DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-1, TIRUPPUR vs. EASTMAN EXPORTS GLOBAL CLOTHING P LTD, TIRUPPUR,TAMILNADU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3326/Chny/2019 & 326/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Eastman Exports Global Clothing (P) Ltd., No. 10, 12, 2Nd Street, Kumar Income Tax, Circle 1(1), 121, Adams Buildings, 60 Feet Road, Nagar South, Tirupur 641 603. Tirupur 641 602. [Pan: Aaccc0952E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.706/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Victus Dyeings, The Assistant Commissioner Of 410, P.N. Road, R.K. Nagar, Income Tax, Circle 1, Vs. Tirupur 641 601. Tirupur. [Pan: Aacfv4420D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.768/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, Income Tax, Circle 1, 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, Vs. Tirupur. City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. [Pan: Aacfk3053B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.358/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, The Assistant Commissioner Of 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, Income Tax, Circle 1, Vs. City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. Tirupur. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

260A of the Act. He submits that the said appeals are pending for hearing along with AYs 2014-15 and 2015-16 before the Hon’ble High Court of Madras. 9. The ld. CIT- DR vehemently argued that the finding of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case

GEENA GARMENTS,TIRUPPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, TIRUPPUR, TIRUPPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3326/Chny/2019 & 326/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Eastman Exports Global Clothing (P) Ltd., No. 10, 12, 2Nd Street, Kumar Income Tax, Circle 1(1), 121, Adams Buildings, 60 Feet Road, Nagar South, Tirupur 641 603. Tirupur 641 602. [Pan: Aaccc0952E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.706/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Victus Dyeings, The Assistant Commissioner Of 410, P.N. Road, R.K. Nagar, Income Tax, Circle 1, Vs. Tirupur 641 601. Tirupur. [Pan: Aacfv4420D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.768/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, Income Tax, Circle 1, 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, Vs. Tirupur. City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. [Pan: Aacfk3053B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.358/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, The Assistant Commissioner Of 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, Income Tax, Circle 1, Vs. City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. Tirupur. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

260A of the Act. He submits that the said appeals are pending for hearing along with AYs 2014-15 and 2015-16 before the Hon’ble High Court of Madras. 9. The ld. CIT- DR vehemently argued that the finding of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case

ACIT, CIRCLE-1, , TIRUPUR vs. EASTMAN EXPORTS GLOBAL CLOTHING (P) LTD., TIRUPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3326/Chny/2019 & 326/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Eastman Exports Global Clothing (P) Ltd., No. 10, 12, 2Nd Street, Kumar Income Tax, Circle 1(1), 121, Adams Buildings, 60 Feet Road, Nagar South, Tirupur 641 603. Tirupur 641 602. [Pan: Aaccc0952E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.706/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Victus Dyeings, The Assistant Commissioner Of 410, P.N. Road, R.K. Nagar, Income Tax, Circle 1, Vs. Tirupur 641 601. Tirupur. [Pan: Aacfv4420D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.768/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, Income Tax, Circle 1, 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, Vs. Tirupur. City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. [Pan: Aacfk3053B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.358/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, The Assistant Commissioner Of 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, Income Tax, Circle 1, Vs. City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. Tirupur. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

260A of the Act. He submits that the said appeals are pending for hearing along with AYs 2014-15 and 2015-16 before the Hon’ble High Court of Madras. 9. The ld. CIT- DR vehemently argued that the finding of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SHRIRAM EPC LIMITED, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

Section 14A of the Act cannot be made. Reference can be made to the following decisions (iii) Redington (India) Ltd vs. Addl. CIT, 392 ITR 633, (iv) CIT vs. Chettinad Logistics P. Ltd, 248 Taxman 55. In view of the above judgments, we allow the appeal filed by the assessee. 62. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee

SHRIRAM EPC LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

Section 14A of the Act cannot be made. Reference can be made to the following decisions (iii) Redington (India) Ltd vs. Addl. CIT, 392 ITR 633, (iv) CIT vs. Chettinad Logistics P. Ltd, 248 Taxman 55. In view of the above judgments, we allow the appeal filed by the assessee. 62. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee

SHRIRAM EPC LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

Section 14A of the Act cannot be made. Reference can be made to the following decisions (iii) Redington (India) Ltd vs. Addl. CIT, 392 ITR 633, (iv) CIT vs. Chettinad Logistics P. Ltd, 248 Taxman 55. In view of the above judgments, we allow the appeal filed by the assessee. 62. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SHRIRAM EPC LIMITED, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

Section 14A of the Act cannot be made. Reference can be made to the following decisions (iii) Redington (India) Ltd vs. Addl. CIT, 392 ITR 633, (iv) CIT vs. Chettinad Logistics P. Ltd, 248 Taxman 55. In view of the above judgments, we allow the appeal filed by the assessee. 62. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SHRIRAM EPC LIMITED, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

Section 14A of the Act cannot be made. Reference can be made to the following decisions (iii) Redington (India) Ltd vs. Addl. CIT, 392 ITR 633, (iv) CIT vs. Chettinad Logistics P. Ltd, 248 Taxman 55. In view of the above judgments, we allow the appeal filed by the assessee. 62. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SHRIRAM EPC LIMITED, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

Section 14A of the Act cannot be made. Reference can be made to the following decisions (iii) Redington (India) Ltd vs. Addl. CIT, 392 ITR 633, (iv) CIT vs. Chettinad Logistics P. Ltd, 248 Taxman 55. In view of the above judgments, we allow the appeal filed by the assessee. 62. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee

SAN TEX INC.,TIRUPUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1, TIRUPUR

260A of the Act. He submits that the said appeals\nare pending for hearing along with AYs 2014-15 and 2015-16 before the\nHon'ble High Court of Madras.\n9.\nThe Id. CIT- DR vehemently argued that the finding of the Tribunal\nin assessee's own case for the AY 2011-12, 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2015-16\nare

VICTUS DYEINGS ,TIRUPUR vs. ACIT , CIRCLE-1, TIRUPUR

260A of the Act. He submits that the said appeals\nare pending for hearing along with AYs 2014-15 and 2015-16 before the\nHon'ble High Court of Madras.\n9.\nThe Id. CIT- DR vehemently argued that the finding of the Tribunal\nin assessee's own case for the AY 2011-12, 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2015-16\nare

GATES WEARS,TIRUPPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, TIRUPPUR

In the result, ITA Nos. 3326/Chny/2019, 326/Chny/2024 &\n768/Chny/2022 are dismissed; ITA No

260A of the Act. He submits that the said appeals\nare pending for hearing along with AYs 2014-15 and 2015-16 before the\nHon'ble High Court of Madras.\n9.\nThe Id. CIT- DR vehemently argued that the finding of the Tribunal\nin assessee's own case for the AY 2011-12, 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2015-16\nare

KM KNIT WEAR,TIRUPUR vs. ADIT,CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, ITA Nos. 3326/Chny/2019, 326/Chny/2024 &\n768/Chny/2022 are dismissed; ITA No

260A of the Act. He submits that the said appeals\nare pending for hearing along with AYs 2014-15 and 2015-16 before the\nHon'ble High Court of Madras.\n9.\nThe Id. CIT- DR vehemently argued that the finding of the Tribunal\nin assessee's own case for the AY 2011-12, 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2015-16\nare

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, MADURAI vs. RAMASUBBU MINNALKODI, TIRUNELVELI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

depreciation, as her business income. On this\nbasis, the assessee submitted that the business income of Rs.20,64,120/- as\ndisclosed in the return of income filed for the relevant assessment year was in\nline with the statement furnished during the course of survey. It was, therefore,\nrequested that no addition be made to the returned income and that

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. V.A. TECH WABAG LIMITED, CHENNAI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

260A of the Act and no Substantial Question of Law arises in these Appeals filed by the Revenue. Since the Assessee admittedly entered into contract with Local Bodies or Municipal Bodies for undertaking the contract works for developing the infrastructure-sewage system, he is directly entitled to get the benefit of such deductions under Section 80IA

VA TECH WABAG LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

260A of the Act and no Substantial Question of Law arises in these Appeals filed by the Revenue. Since the Assessee admittedly entered into contract with Local Bodies or Municipal Bodies for undertaking the contract works for developing the infrastructure-sewage system, he is directly entitled to get the benefit of such deductions under Section 80IA

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. JOHNSON LIFTS PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.47/Chny/2024 & Ita No.48/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2016-17 & 2017-18

section 32 of the Income Tax Act, depreciation on intangible assets is limited to 25%, contrary to decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Dinamalar Vs. ITO, Income Tax Department, Ward 11(1), Tirunelveli (2017) reported in 74 taxmann.com 14 (Madras). ITA No.47/Chny/2024 & ITA No.48/Chny/2024 :- 5 -: 14.The ClT(A) erred in deleting the excess depreciation claimed

DCIT, CHENGALPUT vs. BEST & CROMPTON ENGG. PROJECTS LTD., CHENNAI

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 646/Mds/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Best & Crompton Engg. Income Tax, V. Projects Ltd., Pgp House, 2Nd Floor, Corporate Circle – 1 (2), Chennai – 34. No.57, Sterling Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 34. Pan : Aabcb5248H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 647/Mds/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Best & Crompton Engg. Ltd., Income Tax, V. No.28, Sidco Industrial Estate, Corporate Circle – 1 (2), Ambattur, Chennai - 58. Chennai – 34. Pan : Aaacb2753N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Shiva Srinivas, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : None सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.01.2017 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28.02.2017 आदेश आदेश /O R D E R आदेश आदेश

Section 260A of the Act. Therefore, in order to keep the matter alive, the Revenue has filed the appeal before this Tribunal. 6. We have considered the submissions of the Ld. D.R., and perused the material available on record. The assessee claimed depreciation

DCIT, CHENGALPUT vs. BEST & CROMPTON ENGG. PROJECTS LTD., CHENNAI

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 646/Mds/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Best & Crompton Engg. Income Tax, V. Projects Ltd., Pgp House, 2Nd Floor, Corporate Circle – 1 (2), Chennai – 34. No.57, Sterling Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 34. Pan : Aabcb5248H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 647/Mds/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Best & Crompton Engg. Ltd., Income Tax, V. No.28, Sidco Industrial Estate, Corporate Circle – 1 (2), Ambattur, Chennai - 58. Chennai – 34. Pan : Aaacb2753N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Shiva Srinivas, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : None सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.01.2017 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28.02.2017 आदेश आदेश /O R D E R आदेश आदेश

Section 260A of the Act. Therefore, in order to keep the matter alive, the Revenue has filed the appeal before this Tribunal. 6. We have considered the submissions of the Ld. D.R., and perused the material available on record. The assessee claimed depreciation