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

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

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, 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 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Cognizant Technology Solutions Vs 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. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Pan: Aaacd 3312M (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1262, 1263, 1264, 1265 & 1266/Chny/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs 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 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) निधारिती की ओर से/Assessee By राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit & Ms. Anitha, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.05.2025 - 2 -

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

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं/.Ita Nos.:3315, 3316 & 3321/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2019-20, 2020-21 & 2018-19 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Taxх, Central Circle -1, Trichy. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Vs. Shri Kumarasamy Ramakrishnan, Ramakrishna Poultry Farm, No.79, Main Road, Thalavapalayam, Karur, Tamil Nadu – 639 113. [Pan:Aagpr-3421-A] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थीकी ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri A. Sasikumar, Cit प्रत्यर्थीकी ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri.M.V.Prasad, C.A.& Shri.K.S.Rajendra Kumar, C.A. सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.03.2025 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05.06.2025 आदेश / Order Per S. R. Raghunatha: These Three Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai-19, Dated 07.10.2024, 04.10.2024 &04.10.2024And Pertain To Assessment Years 2019-20, 2020-21&2018-19 Respectively. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Being Heard Together & Disposed Off, By This Consolidated Order. :-2-:

3)(ii) of the Act, so as to attract disallowance of the deduction u/s 801A(4)(iv) of the Act. 21. In this regard, the Id.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

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

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

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

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

ALAGUMALAI IMPEX PVT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee for both the assessment years are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

3) of the Act determining total income of the assessee at ₹.1,09,75,887/- disallowing and reducing the assessee’s claim of deduction under section 10A

M/S. ALAGUMALAI IMPEX PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee for both the assessment years are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

3) of the Act determining total income of the assessee at ₹.1,09,75,887/- disallowing and reducing the assessee’s claim of deduction under section 10A

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. ALAGUMALAI IMPEX P. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee for both the assessment years are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

3) of the Act determining total income of the assessee at ₹.1,09,75,887/- disallowing and reducing the assessee’s claim of deduction under section 10A

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. TVS MOTOR COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2008-09 The The Asst. Asst. Commissioner Commissioner Of Of Vs. M/S. Tvs Motor Company Ltd., M/S. Tvs Motor Company Ltd., Income Tax, Company Circle Income Tax, Company Circle- Jayalakshmi Estates, 29 (Old Jayalakshmi Estates, 29 (Old Iii(2), New Block, 4Th Floor, 121, Iii(2), New Block, 4 No.8), Haddows Road, Chennai No.8), Haddows Road, Chennai Mahatma Mahatma Gandhi Gandhi Road, Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai Nungambakkam, Chennai Pan/Gir No.Aaacs 7032 B Aaacs 7032 B (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Ar Revenue By : Dr. S.Palanikumar, Cit ( Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 24 /2/ 2022 2 Date Of Pronouncement : 13/4/20 /2022 O R D E R Per C.M.Garg, Jm , Jm

3. CIT vs KEI Indusrtries Ltd., 373 ITR 574 (Del) 4. CIT vs Galaxy Surfactants Ltd., 343 ITR 108 (Del) 5. TCA No.448 of 2019 remanding the matter in ITA No.1782/Mds/2012 11. Ld counsel by referring to para 7 of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Synco Industries Ltd(supra) submitted that sub-section

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. POLYHOSE INDIA (RUBBER) PVT. LTD., KANCHEEPURAM

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3387, 3388 & 3389/Mds/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2008-2009, 2009-10 & 2011-12) M/S. Polyhose India (Rubber) Pvt. Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, C/O. B. Sivaraman & Associates, Ca Corporate Circle-V(2), 10, E Block, Karthik Apartments, Chennai – 34. 46, Vijayaragava Road, Chennai – 600 017. Pan: Aadcp4173F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.17/Mds/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-2010) Vs M/S. Polyhose India (Rubber) Pvt. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd., F-37 To F-42, Corporate Circle-5(2), Sipcot Industrial Park, Chennai – 34. Irungattukottai, Kanchipuram - 602105 Pan: Aadcp4173F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Smt. S. Vijayaprabha, Jcit "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : 26.09.2017 सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 22.11.2017 घोषणाक"तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement

disallowing the provision for warranty amounting to Rs.20 lakhs. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of manufacture and export of high quality rubber hoses. For all the relevant three assessment years assessment was made U/s.143(3) of the Act. 5. Assessee’s Appeal: Assessment year