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

disallowing a sum of Rs.47,19,678/- under section 10AA on the grounds that an undertaking which has already availed the benefit before the commencement of the SEZ Act 2005, the deduction referred to in section 10A for the ten consecutive assessment years, such unit shall not be eligible for deduction from income in this section. 3

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, TRICHY, TRICHY vs. KUMARASAMY RAMAKRISHNAN, KARUR

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं/.Ita Nos.:3315, 3316 & 3321/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2019-20, 2020-21 & 2018-19

3)(ii) of the Act, so as to attract disallowance of the deduction u/s 80IA(4)(iv) of the Act. 21. In this regard, the ld.CIT(A) drew strong support from the judgment of the Hon’ble Madras High Courtin the case of CIT v. Heartland KG Information Ltd [2013] 39 taxmann.com 132 (Madras), wherein the Hon’ble High Court

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, TRICHY, TRICHY vs. KUMARASAMY RAMAKRISHNAN, KARUR

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are\nOrder pronounced in the court on 05th June, 2025 at Chennai

disallowance of the deduction claimed u/s.80IA(4)(iv) is\nattracted on the ground of violation of the condition specified in section\n801A(3)(ii) when the 'running business' of the 'wind mill undertaking' is\ntransferred to the assessee by the previous owner and that the stipulation in\nthe said condition that the 'undertaking' is not formed by the transfer

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, TRICHY, TRICHY vs. KUMARASAMY RAMAKRISHNAN, KARUR

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are\nOrder pronounced in the court on 05th June, 2025 at Chennai

disallowance of the deduction claimed u/s.80IA(4)(iv) is\nattracted on the ground of violation of the condition specified in section\n801A(3)(ii) when the 'running business' of the 'wind mill undertaking' is\ntransferred to the assessee by the previous owner and that the stipulation in\nthe said condition that the 'undertaking' is not formed by the transfer

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

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1193, 1194, 1205, 1206 & 1207/Chny/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs Cognizant Technology Solutions The Asst. Commissioner India Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, No.5/535, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Central Circle 1(1), Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 096. Pan : Aaacd 3312M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1262, 1263, 1264, 1265 & 1266/Chny/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Cognizant Technology Income Tax, Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle 1(1), No.5/535, Okkiam Chennai. Thoraipakkam, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai – 600 096. Pan : Aaacd 3312M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

3: Disallowance of set-off of losses incurred by units eligible for deduction under section 10A and 10AA against other

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

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1193, 1194, 1205, 1206 & 1207/Chny/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs Cognizant Technology Solutions The Asst. Commissioner India Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, No.5/535, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Central Circle 1(1), Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 096. Pan : Aaacd 3312M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1262, 1263, 1264, 1265 & 1266/Chny/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Cognizant Technology Income Tax, Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle 1(1), No.5/535, Okkiam Chennai. Thoraipakkam, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai – 600 096. Pan : Aaacd 3312M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

3: Disallowance of set-off of losses incurred by units eligible for deduction under section 10A and 10AA against other

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

Disallowance for book profits under Section 115JB was deleted. Penalty proceedings were kept open.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": [ "14A", "8D", "40(a)(i)", "9(1)(vii)", "10A", "10AA", "115JB", "195", "271(1)(c)", "274", "10(35)", "10(38)", "12(3

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

3) to Section 14A\nof the Act, the AO does not have power to compute\ndisallowance under Section 14A as per provisions of Rule 8D,\neven for A.Ys.2008-09 and onwards, if the AO does not\nexpress dissatisfaction.\n- For the purpose of computation of disallowance u/s.14A of\nthe Act read with rule 8D, the investments which have

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

3) to section 14A\nof the Act, the AO does not have power to compute\ndisallowance under section 14A as per provisions of Rule 8D,\neven for A.Ys.2008-09 and onwards, if the AO does not\nexpress dissatisfaction.\n\n- For the purpose of computation of disallowance u/s.14A of\nthe Act read with rule 8D, the investments which have

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

3) to section 14A\nof the Act, the AO does not have power to compute\ndisallowance under section 14A as per provisions of Rule 8D,\neven for A.Ys.2008-09 and onwards, if the AO does not\nexpress dissatisfaction.\n- For the purpose of computation of disallowance u/s.14A of\nthe Act read with rule 8D, the investments which have

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

3) to Section 14A\nof the Act, the AO does not have power to compute\ndisallowance under Section 14A as per provisions of Rule 8D,\neven for A.Ys.2008-09 and onwards, if the AO does not\nexpress dissatisfaction.\n- For the purpose of computation of disallowance u/s.14A of\nthe Act read with rule 8D, the investments which have

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

3) to section 14A\nof the Act, the AO does not have power to compute\ndisallowance under section 14A as per provisions of Rule 8D,\neven for A.Ys.2008-09 and onwards, if the AO does not\nexpress dissatisfaction.\n- For the purpose of computation of disallowance u/s.14A of\nthe Act read with rule 8D, the investments which have

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

10A", "10AA", "115JB", "271(1)(c)", "274", "10(35)", "10(38)", "195" ], "issues": "1. Whether disallowance under Section 14A can exceed exempt income. 2. Taxability of software AMC and license payments as fees for technical services or royalty. 3

AVALON TECHNOLOIGES (P) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2009-10 in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. M.L. Meena

sections 32, 40(a)(ia), 40A(3) , 43B, etc. of the Act and other specific disallowances, related to the business activity against which the Chapter VI-A deduction has been claimed, result inenhancement of the profits of the eligible business, and that deduction under Chapter VI- A is admissible on the profits so enhanced by the disallowance. 4. Accordingly, henceforth

AVALON TECHNOLOGIES (P) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2009-10 in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. M.L. Meena

sections 32, 40(a)(ia), 40A(3) , 43B, etc. of the Act and other specific disallowances, related to the business activity against which the Chapter VI-A deduction has been claimed, result inenhancement of the profits of the eligible business, and that deduction under Chapter VI- A is admissible on the profits so enhanced by the disallowance. 4. Accordingly, henceforth

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. AVALON TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD.,, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2009-10 in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. M.L. Meena

sections 32, 40(a)(ia), 40A(3) , 43B, etc. of the Act and other specific disallowances, related to the business activity against which the Chapter VI-A deduction has been claimed, result inenhancement of the profits of the eligible business, and that deduction under Chapter VI- A is admissible on the profits so enhanced by the disallowance. 4. Accordingly, henceforth

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. MEGASOFT LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2560/Mds/2014 आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1250, 1251 & 1252/Mds/2015 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1416/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2006-07, 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Megasoft Limited, Income Tax, Company Circle Iv(2), V. No.85, Kutchery Road, The Assistant Commissioner Of Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. Income Tax, Corporate Circle 4(1), Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Aabcm 8933 A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

3. On the contrary, Dr. C.P. Ramaswami, the Ld.counsel for the assessee, submitted that Section 10A of the Act is a provision for exemption and not a deduction. The losses suffered by other eligible unit cannot be set off against the profit of Section 10A unit before giving exemption. According to the Ld. counsel, the benefit of Section 10A

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. MEGASOFT LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2560/Mds/2014 आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1250, 1251 & 1252/Mds/2015 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1416/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2006-07, 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Megasoft Limited, Income Tax, Company Circle Iv(2), V. No.85, Kutchery Road, The Assistant Commissioner Of Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. Income Tax, Corporate Circle 4(1), Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Aabcm 8933 A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

3. On the contrary, Dr. C.P. Ramaswami, the Ld.counsel for the assessee, submitted that Section 10A of the Act is a provision for exemption and not a deduction. The losses suffered by other eligible unit cannot be set off against the profit of Section 10A unit before giving exemption. According to the Ld. counsel, the benefit of Section 10A

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. MEGASOFT LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2560/Mds/2014 आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1250, 1251 & 1252/Mds/2015 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1416/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2006-07, 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Megasoft Limited, Income Tax, Company Circle Iv(2), V. No.85, Kutchery Road, The Assistant Commissioner Of Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. Income Tax, Corporate Circle 4(1), Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Aabcm 8933 A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

3. On the contrary, Dr. C.P. Ramaswami, the Ld.counsel for the assessee, submitted that Section 10A of the Act is a provision for exemption and not a deduction. The losses suffered by other eligible unit cannot be set off against the profit of Section 10A unit before giving exemption. According to the Ld. counsel, the benefit of Section 10A