ADP INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri Jagadishआयकर अपीलसं/.Ita Nos.: 2670, 2671, 2672 & 2698/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Adp India Private Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of Thamarai Tech Park, 6Th Floor, Vs. Income Tax, Sp Plot No. 16 To 20 & 20A, Thiru Vi Ka Corporate Circle 1(1), Industrial Estate, Inner Ring Road, Chennai. Guindy Industrial Estate So, Guindy, Chennai 600 032. [Pan: Aadcm-5547-J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Sandeep Bagmar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri V. Justin, Cit & Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.05.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21.05.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R Per George George K: These Four Appeals Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against Four Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (All Dated 21.08.2024) Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). The Relevant Assessment Years Are 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21. Ita Nos.2670 To 2672 & 2698/Chny/2024

depreciation on goodwill, which was confirmed by the CIT(A). Thus, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and the addition made by the Assessing Officer stands deleted for all the assessment years under consideration. ITA Nos.2670 to 2672 & 2698/Chny/2024 18. The next ground raised by the assessee in ground Nos. 3.1 to 3.6 for the assessment year

CRR LEATHERS,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.616/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2008-09 M/S. Crr Leathers, The Income Tax Officer, 9/5, Patnool Sardarjung Street, Vs. Non Corporate Ward 4(3), Periamet, Chennai 600 003. Chennai 600 006. [Pan: Aaafc4173G] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri K. Ravi, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 08.06.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.08.2017 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) 5, Chennai Dated 27.10.2016 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2008-09, Wherein, In The Grounds Appeal, Besides Challenging The Confirmation Of Various Additions For Want Of Tds Under Section 195 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short], The Assessee Has Mainly Challenged Confirmation Of Reopening Of Assessment, Which Is Barred By Limitation.

40(A)(2) of the Act during the course of reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act beyond the expiry of four years from the end of the assessment year under consideration. While doing so, the Assessing Officer has not brought on record any new tangible materials for reopening of assessment already concluded under section

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

depreciation on software, and treatment of unrealized gains on mutual funds.", "held": "The Tribunal held that disallowance under section 14A cannot exceed the exempt income earned and is not applicable if no exempt income is earned. Disallowance under section 40

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

section 40(a)(i) of the Act on 8 I.T.A. Nos.1458, 1950 & 2889/Chny/24 account of legal & professional charges, other networking cost and advertising, selling & marketing expenses. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. We note that the ld. CIT(A), by following Tribunal’s order for earlier assessment years

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

section 40(a)(i) of the Act on 8 I.T.A. Nos.1458, 1950 & 2889/Chny/24 account of legal & professional charges, other networking cost and advertising, selling & marketing expenses. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. We note that the ld. CIT(A), by following Tribunal’s order for earlier assessment years

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

section 40(a)(i) of the Act on 8 I.T.A. Nos.1458, 1950 & 2889/Chny/24 account of legal & professional charges, other networking cost and advertising, selling & marketing expenses. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. We note that the ld. CIT(A), by following Tribunal’s order for earlier assessment years

ADP INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CC-1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

depreciation was set aside.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "250", "143(1)", "143(2)", "142(1)", "32", "43(1)", "47", "170", "40

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 of INR 2,09,40

COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI

depreciation at 60%.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": [ "14A", "8D", "40(a)(ia)", "9(1)(vii)", "10A", "10AA", "115JB", "271(1)(c)", "274", "195", "40

COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI

Section 40(a)(i), and treatment of software licenses and depreciation.", "held": "The Tribunal held that disallowance under Section 14A cannot

ABAN OFFSHORE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

depreciation made by the assessee does not fall within any of the categories mentioned in the aforesaid provision. Therefore, it is not possible to make the impugned disallowance by resorting to the provisions of section 40

EURO SHOES COMPONENTS LTD,VELLORE vs. ACIT , VELLORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1595 & 1596/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S Euro Shoe Components Ltd., The Assistant Commissioner Of No.478/30A, Coromandal Road, V. Income Tax, Sipcot, Ranipet – 632 403. Circle – 1, Vellore. Pan : Aabce 4723 G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

depreciation and disallowance made under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). 4. Shri

EURO SHOES COMPONENTS LTD,VELLORE vs. ACIT , VELLORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1595 & 1596/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S Euro Shoe Components Ltd., The Assistant Commissioner Of No.478/30A, Coromandal Road, V. Income Tax, Sipcot, Ranipet – 632 403. Circle – 1, Vellore. Pan : Aabce 4723 G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

depreciation and disallowance made under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). 4. Shri

KHIVRAJ & CO.,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 5, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri Duvvuru R.L.Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3234/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Khivraj & Co., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 12, General Muthiah Mudali Street, Income Tax, Sowcarpet, Chennai 600 079. Non Corporate Circle 5, Chennai 600 006. [Pan: Aaafk2848L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Ajit Kumar Choradia, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26.11.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 02.01.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Duvvuru R.L.Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 5, Chennai, Dated 26.10.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2011-12. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: “1. The Order Of The Ld. Ao & Ld. Cit(A) Is Wrong On Facts & In Law. 2. The Ld. Ao & Ld. Cit(A) Erred In His Observation That The Appellant Had Agreed For The Disallowances. 3. The Ld. Ao & Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Disallowing The Appellant'S Claim For Deduction U/S 80-La Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. :- 2 -:

depreciation schedule. The provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act is applicable only when the assessee has claimed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

Section 40(a)(ia) for software AMC and license payments, set-off of losses, and depreciation on software. The primary

VA TECH WABAG LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

depreciation claim on ERP implementation costs under section 40(a)(i) of the Act and whereas the Hon'ble DRP has erred

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

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

depreciation claim on ERP implementation costs under section 40(a)(i) of the Act and whereas the Hon'ble DRP has erred

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

Depreciation on computer software was allowed at 60%. Unrealized gains on mutual fund units were not taxable as income in the current year. The addition of disallowance under Section 14A in computing book profits was deleted, and penalty proceedings were kept open for future challenge.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": [ "14A", "8D", "40