CRR LEATHERS,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.616/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2008-09 M/S. Crr Leathers, The Income Tax Officer, 9/5, Patnool Sardarjung Street, Vs. Non Corporate Ward 4(3), Periamet, Chennai 600 003. Chennai 600 006. [Pan: Aaafc4173G] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri K. Ravi, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 08.06.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.08.2017 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 5, Chennai Dated 27.10.2016 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2008-09, Wherein, In The Grounds Appeal, Besides Challenging The Confirmation Of Various Additions For Want Of Tds Under Section 195 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short], The Assessee Has Mainly Challenged Confirmation Of Reopening Of Assessment, Which Is Barred By Limitation.

3 I.T.A. No.616/M/17 explanation. Similarly tax was not deducted in certain payments made under job work charges amounting to ₹. 2,56,895/-. Hence, a sum of ₹. 5,71,745/- was disallowed under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and the same was brought to tax. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer has completed the assessment under section 143

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

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

disallowed. The submission that has been urged on behalf of the assessee is that, since the assessment was opened and an order of reassessment was passed only one issue namely, the claim under Section 72A, when the Commissioner as a Revisional Authority under Section 263 seeks to exercise his jurisdiction on matters which did not form the subject

N.PURUSHOTHAMAN,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is party allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.76/Chny/2017 & C.O. No.34/Chny/2017 [In Ita No.76/Chny/2017] ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

section 148, the assessment u/s 143(3) is not valid.” In view of the above, the CIT(A) agreed with the arguments of the assessee and statement made by the Assessing Officer in remand report that only Rs.16.67 lakhs, out of total disallowance

DCIT, OOTY vs. N.PURUSHOTHAMAN, COIMBATORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is party allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.76/Chny/2017 & C.O. No.34/Chny/2017 [In Ita No.76/Chny/2017] ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

section 148, the assessment u/s 143(3) is not valid.” In view of the above, the CIT(A) agreed with the arguments of the assessee and statement made by the Assessing Officer in remand report that only Rs.16.67 lakhs, out of total disallowance

M/S. SHRIRAM CONSTRUCTION FINANCE,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.317/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Shriram Construction Finance, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Mookambika Complex, No. 4, Income Tax, Lady Desika Road, Mylapore, Non Corporate Circle 2, Chennai 600 004. Chennai. [Pan:Aaafs2597N] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.343/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Shriram Construction Income Tax, Finance, Mookambika Complex, Non Corporate Circle 2(1), No. 4, Lady Desika Road, Chennai. Mylapore, Chennai 600 004. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate Department By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 30.03.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.04.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 2, Chennai Dated 26.11.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are Reproduced As 2

disallowance under section 14A of the Act has already come across under section 143(1) of the Act as well as under section 143(3

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2, CHENNAI vs. SHRIRAM CONSTRUCTION FINANCE, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.317/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Shriram Construction Finance, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Mookambika Complex, No. 4, Income Tax, Lady Desika Road, Mylapore, Non Corporate Circle 2, Chennai 600 004. Chennai. [Pan:Aaafs2597N] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.343/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Shriram Construction Income Tax, Finance, Mookambika Complex, Non Corporate Circle 2(1), No. 4, Lady Desika Road, Chennai. Mylapore, Chennai 600 004. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate Department By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 30.03.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.04.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 2, Chennai Dated 26.11.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are Reproduced As 2

disallowance under section 14A of the Act has already come across under section 143(1) of the Act as well as under section 143(3

D.A.V. EDUCATIONAL TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-2, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2014-15,\n2017-18 & 2018-19 are allowed and the appeal for AY 2015-16 is partly\nallowed

143(2) and 142(1) of the Act. We find the\nnotice dated 02.06.2016 issued under section 142(1) of the Act placed at\npage 71 of the paper book and on perusal of the same, the Assessing\nOfficer asked the assessee to furnish; vide item No. 11, If charitable, do\nthe objects constitute the main limbs of charitable purposes

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MADURAI, MADURAI vs. TRANSWORLD GARNET INDIA PVT LTD.,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the five appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Section under\n| | | | order of | assessment | which\n| | | | CIT(A) | order | assessment order\n| | | | | | was passed\n| 1 | 1872/Chny/2025 | 2013-14 | 07.04.2025 | 05.05.2021 | 153A r.w.s 143(3)\n| 2 | 1873/Chny/2025 | 2014-15 | 07.04.2025 | 05.05.2021 | 153A r.w.s 143(3)\n| 3 | 1875/Chny/2025 | 2015-16 | 09.04.2025 | 06.05.2021 | 153A r.w.s 143(3)\n| 4 | 1877/Chny/2025 | 2016-17 | 09.04.2025 | 06.05.2021 | 153A r.w.s 143(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\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-2, MADURAI, MADURAI vs. TRANSWORLD GARNET INDIA PVT LTD.,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the five appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Section 153A of the Act. Additionally, the sworn statement of Shri S.\nRamesh, without corroborative evidence, is insufficient to justify any\nadditions. Given that both assessments were completed u/s 143(3) of the\nAct and no new material discredits the books of account, no additions can\nbe made in an unabated assessment. In light of legal precedents and the\nfacts

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MADURAI vs. TRANSWORLD GARNET INDIA PVT LTD, CHENNAI

In the result, all the five appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

143(3) of the\nAct and no new material discredits the books of account, no additions can\nbe made in an unabated assessment. In light of legal precedents and the\nfacts, the additions u/s 153A for AYs 2013-14 and 2014-15 are unsustainable\nin the eyes of law. Therefore, all the grounds raised upon the issue of legality\nare

T.S.R.KHANNAIYANN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, COIMBATORE

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

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

3) of section 143.” 10 I.T.A. Nos.256 & 257/Chny/18 I.T.A. No.812/Chny/18 10. In view of the above judgment of Apex Court, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that even though the case was reopened and reason for reopening was supplied, the Assessing Officer was expected to serve the notice under Section 143(2) of the Act within a period

ITO CORPORATE WARD 2 , COIMBATORE vs. SHRI. T S R KHANNAIYAN, COIMBATORE

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

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

3) of section 143.” 10 I.T.A. Nos.256 & 257/Chny/18 I.T.A. No.812/Chny/18 10. In view of the above judgment of Apex Court, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that even though the case was reopened and reason for reopening was supplied, the Assessing Officer was expected to serve the notice under Section 143(2) of the Act within a period

T.S.R.KHANNAIYANN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, COIMBATORE

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

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

3) of section 143.” 10 I.T.A. Nos.256 & 257/Chny/18 I.T.A. No.812/Chny/18 10. In view of the above judgment of Apex Court, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that even though the case was reopened and reason for reopening was supplied, the Assessing Officer was expected to serve the notice under Section 143(2) of the Act within a period

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MADURAI, MADURAI vs. TRANSWORLD GARNET INDIA PVT LTD.,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the five appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

143(3) of the\nAct and no new material discredits the books of account, no additions can\nbe made in an unabated assessment. In light of legal precedents and the\nfacts, the additions u/s 153A for AYs 2013-14 and 2014-15 are unsustainable\nin the eyes of law. Therefore, all the grounds raised upon the issue of legality\nare

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MADURAI, MADURAI vs. TRANSWORLD GARNET INDIA PVT LTD.,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the five appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Section 153A of the Act. Additionally, the sworn statement of Shri S.\nRamesh, without corroborative evidence, is insufficient to justify any\nadditions. Given that both assessments were completed u/s 143(3) of the\nAct and no new material discredits the books of account, no additions can\nbe made in an unabated assessment. In light of legal precedents and the\nfacts

SHRIRAM FINANCE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE 3(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.173/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Shriram Finance Limited Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of [Formerly Known As Shriram Transport Income Tax, Finance Company Limited), Corporate Circle 3(1), Sri Towers, Plot No. 14A, South Phase, Chennai. Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai 600 017. [Pan: Aaacs7018R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri R.V. Aroon Prasad, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 25.07.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.08.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.11.2023 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. Ground No. 1 Is General In Nature & Requires No Adjudication.

disallowances taking into account the same income as made under section 143(1) of the Act by separate order passed under section 143(3

ABT LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. THE PCIT(CENTRAL), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 61 & 62/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. Abt Limited, The Principal Commissioner Of 180, Race Course Road, Vs. Income Tax (Central), Coimbatore 641 018. Chennai-2, Chennai. [Pan:Aabca8398K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N. Arjun Raj, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M. Rajan, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 01.08.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.08.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Chennai-2, Chennai, Dated 04.03.2021 & 05.03.2021 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively Challenging The Revision Orders Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

143(3) of the Act dated 08.02.2016 by assessing total income of the assessee under normal provisions at ₹.16,37,88,681/- after making disallowance of claim of revenue expenditure after allowing depreciation @ 10% treating the expenditure as capital. 3. Thereafter, a search action under section