M/S. SOUTHERN PETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRIES CORPORATION LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

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

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

revision is required by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act 1961. Therefore, it is prayed that further proceedings on account / of the above Notice dated 24.10.2007 may kindly be dropped.” :- 14 -: 4.4 Before we delve on the revisionary order of learned CIT , dated 05.02.2008 passed u/s 263

SHRIRAM CITY UNION FINANCE LTD.,CHENNAI vs. PCIT CORPOREATE CIRCLE-6(1), CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

disallowance u/s 14A. The Ld. AR submitted that even in consequential order, Ld. AO has examined the issue of capital gain on reverse merger and has not made any adjustment / addition and thus, the original assessment order could not be said to be erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of the revenue for which revision would be required u/s 263

SHRI R PANNERSELVAM,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CC-3(3),, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Girish Agrawal

revision u/s 263 of the Act dated 27.03.2013, the assumption of jurisdiction u/ s 147 of the Act to cover up the said lapse should be reckoned as fatal to such assumption of jurisdiction and ought to have appreciated further that having not demonstrated the availability of fresh materials, the stand of the appellant would get fortified, thereby vitiating

SOUTHERN PETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRIES CORPORATION LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1.आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.204/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2004-05) & 2.आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.205/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2004-05) M/S. Southern Petrochemical Acit / Ito बनाम Industries Corporation Limited Corporate Circle-6(2) / 88, Spic House, Mount Road, Guindy, Corporate Ward-3(1) / Vs. Chennai-600 032. Chennai-600 034. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs-4668-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan & Shri Saroj Kumar Parida (Advocates)-Ld. Ars " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) & Shri Ar V Sreenivasan (Addl. Cit)-Ld. Drs सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16-10-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10-01-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

revision u/s 263 by revisionary authority vide order dated 17.10.2008. Consequently, another assessment was framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 on 23.12.2009 making some more additions / disallowances

SOUTHERN PETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRIES CORPORATION LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1.आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.204/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2004-05) & 2.आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.205/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2004-05) M/S. Southern Petrochemical Acit / Ito बनाम Industries Corporation Limited Corporate Circle-6(2) / 88, Spic House, Mount Road, Guindy, Corporate Ward-3(1) / Vs. Chennai-600 032. Chennai-600 034. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs-4668-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan & Shri Saroj Kumar Parida (Advocates)-Ld. Ars " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) & Shri Ar V Sreenivasan (Addl. Cit)-Ld. Drs सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16-10-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10-01-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

revision u/s 263 by revisionary authority vide order dated 17.10.2008. Consequently, another assessment was framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 on 23.12.2009 making some more additions / disallowances

THE CHENNAI CO-OP. SOCIETIES EMPLOYEES CO-OP. AND SOCIETY LTD.,CHENNAI vs. PCIT-8, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

disallowed (₹1,48,80,278-) & consequently brought to tax. So, he rightly interfered with the assessment order passed on 09.03.2023, which doesn’t call for any interference from our side. 7. In his rejoinder, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has raised the legal issue which assessee is entitled to do because it is settled law that the jurisdiction

SIVAKUMARAN PUGAZHENDHI,CHENNAI vs. PCIT,, CHENNAI-4

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.27/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sivakumaran Pugazhendhi, The Principal Commissioner 70 Raja Agraharam Street, Vs. Of Income Tax, Poonamalle, Chennai-4. Chennai – 600 056. [Pan: Aiapp-7309-R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Ms. T.V. Muthu Abirami, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri M. Rajan, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05.09.2022 : 21.09.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R

u/s. 263 of the Act 11. On a careful reading of the impugned revision order of PCIT passed under section 263 of the Act, it becomes very much clear that he has revised the assessment order passed under section 143(3) :- 10 -: r.w.s. 147 of the Act. Thus, the issues before us are, firstly, whether the assessment order passed under

CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. PCIT-4,, CHENNAI

disallowance of deduction u/s. 80G of Act.\nHowever, the same was subsequently dropped by the Learned DCIT.\n3. Pursuant to the aforesaid Assessment Order, the Id.PCIT invoked\nthe provisions u/s. 263 of the Act and issued show cause notice\ndated 27.09.2024 (refer Page no. 356 of Factual Paperbook) and\nsought to set aside the Assessment order regarding the issue

GOLDEN VATS PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the order passed by the Commissioner dated 14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.416/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S. Golden Vats Private Limited Acit बनाम New No.272, 3Rd Floor, Central Circle-3(2), Avvai Shanmugam Salai, Chennai. / Vs. Gopalapuram , Chennai-600 086. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaccg-9782-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent)

revision of this order on the ground that the assessment was reopened to make disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) and also to make disallowance of donation and CSR expenditure for Rs.201.84 Lacs and Rs.21 Lacs respectively. The assessment order, though considered the issue of disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia), did not consider the issue of disallowance of donation

M/S SHRIRAM PROPERTIES LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. PCIT-CENTRAL1, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 431/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18

disallowance of royalty paid amounting to Rs. 37,50,000/-. 5. The case has been subsequently taken up for revision proceedings by the Pr. CIT and issued show cause notice u/s. 263

RAMCO INDUSTRIES LIMITED,RAJAPALAYAM vs. DCIT, MADURAI

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

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1238/Chny/2024 िनधा9रण वष9 /Assessment Year: 2018-19 Ramco Industries Ltd., The Asst. Commissioner Of 47, Psk Nagar, Vs. Income Tax, Rajapalayam – 636 108. Corporate Circle, [Pan: Aaacr 5284J] Madurai.

u/s 263 of the Act, when the subject matter of the revision, namely disallowances u/s 14A of the Act as per Rule

PHILIPS FOODS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,TUTICORIN vs. PCIT-1, MADURAI

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed

revise\nassessment order raised by National e-Assessment Centre(NEAC), Delhi,\nu/s 143(3) r.w.s 144B of the Act for AY-2016-17 dated 04.05.2021. In its\noriginal appeal filed alongside Form-36 the appellant had raised three\ngrounds challenging validity of the revisionary proceedings u/s 263 and\nhad also argued on merits of the case alluding that the report

MEERA HUSSAIN,CHENNAI vs. PCIT, CHENNAI

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jmand Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.501/Chny/2022 (िनधा1रणवष1 / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Meera Hussain Pr. Cit बनाम/ 19, Thambu Chetty Street, Chennai-8. Vs. Mannady,Chennai-600 001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Aahpm-9324-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : ("#थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri T.T. Durairaj Kandiar(Ca) – Ld.Ar "#थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri M. Rajan (Cit) – Ld.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04-05-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19-05-2023 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. By Way Of This Appeal, The Assessee Assail The Invocation Of Revisionary Jurisdiction U/S 263 By Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai-8 (Pr. Cit) Vide Impugned Order Dated 25.03.2021 In The Matter An Assessment Framed By Ld. Ao U/S.143(3) Of The Act On 14-11-2017. The Grounds Taken By The Assessee Are As Under:- “On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Order Of The Hon'Ble Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai-8, Passed U/S.263, With Reference No.: Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2020-21/ 1031753147(1), Dated 25.03.2021, Is Against The Facts Of The Case Weight Of Evidence On Record & Bad In Law For The Following Reasons:-

263. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of the Hon'ble PCIT, Chennai-8 is against the provisions of the Act as the original Order cannot be treated as erroneousand prejudicial to the interest of revenue and is completely unsustainable in law.” 2. The Registry has noted delay of 380 days in the appeal, the condonation

PADMAVATHY REALTY AND PROMOTERS P LTD,CHENNAI vs. THE PCIT,, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 195/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Padmavathy Realty & The Principal Commissioner Of Promoters P Ltd V. Chennai-4, 30, Ii Street, Balaji Nagar, Chennai. Royapettah, Chennai – 600 014. [Pan: Aaccd-0782-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25.07.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04.08.2023

revision u/s 263 of the Act. Hence, the Assessment Order is set aside with a direction to the Assessing Officer to undertake a fresh assessment within the stipulated time, by treating the amortised value of premium for the year of Rs. 42, 75,00,000/- as direct cost and enhance the value of closing stock by such extent, after providing

MEGNANAPURAM PACCS,TIRUCHENDUR vs. PCIT,, MADURAI

u/s 263 of the Act and consequently\nerred in setting aside the re-assessment order dated 20.11.2023 without\nassigning proper reasons and justification.\n3) The PCIT failed to appreciate that revision order was passed out of time, invalid,\npassed without jurisdiction and not sustainable both on facts and in law.\n4) The PCIT failed to appreciate that there could

NEW CARRYING CORPORATION,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NON CORPORATE WARD-12(1)I/C, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 229/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16

disallowance on certain expenses amounting to Rs. 46,553/-. :-5-: ITA. No:229 /Chny/2022 7. The case has been subsequently taken up for revision proceedings by the PCIT, Chennai-8 and a show cause notice u/s. 263

SOUTHERN PETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRIES CORPORATION LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

The appeal stands partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1.आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.206/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 2.आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.207/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2005-06) M/S. Southern Petrochemical Income Tax Officer बनाम Industries Corporation Limited Corporate Ward-3(1) 88, Spic House, Mount Road, Guindy, Chennai-600 034. / Vs. Chennai-600 032. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs-4668-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan & Shri Saroj Kumar Parida (Advocates)-Ld. Ars " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) & Shri Ar V Sreenivasan (Addl. Cit)-Ld. Drs सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16-10-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10-01-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

revision u/s 263 by revisionary authority vide order dated 25.03.2011. Consequently, another assessment was framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 on 14.11.2011 making some more additions / disallowances

SOUTHERN PETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRIES CORPORATION LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

The appeal stands partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1.आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.206/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 2.आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.207/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2005-06) M/S. Southern Petrochemical Income Tax Officer बनाम Industries Corporation Limited Corporate Ward-3(1) 88, Spic House, Mount Road, Guindy, Chennai-600 034. / Vs. Chennai-600 032. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs-4668-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan & Shri Saroj Kumar Parida (Advocates)-Ld. Ars " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) & Shri Ar V Sreenivasan (Addl. Cit)-Ld. Drs सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16-10-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10-01-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

revision u/s 263 by revisionary authority vide order dated 25.03.2011. Consequently, another assessment was framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 on 14.11.2011 making some more additions / disallowances