S.ARJUN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT NON CORPORATE WARD 20(1), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

depreciation and allowances are dealt with in section 32. Therefore, Parliament has used the expression " any expenditure" in section 37 to cover both. Therefore, the expression " expenditure" as used in section 37 ITA No.2220/CHNY /2018 :- 7 -: may, in the circumstances of a particular case, cover an amount which is really a " loss" even though the said amount has not gone

M/S. TANFAC INDUSTREIS LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE - 3 (1),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

depreciation of 25% would be allowable to the assessee. 4.4 In the technical write-up, the assessee submitted that in normal course, the reactor would run for at least 10 to 15 years. The original 4 reactor was installed in 1985 and was replaced in 2003. The old reactor has served a life of more than 18 years but installed

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. SOUTHERN PETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRIES CORPN. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar"नधा(रण वष( /Assessment Year: 2003-04

4) and 37(5) of the 1961 Act stood omitted by Finance Act, 1997 w.e.f. 01.04.1998. Presently , we are seized with ay: 2003-04. We have :- 8 -: observed that learned CIT(A) has noted in its appellate order that the assessee could not furnish complete evidences to support its expenses but positive finding is recorded by learned CIT(A) that

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

37. The ld.AR also relied upon the ruling of Hon’ble Delhi Tribunal in the case of American Express (India) (P) Ltd. v. CIT (44 taxmann.com 389), wherein it was held as follows: “Turnover of both the units have increased over the years even after expiry of tax holiday under section 10B of the Act to sufficiently demonstrate that

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

depreciation was denied by the AO in AYs 2017-18 and 2018-19\nalso. Against the above adjustments made by the AO, the assessee filed the\ncaptioned appeals before us.\n6. Against the above adjustments made by the AO, the assessee filed the\ncaptioned appeals before us.\n7. The assessee made detailed submissions against the above\nadjustments during the hearing

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

depreciation was denied by the AO in AYs 2017-18 and 2018-19\nalso. Against the above adjustments made by the AO, the assessee filed the\ncaptioned appeals before us.\n\n6.\nAgainst the above adjustments made by the AO, the assessee filed the\ncaptioned appeals before us.\n\n7.\nThe assessee made detailed submissions against the above\nadjustments during

SIVANANDHA MILLS LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, ITA No.2106/Mds/13 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

4 (Gau) that where the genuineness and regularity of the accounts have not been challenged, the accounts are prima facie proof of the entries and the correctness thereof under section 34 of the Evidence Act, 1872. 8. Regarding business lull, it was submitted that the assessee could not carry on its business, owing to factors beyond its control, as already

M/S. SIVANANDHA MILLS LTD.,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, ITA No.2106/Mds/13 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

4 (Gau) that where the genuineness and regularity of the accounts have not been challenged, the accounts are prima facie proof of the entries and the correctness thereof under section 34 of the Evidence Act, 1872. 8. Regarding business lull, it was submitted that the assessee could not carry on its business, owing to factors beyond its control, as already

VA TECH WABAG LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

4) which is in the nature of a works contract awarded by any person (including the Central or State Government) and executed by the undertaking or enterprise referred to in sub- section(1).” & C.O No.50/CHNY/2016 We noted that this explanation has not at all been examined whether the assessee falls as a work contractor in this case in term

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

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

4) which is in the nature of a works contract awarded by any person (including the Central or State Government) and executed by the undertaking or enterprise referred to in sub- section(1).” & C.O No.50/CHNY/2016 We noted that this explanation has not at all been examined whether the assessee falls as a work contractor in this case in term

CLASSIC LINEN INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee in iTA

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar"नधा$रण वष$ /Assessment Year: 2011-12

depreciation allowance under section 32, the written down value of any asset used for the purposes of the business of the undertaking shall be computed as if the assessee had claimed and been actually allowed the deduction in respect of depreciation for each of the relevant assessment year. (7) The provisions of sub-section (8) and sub-section

HIGH ENERGY BATTERIES INDIA LTD,CHENNAI vs. ITO CORPORATE WARD 2 (3), 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. 1258/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 High Energy Batteries India Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, No. 13, Esvin House, Old Vs. Corporate Ward 2(3), Mahabalipuram Road, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai 600 096. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aaach1479H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 22.10.2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04.12.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 6, Chennai, Dated 30.01.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2012-13. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: 1.1 The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Confirming The Action Of The Ao In Allowing Only Depreciation @15% On Bolero Van As Against The Claim By The Appellant That It Should Be Totally Allowed As An Expenditure. 1.2 The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Failed To Note That Since The Vehicle Is Being Used For Research & Development Its Entire Cost Is Entitled For 100% Deduction U/S.35(1)(Iv) Of The Income Tax Act.

depreciation. He did not however, allow the claim for foreign exchange loss on loans both in relation to capital as well as revenue account which were outstanding on the last day of accounting year. On appeal, the CIT(A) affirmed the view of AO in relation to deduction u/s 37 of the interest on loans outstanding on the last

M/S AVM CHARITIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

depreciation allowance for such assessment year. Proviso provided to sec.147 of the Act deals with re-opening of assessment, in a case, where the assessment has been completed u/s.143(3) of the Act, and as per said proviso, where the assessment under sub-sec.(3) of sec.143 of this section has been made for relevant assessment year, no action shall

M/S AVM CHARITIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD-1, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

depreciation allowance for such assessment year. Proviso provided to sec.147 of the Act deals with re-opening of assessment, in a case, where the assessment has been completed u/s.143(3) of the Act, and as per said proviso, where the assessment under sub-sec.(3) of sec.143 of this section has been made for relevant assessment year, no action shall

AVM CHARITIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

depreciation allowance for such assessment year. Proviso provided to sec.147 of the Act deals with re-opening of assessment, in a case, where the assessment has been completed u/s.143(3) of the Act, and as per said proviso, where the assessment under sub-sec.(3) of sec.143 of this section has been made for relevant assessment year, no action shall

M/S. A V M CHARITIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD-1, CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

depreciation allowance for such assessment year. Proviso provided to sec.147 of the Act deals with re-opening of assessment, in a case, where the assessment has been completed u/s.143(3) of the Act, and as per said proviso, where the assessment under sub-sec.(3) of sec.143 of this section has been made for relevant assessment year, no action shall

AVM CHARITIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

depreciation allowance for such assessment year. Proviso provided to sec.147 of the Act deals with re-opening of assessment, in a case, where the assessment has been completed u/s.143(3) of the Act, and as per said proviso, where the assessment under sub-sec.(3) of sec.143 of this section has been made for relevant assessment year, no action shall

M/S AVM CHARITIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO,EXEMPTION WARD, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

depreciation allowance for such assessment year. Proviso provided to sec.147 of the Act deals with re-opening of assessment, in a case, where the assessment has been completed u/s.143(3) of the Act, and as per said proviso, where the assessment under sub-sec.(3) of sec.143 of this section has been made for relevant assessment year, no action shall