SHRIRAM CAPITAL LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.512 &513 /Mds/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-2011 & 2011- 2012)

disallowed the same. If the expenditure is incurred for the purpose of business, is made possible as obligation expenditure cannot be held as enduring benefit. 16. We have to see the nature of liability of net value of the payment and whether the expenditure is capital or revenue which is wholly and exclusively used for the purpose of business carried

SHRIRAM CAPITAL LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.512 &513 /Mds/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-2011 & 2011- 2012)

disallowed the same. If the expenditure is incurred for the purpose of business, is made possible as obligation expenditure cannot be held as enduring benefit. 16. We have to see the nature of liability of net value of the payment and whether the expenditure is capital or revenue which is wholly and exclusively used for the purpose of business carried

THIAGARAJAR MILLS (P) LIMITED,MADURAI vs. JCT, MADURAI

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.1202, 1203 & 1204/Chny/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/S. Thiagarajar Mills (P) Ltd., Joint Commissioner Of Gst Road, Kappalur Vs. Income Tax, Madurai – 625 008. Range – I, Madurai [Pan: Aaact 4304R] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Srinivasan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M. Srinivasa Rao, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 24.10.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: These Three Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Chennai All Dated 20.03.2015 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12. Since Common Issues Have Been Raised In These Appeals, Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity.

2) of the Act. It is, thus, evident that before the I.T.A. Nos. 1202, 1203 & 1204/Chny/2015 6 expiry of the period of one month from the date of service of notice under sub-section (1) of section 142 of the Act, no right to question the jurisdiction of an Assessing Officer would survive. 2.6 In the present case, the assessee

THIAGARAJAR MILLS (P) LIMITED,MADURAI vs. JCT, MADURAI

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.1202, 1203 & 1204/Chny/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/S. Thiagarajar Mills (P) Ltd., Joint Commissioner Of Gst Road, Kappalur Vs. Income Tax, Madurai – 625 008. Range – I, Madurai [Pan: Aaact 4304R] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Srinivasan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M. Srinivasa Rao, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 24.10.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: These Three Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Chennai All Dated 20.03.2015 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12. Since Common Issues Have Been Raised In These Appeals, Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity.

2) of the Act. It is, thus, evident that before the I.T.A. Nos. 1202, 1203 & 1204/Chny/2015 6 expiry of the period of one month from the date of service of notice under sub-section (1) of section 142 of the Act, no right to question the jurisdiction of an Assessing Officer would survive. 2.6 In the present case, the assessee

THIAGARAJAR MILLS (P) LIMITED,MADURAI vs. JCT, MADURAI

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.1202, 1203 & 1204/Chny/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/S. Thiagarajar Mills (P) Ltd., Joint Commissioner Of Gst Road, Kappalur Vs. Income Tax, Madurai – 625 008. Range – I, Madurai [Pan: Aaact 4304R] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Srinivasan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M. Srinivasa Rao, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 24.10.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: These Three Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Chennai All Dated 20.03.2015 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12. Since Common Issues Have Been Raised In These Appeals, Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity.

2) of the Act. It is, thus, evident that before the I.T.A. Nos. 1202, 1203 & 1204/Chny/2015 6 expiry of the period of one month from the date of service of notice under sub-section (1) of section 142 of the Act, no right to question the jurisdiction of an Assessing Officer would survive. 2.6 In the present case, the assessee

ALBERT & CO. P LTD. ,CHENNAI vs. ITO CORPORATE WARD 6(1) , CHENNAI

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

2 and 3 pertain to disallowance under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act while Ground 4 to 10 pertain to disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia). The connected grounds are taken up together hereinafter. Ground Nos.2 & 3: 9. The brief facts relevant for adjudication of the issue are that during the assessment proceedings the assessing officer noticed that while

ALBERT & CO. P. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO CORPORATE WARD 6(1), CHENNAI

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

2 and 3 pertain to disallowance under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act while Ground 4 to 10 pertain to disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia). The connected grounds are taken up together hereinafter. Ground Nos.2 & 3: 9. The brief facts relevant for adjudication of the issue are that during the assessment proceedings the assessing officer noticed that while

ALBERT & CO. P. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO CORPORATE WARD 6(1), CHENNAI

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

2 and 3 pertain to disallowance under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act while Ground 4 to 10 pertain to disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia). The connected grounds are taken up together hereinafter. Ground Nos.2 & 3: 9. The brief facts relevant for adjudication of the issue are that during the assessment proceedings the assessing officer noticed that while

PRECOT LIMITED ,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT,CORPORATE CIRCLE 2, COIMBATORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.132/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Precot Limited Sf No.559/4, D Block, 4Th Floor, Income Tax, Hanudev Info Park, Nava India Road Corporate Circle-2, Udaiyampalayam, Coimbatore. Coimbatore-641 028. Pan : Aabcp 3038K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

124/-. Therefore, the Assessing Officer relying on the provisions of section 2(24)(x) and Explanation to Section 36(1)(va) of the Act disallowed

SIVAKARTHICK RAMAN,MADURAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE MADURAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:281/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23 Sivakarthick Raman, The Assistant Commissioner Of 5/200, 2Nd Street, Alagupillai Nagar, Vs. Income Tax, T.Pudukudi, International Taxation Circle, Achampathu, Madurai. Madurai – 625 019. [Pan: Ajnpr-3214-R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. Preeti Goel, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Anitha, Addl. C.I.T. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.04.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am:

124. 35. Karnataka High Court in Prahlad Vijendra Rao 2011 198 Taxman 551 - Salary income derived by a person working outside India for 225 days has been held as not to have accrued in India. 36. The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court has held in Utanka Roy v. Director of Income-tax (2017 82 Taxman.com 113) that Explanation 2

M/S BGR EERGY SYSTEMS LIMIED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.221 & 222/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2018-19 M/S. Bgr Energy Systems Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 443, Anna Salai, Guna Complex, Income Tax, Teynampet, Chennai 600 018. Central Circle 3(1), Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aabcg2202J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.277 & 278/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2018-19 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Bgr Energy Systems Limited, Income Tax, No. 443, Anna Salai, Guna Complex, Central Circle 3(1), Teynampet, Chennai 600 018. Chennai 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. T. Sandhyaarti, Fca Department By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 19.07.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Directed Against The Consolidated Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income

124. 9. I have gone through the facts of the case. The appellant had made similar submissions in respect of the identical disallowance for all earlier years. In this regard, it is noted here that the disallowance made for the earlier A Ys have been upheld by the Ld. CIT(A) as well as the Hon. ITAT. The appellant

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1), CHENNAI vs. BGR ENERGY SYSTEMS LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.221 & 222/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2018-19 M/S. Bgr Energy Systems Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 443, Anna Salai, Guna Complex, Income Tax, Teynampet, Chennai 600 018. Central Circle 3(1), Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aabcg2202J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.277 & 278/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2018-19 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Bgr Energy Systems Limited, Income Tax, No. 443, Anna Salai, Guna Complex, Central Circle 3(1), Teynampet, Chennai 600 018. Chennai 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. T. Sandhyaarti, Fca Department By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 19.07.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Directed Against The Consolidated Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income

124. 9. I have gone through the facts of the case. The appellant had made similar submissions in respect of the identical disallowance for all earlier years. In this regard, it is noted here that the disallowance made for the earlier A Ys have been upheld by the Ld. CIT(A) as well as the Hon. ITAT. The appellant

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1), CHENNAI vs. BGR ENERGY SYSTEMS LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.221 & 222/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2018-19 M/S. Bgr Energy Systems Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 443, Anna Salai, Guna Complex, Income Tax, Teynampet, Chennai 600 018. Central Circle 3(1), Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aabcg2202J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.277 & 278/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2018-19 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Bgr Energy Systems Limited, Income Tax, No. 443, Anna Salai, Guna Complex, Central Circle 3(1), Teynampet, Chennai 600 018. Chennai 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. T. Sandhyaarti, Fca Department By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 19.07.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Directed Against The Consolidated Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income

124. 9. I have gone through the facts of the case. The appellant had made similar submissions in respect of the identical disallowance for all earlier years. In this regard, it is noted here that the disallowance made for the earlier A Ys have been upheld by the Ld. CIT(A) as well as the Hon. ITAT. The appellant

M/S BGR EERGY SYSTEMS LIMIED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.221 & 222/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2018-19 M/S. Bgr Energy Systems Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 443, Anna Salai, Guna Complex, Income Tax, Teynampet, Chennai 600 018. Central Circle 3(1), Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aabcg2202J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.277 & 278/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2018-19 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Bgr Energy Systems Limited, Income Tax, No. 443, Anna Salai, Guna Complex, Central Circle 3(1), Teynampet, Chennai 600 018. Chennai 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. T. Sandhyaarti, Fca Department By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 19.07.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Directed Against The Consolidated Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income

124. 9. I have gone through the facts of the case. The appellant had made similar submissions in respect of the identical disallowance for all earlier years. In this regard, it is noted here that the disallowance made for the earlier A Ys have been upheld by the Ld. CIT(A) as well as the Hon. ITAT. The appellant

T vs. MOTOR COMPANY LTD.,CHENNAIVS.ACIT, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.672/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S.Tvs Motor Co. Ltd., V. The Acit, No.29, Haddows Road, Corporate Circle – 3(1), Chennai-600 006. Chennai. [Pan: Aaacs 7032 B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

disallowance of loss on actual re is against the disallowance of loss on actual re is against the disallowance of loss on actual re- payment of External Commercial Borrowings (hereinafter in short ‘ECB’) payment of External Commercial Borrowings (hereinafter in short ‘ECB’) payment of External Commercial Borrowings (hereinafter in short ‘ECB’) loan during the year. 8.1 The brief facts

RAMESH KUMAR ,CHENNAI vs. ITO INTERNATIONAL TAXATION , TUTICORIN

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

disallowance of relief, amounting to `28, 44,650, claimed by the assessee under Article 15(1) of the tax treaty. During the calendar years 2013 and 2014 relevant to Indian FY 2013-14, the assessee was exercising his employment in Switzerland and had filed his tax returns in Switzerland in the 4 capacity of a tax resident of Switzerland

ACIT CIRCLE 1, TRICHY vs. DALMIA CEMENT BHARAT LTD., DALMIAPURAM

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2013-14] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.63/Chny/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.3157/Chny2017) [Assessment Year: 2013-14] M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. The Assistant Commissioner Of Dalmiapuram, Income Tax, Circle-1, Tamilnadu-621651 Vs Williams Road, Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan- Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2014-15] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue

2(24), it cannot be included as book profit under section 115JB. The ld. Counsel invited attention to a catena of other cases on the same principle. 22. Per Contra, the ld. DR would like to place reliance on the orders of the lower authorities. 23. We have heard the rival submission in the light of material placed on record

ACIT CIRCLE 1, TRICHY vs. DALMIA CEMENT BHARAT LTD., DALMIAPURAM

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2013-14] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.63/Chny/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.3157/Chny2017) [Assessment Year: 2013-14] M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. The Assistant Commissioner Of Dalmiapuram, Income Tax, Circle-1, Tamilnadu-621651 Vs Williams Road, Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan- Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2014-15] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue

2(24), it cannot be included as book profit under section 115JB. The ld. Counsel invited attention to a catena of other cases on the same principle. 22. Per Contra, the ld. DR would like to place reliance on the orders of the lower authorities. 23. We have heard the rival submission in the light of material placed on record

B.DHANASEKARAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.365/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Shri R. Dhanasekaran, The Assistant Commissioner Of R-3, Tnhb Shopping Complex, Vs. Income Tax, Shastri Nagar, 1St Avenue, Adyar, Non Corporate Circle – 15(1), Chennai 600 020. Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Adxpd7168E] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N. Devanathan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri J. Pavitran Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.09.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11.10.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

124 & 125/Hyd/2009 vide order dated 17.06.2013 inter alia that word ‘owned’ in sub-clause (a) on clause (1) of sub-section (4) of section 80IA of the Act referred to the enterprise. In other words, the enterprises carrying on development of the infrastructure facilities should be owned by a company or consortium of companies. The infrastructure facilities need