLOTHING LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.1436, 1643/Mds/2014, 910/Mds/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-2011)

234B and 234C of the Act. Since, the interest is consequential and mandatory in nature, the same to be considered by Assessing Officer while passing consequential order. With these observations, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 12. In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.1436/Mds/2014 is partly allowed. 13. Now, we take up and ITA No.910/Mds/2015

AMBATTUR CLOTHING LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.1436, 1643/Mds/2014, 910/Mds/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-2011)

234B and 234C of the Act. Since, the interest is consequential and mandatory in nature, the same to be considered by Assessing Officer while passing consequential order. With these observations, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 12. In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.1436/Mds/2014 is partly allowed. 13. Now, we take up and ITA No.910/Mds/2015

AMBATTUR CLOTHING LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.1436, 1643/Mds/2014, 910/Mds/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-2011)

234B and 234C of the Act. Since, the interest is consequential and mandatory in nature, the same to be considered by Assessing Officer while passing consequential order. With these observations, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 12. In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.1436/Mds/2014 is partly allowed. 13. Now, we take up and ITA No.910/Mds/2015