BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

24 results for “depreciation”+ Section 80Pclear

Sorted by relevance

Bangalore54Delhi43Chennai24Visakhapatnam21Mumbai20Hyderabad20Kolkata19Surat18Pune16Cochin10Jaipur10Ahmedabad9Karnataka8Jodhpur8Chandigarh5Nagpur4Rajkot3Allahabad2Lucknow2Panaji2Indore2SC2Patna1

Key Topics

Section 14736Section 80P32Section 143(3)27Section 14A22Disallowance21Deduction19Addition to Income14Section 36(1)12Section 26310Section 143(1)

AA368 APPAKUDAL PUDUPALAYAM AGRI CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY ,ERODE vs. ADIT-CPC , BANGALORE

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

ITA 639/CHNY/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Apr 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.639/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 Aa368 Appakudal Pudupalayam Agri Vs. The Assistant Director Of Co-Op. Credit Society, Pudupalayam, Income Tax - Cpc, Sakthi Nagar, Erode 638 315. Bengaluru. [Pan: Aacaa0858K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate [Erode] ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 27.02.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12.04.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi, Dated 08.07.2022 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee The Assessee Is A Primary Agricultural Co-Operative Credit Society Limited Registered Under The Tamilnadu Co-Operative Societies Act,1983. The Assessee Filed The 2

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate [Erode]For Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

Showing 1–20 of 24 · Page 1 of 2

10
Section 1488
Depreciation8

section 80P of the Act and confirmed the following claim of the assessee: Depreciation debited to P & L a/c : ₹. 2,98,742/- Provision

DFE PHARMA INDIA LLP.,BENGALURU vs. DCIT, CC - 2(1),, CHENNAI

In the result the appeal is allowed

ITA 1212/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1212/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Dfe Pharma India Llp, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of B-4, Sipcot Industrial Complex, Income Tax, Kudikadu, Cuddalore 607 005. Non Corporate Circle 1(1), [Pan:Aaifd2025J] Chennai. आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.282/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Dfe Pharma India Llp, Income Tax, Non Corporate Circle 1(1), B-4, Sipcot Industrial Complex, Chennai. Kudikadu, Cuddalore 607 005. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri G.S.D. Babu, Advocate Department By : Shri M. Rajan, Cit & Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 21.03.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 01.04.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 1, Chennai Dated 27.02.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2014-15 Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short]. The Revenue Preferred An Appeal Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2

For Appellant: Shri G.S.D. Babu, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Rajan, CIT &
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 263Section 80P

80P) included in Chapter VI-A under the heading "C.- Deductions in respect of certain incomes"; 50[***] (ii) deduction claimed, if any, under section 10AA and (iii) deduction claimed, if any, under section 35AD as reduced by the amount of depreciation

DCIT, NCC - 1 (1),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. DFE PHARMA INDIA LLP.,, CUDDALORE

In the result the appeal is allowed

ITA 282/CHNY/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1212/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Dfe Pharma India Llp, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of B-4, Sipcot Industrial Complex, Income Tax, Kudikadu, Cuddalore 607 005. Non Corporate Circle 1(1), [Pan:Aaifd2025J] Chennai. आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.282/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Dfe Pharma India Llp, Income Tax, Non Corporate Circle 1(1), B-4, Sipcot Industrial Complex, Chennai. Kudikadu, Cuddalore 607 005. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri G.S.D. Babu, Advocate Department By : Shri M. Rajan, Cit & Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 21.03.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 01.04.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 1, Chennai Dated 27.02.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2014-15 Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short]. The Revenue Preferred An Appeal Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2

For Appellant: Shri G.S.D. Babu, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Rajan, CIT &
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 263Section 80P

80P) included in Chapter VI-A under the heading "C.- Deductions in respect of certain incomes"; 50[***] (ii) deduction claimed, if any, under section 10AA and (iii) deduction claimed, if any, under section 35AD as reduced by the amount of depreciation

THE VILLUPURAM DISTRICT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD.,,VILLUPURAM vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-I,, CUDDALORE

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

ITA 858/CHNY/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.B. Som, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(viia)

80P was withdrawn for Co-operative Banks. Since the claim deduction of Rs.3,47,01,173 towards of release of reserves and standard assets related to exempted periods, the same is not allowable deduction and has to be withdrawn. II) Further it was noticed that the assessee had claimed deductions of Rs.14,95,14,257/- under Section 36(1) (viia

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, CUDDALLORE vs. M/S VILLUPURAM DISTRICT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD., VILLUPURAM

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

ITA 981/CHNY/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.B. Som, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(viia)

80P was withdrawn for Co-operative Banks. Since the claim deduction of Rs.3,47,01,173 towards of release of reserves and standard assets related to exempted periods, the same is not allowable deduction and has to be withdrawn. II) Further it was noticed that the assessee had claimed deductions of Rs.14,95,14,257/- under Section 36(1) (viia

THE VILLUPURAM DISTRICT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD.,,VILLUPURAM vs. DCIT, VILLUPURAM CIRCLE,, VILLUPURAM

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

ITA 855/CHNY/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.B. Som, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(viia)

80P was withdrawn for Co-operative Banks. Since the claim deduction of Rs.3,47,01,173 towards of release of reserves and standard assets related to exempted periods, the same is not allowable deduction and has to be withdrawn. II) Further it was noticed that the assessee had claimed deductions of Rs.14,95,14,257/- under Section 36(1) (viia

THE VILLUPURAM DISTRICT CENTRAL COOPERTATIVE BANK LTD.,,VILLUPURAM vs. DCIT, VILLUPURAM CIRCLE,, VILLUPURAM

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

ITA 854/CHNY/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.B. Som, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(viia)

80P was withdrawn for Co-operative Banks. Since the claim deduction of Rs.3,47,01,173 towards of release of reserves and standard assets related to exempted periods, the same is not allowable deduction and has to be withdrawn. II) Further it was noticed that the assessee had claimed deductions of Rs.14,95,14,257/- under Section 36(1) (viia

THE VILLUPURAM DISTRICT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD.,,VILLUPURAM vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-II,, CUDDALORE

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

ITA 857/CHNY/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.B. Som, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(viia)

80P was withdrawn for Co-operative Banks. Since the claim deduction of Rs.3,47,01,173 towards of release of reserves and standard assets related to exempted periods, the same is not allowable deduction and has to be withdrawn. II) Further it was noticed that the assessee had claimed deductions of Rs.14,95,14,257/- under Section 36(1) (viia

THE CUDDALORE DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OP BANK LTD.,CUDDALORE vs. DCIT CUDDALORE CIRCLE, CUDDALORE

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

ITA 2645/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.B. Som, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(viia)

80P was withdrawn for Co-operative Banks. Since the claim deduction of Rs.3,47,01,173 towards of release of reserves and standard assets related to exempted periods, the same is not allowable deduction and has to be withdrawn. II) Further it was noticed that the assessee had claimed deductions of Rs.14,95,14,257/- under Section 36(1) (viia

THE VILLUPURAM DISTRICT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD.,,VILLUPURAM vs. DCIT, VILLUPURAM CIRCLE,, VILLUPRUAM

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

ITA 856/CHNY/2020[202-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2023

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.B. Som, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(viia)

80P was withdrawn for Co-operative Banks. Since the claim deduction of Rs.3,47,01,173 towards of release of reserves and standard assets related to exempted periods, the same is not allowable deduction and has to be withdrawn. II) Further it was noticed that the assessee had claimed deductions of Rs.14,95,14,257/- under Section 36(1) (viia

ABAN SINGAPORE PTE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT INTL TAX 1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 500/CHNY/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Jun 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.500/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2022-23 Aban Singapore Pte Limited Deputy Commissioner Of Income Room No.8713, Bsnl Building, Tax, 4Th Floor, Bsnl Towers, Intl Tax-1(1), No.16, Greams Road, Chennai. Chennai [Pan: Aaqca2845Q]

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Shri N.Rajakumar, Addl.CIT
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36Section 43BSection 44B

80P;] 96[(e) “micro enterprise” 97 shall have the meaning assigned to it in clause (h) of section 2 of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (27 of 2006);] 98[(f) “non-banking financial company” 97 shall have the meaning assigned to it in clause (f) of section 45-I of the Reserve Bank of India

RAJTELEVISION NETWORK LIMITED,CHNNAI vs. ACIT, NON CORPORAE CIRCLE-20, CHENNAI

In the result both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 531/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R.Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 530 & 531/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2018-19 Acit, Raj Television Network V. Non Corporate Circle 20, Limited, Chennai – 34. No. 32, Poes Road 2Nd Street, Teynampet, Chennai – 600 018. [Pan: Aaacr-3580-P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri.K. Balasubramanian, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri.T.M. Suganthamala, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 31.07.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.08.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri.K. Balasubramanian, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri.T.M. Suganthamala, Addl. CIT
Section 263

80P(2)(a)(i) deduction, it could not be allowed such deduction in view of condition imposed u/s 80A(5), in cases where no deduction was claimed. :-9-: ITA. No:530 & 531/Chny/2024 11. Hence, in the given situation, the action of the AO in rejecting the claim of adjustment of unabsorbed b/f loss/ depreciation loss with the income arrived

RAJ TELEISION NETWORK LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NON CORPORAE CIRCLE-20, CHENNAI

In the result both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 530/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R.Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 530 & 531/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2018-19 Acit, Raj Television Network V. Non Corporate Circle 20, Limited, Chennai – 34. No. 32, Poes Road 2Nd Street, Teynampet, Chennai – 600 018. [Pan: Aaacr-3580-P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri.K. Balasubramanian, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri.T.M. Suganthamala, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 31.07.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.08.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri.K. Balasubramanian, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri.T.M. Suganthamala, Addl. CIT
Section 263

80P(2)(a)(i) deduction, it could not be allowed such deduction in view of condition imposed u/s 80A(5), in cases where no deduction was claimed. :-9-: ITA. No:530 & 531/Chny/2024 11. Hence, in the given situation, the action of the AO in rejecting the claim of adjustment of unabsorbed b/f loss/ depreciation loss with the income arrived

COMPUTER AGE MANAGEMENT SERVICES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT LTU 2 , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for all the assessment years are treated as partly allowed

ITA 1140/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1140, 1141 & 1142/Chny/2018. "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15. Computer Age Management Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Services Pvt. Ltd, Income Tax, Rayala Towers, 3Rd Floor, Ltu-2, 158, Anna Salai, Chennai. Chennai 600 002. [Pan Aaacc 3035G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Sandeep Bagmar, R. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R. Clement Ramesh
Section 14A

depreciation be allowed at 60% on software license as against 25% under the Act’’. 3. Except for the quantum of additional disallowance made u/s.14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘’the Act’’), appearing in ground No.1, all these grounds are typically worded in all the appeals. These common grounds are considered first. First such ground relates

COMPUTER AGE MANAGEMENT SERVICES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT LTU 2 , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for all the assessment years are treated as partly allowed

ITA 1142/CHNY/2018[214-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Dec 2018

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1140, 1141 & 1142/Chny/2018. "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15. Computer Age Management Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Services Pvt. Ltd, Income Tax, Rayala Towers, 3Rd Floor, Ltu-2, 158, Anna Salai, Chennai. Chennai 600 002. [Pan Aaacc 3035G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Sandeep Bagmar, R. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R. Clement Ramesh
Section 14A

depreciation be allowed at 60% on software license as against 25% under the Act’’. 3. Except for the quantum of additional disallowance made u/s.14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘’the Act’’), appearing in ground No.1, all these grounds are typically worded in all the appeals. These common grounds are considered first. First such ground relates

M/S APEX TRANSWORLD PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CC-1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 932/CHNY/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.932/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2011-12 V. M/S.Apex Transworld Pvt. Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner Of 38, 2Nd Main Road, Income Tax, R.A. Puram, Corporate Circle-1(1), Chennai-600 028. Chennai. [Pan: Aadca 7034 L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.K. Ramesh Babu, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr. Ar.V.Sreenivasan, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.01.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11.01.2023

For Respondent: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

depreciation has not been claimed, only because the claim has been made during 148 proceedings. 5. Appellate authority erred in considering case laws " Taxman 442(SC) Commissioner of income tax vs sun engineering works (p) ltd " in Supreme court and "Satyamangalam Agriculture Cooperative Marketing Society Ltd vs Income tax officer" in Madras High Court is against facts of the present

THE GOVERNMENT TELECOMMUNICATION EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 12(3), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2478/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2478/Chny/2017, 2703/Chny/18, 558 & 559/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2011-12 & 2016-17 M/S. The Government The Income Tax Officer, Telecommunications Employees Ncw – 12(3)/Acit 12(1), Cooperative Society Ltd., New No. 112, Chennai. Old No. 37A, Sembudoss Street, Vs. Chennai 600 001. [Pan:Aabat3072B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri M. Karunakaran, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 07.02.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10.02.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 13, Chennai Dated 13.07.2017, 16.08.2018, 21.01.2020 & 27.01.2020 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2014-15, 2015-16, 2011-12 & 2016-17. Since Common Grounds In Identical Facts Involved In These Appeals, Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity.

For Appellant: Shri M. Karunakaran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 80P

80P of the 3 I.T.A. No.2478/Chny/17, ITA No. 2703/Chny/18 & ITA Nos. 558 & 559/Chny/2020 Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that similar issue on an identical facts and circumstances, the Division Bench of the Tribunal has already been decided the issue against the assessee in assessee’s own case for the assessment

THE GOVERNMENT TELECOMMUNICATION EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW - 12 (3),, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 559/CHNY/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2478/Chny/2017, 2703/Chny/18, 558 & 559/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2011-12 & 2016-17 M/S. The Government The Income Tax Officer, Telecommunications Employees Ncw – 12(3)/Acit 12(1), Cooperative Society Ltd., New No. 112, Chennai. Old No. 37A, Sembudoss Street, Vs. Chennai 600 001. [Pan:Aabat3072B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri M. Karunakaran, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 07.02.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10.02.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 13, Chennai Dated 13.07.2017, 16.08.2018, 21.01.2020 & 27.01.2020 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2014-15, 2015-16, 2011-12 & 2016-17. Since Common Grounds In Identical Facts Involved In These Appeals, Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity.

For Appellant: Shri M. Karunakaran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 80P

80P of the 3 I.T.A. No.2478/Chny/17, ITA No. 2703/Chny/18 & ITA Nos. 558 & 559/Chny/2020 Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that similar issue on an identical facts and circumstances, the Division Bench of the Tribunal has already been decided the issue against the assessee in assessee’s own case for the assessment

THE GOVERNMENT TELECOMMUNICATION EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW - 12 (3),, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 558/CHNY/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2478/Chny/2017, 2703/Chny/18, 558 & 559/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2011-12 & 2016-17 M/S. The Government The Income Tax Officer, Telecommunications Employees Ncw – 12(3)/Acit 12(1), Cooperative Society Ltd., New No. 112, Chennai. Old No. 37A, Sembudoss Street, Vs. Chennai 600 001. [Pan:Aabat3072B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri M. Karunakaran, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 07.02.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10.02.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 13, Chennai Dated 13.07.2017, 16.08.2018, 21.01.2020 & 27.01.2020 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2014-15, 2015-16, 2011-12 & 2016-17. Since Common Grounds In Identical Facts Involved In These Appeals, Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity.

For Appellant: Shri M. Karunakaran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 80P

80P of the 3 I.T.A. No.2478/Chny/17, ITA No. 2703/Chny/18 & ITA Nos. 558 & 559/Chny/2020 Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that similar issue on an identical facts and circumstances, the Division Bench of the Tribunal has already been decided the issue against the assessee in assessee’s own case for the assessment

THE GOVT. TELECOMMUNICATION EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 12(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2703/CHNY/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2478/Chny/2017, 2703/Chny/18, 558 & 559/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2011-12 & 2016-17 M/S. The Government The Income Tax Officer, Telecommunications Employees Ncw – 12(3)/Acit 12(1), Cooperative Society Ltd., New No. 112, Chennai. Old No. 37A, Sembudoss Street, Vs. Chennai 600 001. [Pan:Aabat3072B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri M. Karunakaran, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 07.02.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10.02.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 13, Chennai Dated 13.07.2017, 16.08.2018, 21.01.2020 & 27.01.2020 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2014-15, 2015-16, 2011-12 & 2016-17. Since Common Grounds In Identical Facts Involved In These Appeals, Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity.

For Appellant: Shri M. Karunakaran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 80P

80P of the 3 I.T.A. No.2478/Chny/17, ITA No. 2703/Chny/18 & ITA Nos. 558 & 559/Chny/2020 Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that similar issue on an identical facts and circumstances, the Division Bench of the Tribunal has already been decided the issue against the assessee in assessee’s own case for the assessment