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

Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act:\nThe next issue in this appeal of assessee is as regards to the\norder of Ld.CIT(A) in confirming the action of the AO in making\ndisallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act on the payment towards\nSoftware Annual Maintenance Charges ('Software AMC') and\npayments towards license to use software ('Software

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

6\nAY 2012-13\nAssessee (ITA No. 1205/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 5\nAY 2013-14\nAssessee (ITA No. 1206/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 4\nAY 2014-15\nAssessee (ITA No. 1207/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 4\n4.1 The facts relating to the issue of disallowance under Section 14A\nof the Act is common for all the AYs being

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

6\nAY 2012-13\nAssessee (ITA No. 1205/CHNY/2024) 2 to 5\nAY 2013-14\nAssessee (ITA No. 1206/CHNY/2024) 2 to 4\nAY 2014-15\nAssessee (ITA No. 1207/CHNY/2024) 2 to 4\n4.1 The facts relating to the issue of disallowance under Section 14A\nof the Act is common for all the AYs being

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

6\nAY 2012-13\nAssessee (ITA No. 1205/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 5\nAY 2013-14\nAssessee (ITA No. 1206/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 4\nAY 2014-15\nAssessee (ITA No. 1207/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 4\n\n4.1 The facts relating to the issue of disallowance under section 14A\nof the Act is common for all the AYs being

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

6\nAY 2012-13\nAssessee (ITA No. 1205/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 5\nAY 2013-14\nAssessee (ITA No. 1206/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 4\nAY 2014-15\nAssessee (ITA No. 1207/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 4\n4.1 The facts relating to the issue of disallowance under section 14A\nof the Act is common for all the AYs being

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

6\nAY 2012-13\nAssessee (ITA No. 1205/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 5\nAY 2013-14\nAssessee (ITA No. 1206/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 4\nAY 2014-15\nAssessee (ITA No. 1207/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 4\n4.1 The facts relating to the issue of disallowance under section 14A\nof the Act is common for all the AYs being

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

6\nAY 2012-13\nAssessee (ITA No. 1205/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 5\nAY 2013-14\nAssessee (ITA No. 1206/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 4\nAY 2014-15\nAssessee (ITA No. 1207/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 4\n4.1 The facts relating to the issue of disallowance under section 14A\nof the Act is common for all the AYs being

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. CHETTINAD ACADEMY OF RESEARCH AND EDUCATION, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

6. The AO had thereafter issued notice u/s.143(2) of the Act and notice(s) in terms of Section 142(1) of the Act in calling for details in support of the return of income filed for the A.Y. under consideration. 7. The AO during the course of search assessment proceedings had issued a Show Cause Notice in proposing

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)

6. Without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT(A) has erred in treating the alternative plea of the Appellant that tax holiday under section 10A/ 10AA of the Act shall be granted to the Appellant on enhanced income arising out of disallowance made under section 14A of the Act as illogical without providing any cogent reasons for the same

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)

6. Without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT(A) has erred in treating the alternative plea of the Appellant that tax holiday under section 10A/ 10AA of the Act shall be granted to the Appellant on enhanced income arising out of disallowance made under section 14A of the Act as illogical without providing any cogent reasons for the same

M.P. SANTHOSH KUMAR, ITO, CHENNAI vs. GREENPEACE ENVIRONMENT TRUST, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 406/Chny/2025 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer, Greenpeace Environment Trust, Exemptions, Ward-1, Vs. New No.49, Old No.23, Chennai. Ellaiamman Colony, Gopalapuram, Chennai-600 086. [Pan:Aaatg-3538-R] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. Kumar Chandan, Jcit. प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Y.Sridhar, F.C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.06.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25.08.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am :

11 will not apply. Therefore to attract section 13(1) (c) read with section 13 (3) (cc) or 13 (3) (e) it should be established that the expenses which have been disallowed have enured for the benefit of any trustee/manager of the Appellant or any concern (GPIS in this case) in which the author, substantial contributor, trustee etc., are substantially

M/S ENRICE ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Das

6 is Dismissed. ITA Nos.1166 & 1167/Chny/2023 :: 22 :: 7.6 Ground of appeal No.7: 7.6.1 The appellant vide above grounds raised issue that while computing penalty, AO has not followed provisions of section 270A (10). 7.6.2 Section 270A (10) details about tax payable in respect of 'under- reported income' for the year. It reads as under: (10) The tax payable in respect

M/S ENRIA ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(4), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Das

6 is Dismissed. ITA Nos.1166 & 1167/Chny/2023 :: 22 :: 7.6 Ground of appeal No.7: 7.6.1 The appellant vide above grounds raised issue that while computing penalty, AO has not followed provisions of section 270A (10). 7.6.2 Section 270A (10) details about tax payable in respect of 'under- reported income' for the year. It reads as under: (10) The tax payable in respect

PRAKASHCHAND JAIN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CC2(3), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.68/Chny/2024 िनधा रण वष /Assessment Year: 2017-18 Prakashchand Jain, The Dy. Commissioner Of V. 39 & 40 Bakers Street, Income Tax, Choolai, Chennai – 600 112. Central Circle-2(3), Chennai. [Pan: Ahhpp 1690D] (अपीलाथ$/Appellant) (%&थ$/Respondent) अपीलाथ$कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate %&थ$कीओरसे /Respondent By Shri R. Clement Ramesh : Kumar, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10.12.2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 07.03.2025 :

6 March, 2022 passed by Respondent No.1 under Section 270AA (4) of the Act is se No.1 under Section 270AA (4) of the Act is set aside and t aside and Respondent No.1 is directed to grant immunity under Respondent No.1 is directed to grant immunity under Respondent No.1 is directed to grant immunity under Section 270AA

THE CRAFTS COUNCIL OF INDIA,CHENNAI vs. JCIT(EXEMPTIONS), CHENNAI

section 2(15), as per the\ndecision of the Apex Court. The AO and CIT(A) has disallowed depreciation\nclaimed by the Appellant on the ground that the investments depreciable\ncapital assets have been allowed as deduction in the year of investment and\nhence granting depreciation on the same assets would amount to double\ndeduction. This issue has been considered

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LTU CIRCLE 1 CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. CARBORUNDUM UNIVERSAL LIMITED, CHENNAI

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./ It(Tp)A Nos.2, 3 & 4/Chny/2025 िनधा@रण वष@ /Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2017-18

section 35(2AB) of ₹2,11,66,481/- whereas as per the Form 3CL dated 13th June 2016, the DSIR has approved weighted direction only to the extent of ₹2,05,46,481/-. AO disallowed the balance of ₹6

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME CORPORATE CIRCLE 1-1, CHENNAI vs. FL SMIDTH PRIVATE LIMITED, KANCHIPURAM

disallowance of depreciation on goodwill\narising on amalgamation. The Id. CIT(A) has partially allowed the appeals of\nthe assessee. Now the Revenue has filed appeals in ITA No.:\n1731/CHNY/2024, ITA No.: 1682/CHNY/2024 and ITA No.: 1763/CHNY/2024\nfor AY 2014-15, AY 2015-16 and AY 2017-18 respectively. Further, the\nassessee has filed Cross objection grounds of appeal

M/S AVM CHARITIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

11. 15. Assuming but not admitting the decision of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) having held that the appellant is not eligible for exemption u/s.11 of the Act, he ought to have allowed the claim of depreciation amounting to Rs.38,24,001/- in accordance with provisions of section 32 of the Act. For these grounds and such other grounds

M/S. A V M CHARITIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD-1, CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

11. 15. Assuming but not admitting the decision of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) having held that the appellant is not eligible for exemption u/s.11 of the Act, he ought to have allowed the claim of depreciation amounting to Rs.38,24,001/- in accordance with provisions of section 32 of the Act. For these grounds and such other grounds