SIVA INDUSTRIES AND HOLDINGS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA No 1392/2016 for the

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

10 years. The learned TPO adopted 6.31% (LIBOR of 4.41 percent plus 1.9 percent) as the arm’s length price and directed an adjustment of 4.31% (6.31 percent minus 2 percent) at INR 1,48,48,492. Further, the assessee had issued guarantees to financial institutions on behalf of wholly owned subsidiaries in the capacity as a shareholder. No commission

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SIVA VENTURES LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA No 1392/2016 for the

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

10 years. The learned TPO adopted 6.31% (LIBOR of 4.41 percent plus 1.9 percent) as the arm’s length price and directed an adjustment of 4.31% (6.31 percent minus 2 percent) at INR 1,48,48,492. Further, the assessee had issued guarantees to financial institutions on behalf of wholly owned subsidiaries in the capacity as a shareholder. No commission

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SIVA VENTURES LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA No 1392/2016 for the

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

10 years. The learned TPO adopted 6.31% (LIBOR of 4.41 percent plus 1.9 percent) as the arm’s length price and directed an adjustment of 4.31% (6.31 percent minus 2 percent) at INR 1,48,48,492. Further, the assessee had issued guarantees to financial institutions on behalf of wholly owned subsidiaries in the capacity as a shareholder. No commission

YCH LOGISTICS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,KANCHEEPURAM vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

disallowance of deduction u/s.10AA of the Act. 3. Now before us, the ld.AR for the assessee stated that the assessee has filed additional grounds on the issue of jurisdiction of AO in framing the final assessment order u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 92CA(3) r.w.s. 144C(5) of the Act, dated 12.01.2016 and according to assessee, the assessment order is contrary

M/S. EID PARRY INDIA LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, LTU-1,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathait(Tp)A. Nos.:105, 106, 107/Chny/2024 & Ita No.3113/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. E.I.D. Parry India Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 234, Dare House, Nsc Vs. Income Tax, Bose Road, Parrys Corner, Large Taxpayer Unit -1, Chennai 600 001. Chennai. [Pan: Aaace-0702-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

section 144C r.w.s. 92CA of the Act by making disallowance of ₹.7,35,900/-. 8. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A). By considering the submissions of the assessee, the CIT(A) has observed that the LOCs are nothing but IT(TP)A Nos.105 to 107/Chny/2024 & ITA No. 3113 & 3251/Chny/24 corporate

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LTU CIRCLE 1 CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. E I D PARRY INDIA LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathait(Tp)A. Nos.:105, 106, 107/Chny/2024 & Ita No.3113/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. E.I.D. Parry India Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 234, Dare House, Nsc Vs. Income Tax, Bose Road, Parrys Corner, Large Taxpayer Unit -1, Chennai 600 001. Chennai. [Pan: Aaace-0702-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

section 144C r.w.s. 92CA of the Act by making disallowance of ₹.7,35,900/-. 8. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A). By considering the submissions of the assessee, the CIT(A) has observed that the LOCs are nothing but IT(TP)A Nos.105 to 107/Chny/2024 & ITA No. 3113 & 3251/Chny/24 corporate

KELLER GROUND ENGINEERING INDIA PRIVATE LTD,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE 4(2), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

section 144C of the Act is invalid in law and should be struck down as much. 2. The draft assessment order, which is in essence the final assessment order, given that the notice of demand had also been issued and penalty has also been initiated, is a patent violation of the provisions of the Act and therefore, the assessment deserved

M/S. SAINT GOBAIN GLASS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KANCHEEPURAM vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

144C(8) of the Act. 2. The assessee has raised in its appeal several elaborate grounds, however the cruxes of the issues are as follows:- 2 i) The learned DRP as well as the learned Assessing Officer has erred in disallowing an `1,55,27,938/- estimated amount of as expenditure attributable for earning exempt dividend income under section

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

144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the 'Act') for the\n assessment years 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2017-18 dated 29.03.2024,\n29.03.2024 and 29.03.2024 respectively. The CO has been raised by the\nassessee for the A.Y.2015-16 only. Since the facts are common/identical and\nthe issue of assessee's claim of depreciation on goodwill arising on\namalgamation

EATON POWER QUALITY PRIVATE LIMITED,PONDICHERRY vs. DCIT, PONDICHERRY

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1010/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Eaton Power Quality Private The Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, V. Income Tax, No.2, Evr Street Sedarapet, Pondicherry Circle, Puducherry 605 111, Pondicherry. Puducherry (Ut). [Pan: Aacc-6943-R] आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.: 35/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Eaton Power Quality Private The Assessing Officer, Limited, V. National E-Assessment Centre, No.2, Evr Street Sedarapet, Delhi. Puducherry 605 111, Puducherry (Ut). [Pan: Aacc-6943-R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Vishal Kalra, Advocate : Shri. S. Maruthu Pandian, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.05.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03.05.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

disallowing expenditure of INR 5,45,37,056 towards management fees paid to its associated :-4-: IT(TP)A. No: 35/Chny/2021 & ITA No: 1010/Chny/2017 enterprises ("AEs"), under section 37(1) of the Act, alleging that the Appellant had failed to establish receipt of services. 5.2 That on the facts and circumstances of the case

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. REDINGTON (INDIA) LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

disallowance under Section 14A of the Act and also the directions of Transfer Pricing Officer on trademark fees. The assessment was completed by order under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 92CA r.w.s. 144C(1) of the Act dated 05.02.2016. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed appeal before this Tribunal. 4. On the issue of trademark licence

REDINGTON (INDIA) LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

disallowance under Section 14A of the Act and also the directions of Transfer Pricing Officer on trademark fees. The assessment was completed by order under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 92CA r.w.s. 144C(1) of the Act dated 05.02.2016. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed appeal before this Tribunal. 4. On the issue of trademark licence

ROCA BATHROOM PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.586/Mds/2014 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.610/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11

144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). 14. Now coming to Revenue’s appeal in I.T.A. No.1169/Mds/2014, the only issue arises for consideration is with regard to disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for short deduction of tax at source. 15. The assessee deducted tax under Section 194C of the Act. However

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. PARRYWARE ROCA PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.586/Mds/2014 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.610/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11

144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). 14. Now coming to Revenue’s appeal in I.T.A. No.1169/Mds/2014, the only issue arises for consideration is with regard to disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for short deduction of tax at source. 15. The assessee deducted tax under Section 194C of the Act. However

PANASONIC CORPORATION,HARYANA vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

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

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

Section 144C(1) of the Act. According to the Ld. representative, the reimbursement of salary cannot be considered to be income in the hands of the assessee. Therefore, there is no question of any addition or disallowance in the hands of the assessee while computing the taxable income. 17. The Ld. representative for the assessee further submitted that the very

SL LUMAX LIMITED,KANCHIPURAM vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Duvvuru R.L.Reddy*नधा,रण वष, /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S.Sl Lumax Ltd., V. The Principal Commissioner G-14, 15 & 25, Sipcot Industrial Of Income Tax, Room No.602, Park, Irrungattukottai, Vi Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, Sriperumbudur-602 117. New Block, Mahatama Gandhi Kancheepuram District. Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600034. [Pan: Aaacl 1857 B] (अपीलाथ//Appellant) (01यथ//Respondent) : Mr. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, अपीलाथ/ क2 ओर से/ Appellant By Adv. : Mr. A.Sundararajan, Cit 01यथ/ क2 ओर से /Respondent By : 28.11.2019 सुनवाई क2 तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 10.02.2020 घोषणा क2 तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar:

Section 144C(3) of the 1961 Act by the AO , vide assessment order dated 27.02.2017 assessing the income of the assessee at Rs. 76.04 Crs. The learned PCIT after examining records was of the view that provision for warranty claimed by assessee to the tune of Rs. 1,40,45,352/- for financial year 2012-13 in its Profit

VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

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

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.587/Chny/2017 िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Year: 2010-11

144C of the Act. Each of the ground is referred to separately, which may kindly be considered independent of each other. 1. Ground No. 1 Assessment order is bad in law and hence, void-ab- initio. 1.1 On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has failed to adjudicate the following ground taken

COOK INDIA MEDICAL DEVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(2), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3137/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14

144C(5) of the Act (“impugned order”) inter-alia on the following grounds: In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law: 1. The impugned order and directions of the Hon’ble DRP are based on incorrect appreciation of facts and wrong interpretation of law and therefore, are bad in law. 2. The Ld. AO has erred