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

SRI MAHARAJA REFINERIES,ERODE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ERODE

disallowance under Section 40A(2)(b) is totally\nunwarranted, given that the prices of Palm Oil adopted by the Appellant\nare well in tandem with the then prevailing Fair Market Value as per the\nAnnual Report published by the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food &\nPublic Distribution.\n8. Without prejudice, the CIT(A) erred in upholding an erroneous order of\nthe

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SIVA VENTURES LIMITED, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

5. Disallowance u/s.14A r.w.Rule 8D — Rs.9,30,60,979/- In the order for appeal No.375, dated 09.02.2016, addition on account of corporate guarantee has been deleted and disallowance u/s 14A r.w.Rule 8D has been reduced. The AO has stated in penalty order as under: “The Ld .JCIT (Transfer Pricing) found that the commercial substance in involving Date in the funding

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

5. Disallowance u/s.14A r.w.Rule 8D — Rs.9,30,60,979/- In the order for appeal No.375, dated 09.02.2016, addition on account of corporate guarantee has been deleted and disallowance u/s 14A r.w.Rule 8D has been reduced. The AO has stated in penalty order as under: “The Ld .JCIT (Transfer Pricing) found that the commercial substance in involving Date in the funding

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

5. Disallowance u/s.14A r.w.Rule 8D — Rs.9,30,60,979/- In the order for appeal No.375, dated 09.02.2016, addition on account of corporate guarantee has been deleted and disallowance u/s 14A r.w.Rule 8D has been reduced. The AO has stated in penalty order as under: “The Ld .JCIT (Transfer Pricing) found that the commercial substance in involving Date in the funding

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

5. Disallowance u/s.14A r.w.Rule 8D — Rs.9,30,60,979/- In the order for appeal No.375, dated 09.02.2016, addition on account of corporate guarantee has been deleted and disallowance u/s 14A r.w.Rule 8D has been reduced. The AO has stated in penalty order as under: “The Ld .JCIT (Transfer Pricing) found that the commercial substance in involving Date in the funding

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:

144C(13) of the Act against the Appellant for AY 2022-23 disallowing the exemption of INR 1,53,65,359 claimed under Article 15(1) of India-China Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ('DTAA') read with Section 90 of the Act in respect of the salary income received in India for services rendered in China to BMW Brilliance Automotive Limited

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)

5. The assessee filed its return of income for the assessment year 2011-12 on 04.11.2011 admitting a loss of ₹.47,17,77,686/- and the same was processed under section 143(1) of the Act dated 16.08.2012. Subsequently, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under CASS and notice under section 143(2) of the Act dated

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)

5. The assessee filed its return of income for the assessment year 2011-12 on 04.11.2011 admitting a loss of ₹.47,17,77,686/- and the same was processed under section 143(1) of the Act dated 16.08.2012. Subsequently, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under CASS and notice under section 143(2) of the Act dated

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

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

section 144C(5) r.w.s 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

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

Disallowance of Forex Loss 47,65,131 C Total income assessed as 9,74,90,573/- per this order Demand Notice u/s.156 and calculation sheet are enclosed. Penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) initiated for the reasons discussed above.” Thereafter final assessment order was passed by the ACIT, Corporate Circle 3(2), Chennai u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 92CA(3) r.w.s. 144C(5

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

144C(1) of the Act on 23.03.2015 along with disallowance under Section 14A of the Act of `5,95,44,737/-. Against

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

144C(1) of the Act on 23.03.2015 along with disallowance under Section 14A of the Act of `5,95,44,737/-. Against

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

YCH LOGISTICS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KANCHIPURAM, TAMILNADU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE -3(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George George K, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 1330/Chny/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ych Logistics India Private Ltd., Assistant Commissioner Of Plot D V 1, Hi-Tech Sez Phase Ii, V. Income Tax, Sirumangadu Village, Sriperumbudur Corporate Circle -3(2), Taluk, Tamil Nadu 602 105. Chennai. [Pan: Aaacy-2873-L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

144C(5) of the Act: Sl. Nature of Disallowance Amount Reference No. (in Rs.) (A) Transfer Pricing (‘TP’) 1 Downward adjustment with respect to 5,21,07,179 TP Order – Page No.67 of TP transactions the paper book 2 (B) Other than Transfer Pricing Adjustment 1 Disallowance of deduction under 5,72,73,875 AO Order – Page

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

WATANMAL (INDIA) PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T(Tp).A. No. 4/Chny/2018 & I.T.A. No. 2407/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2006-07 & 2008-09 Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Watanmal (India) Pvt. Ltd., Old No. 12, New No. 14, Ground Floor, Income Tax, Sripuram Second Street, Royapettah, Corporate Circle 3(2), Chennai 600 014. Chennai. [Pan:Aaacw6624B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T. Banusekar, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Dr. S. Palanikumar, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 05.09.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 16.09.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao,: The Appeal Filed By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2006- 07 Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel -2, Bengaluru Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 R.W.S. 92Ca(3) R.W.S. 144C(5) R.W.S. 254 R.W.S. 144C(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] Dated 27.12.2017. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2008-09 Is Directed Against The Order Of The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 R.W.S. 92Ca(3) R.W.S.

144C(5) dated 12.07.2017. Since both the appeals are filed by the same assessee, heard together and are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of brevity. I.T(TP).A. No. 4/Chny/2018 [Assessment Year 2006-07]: 2. Facts are, in brief, that the assessee company is engaged in the business of providing logistics and business support services