BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

265 results for “disallowance”+ Section 156clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,136Delhi973Bangalore284Chennai265Kolkata220Ahmedabad134Pune116Hyderabad106Jaipur104Raipur95Cochin72Chandigarh62Surat57Panaji44Calcutta38Lucknow33Indore32Rajkot22SC21Nagpur20Allahabad15Ranchi15Karnataka15Visakhapatnam13Varanasi13Cuttack11Amritsar8Kerala5Jabalpur5Agra3Punjab & Haryana2Patna2Himachal Pradesh2Telangana2Dehradun2Rajasthan1Gauhati1Jodhpur1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Addition to Income51Disallowance48Section 10B38Section 143(3)33Section 40A(3)33Section 153C30Deduction29Section 1127Depreciation25Section 10A

M/S. UPDATER SERVICES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), CHENNAI

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by both the assessee and the Revenue, as well as the grounds raised in the cross-objections filed by the assessee, are treated as allowed for statistical...

ITA 1339/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:1339 /Chny/2025 िनधा#रण वष# / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Updater Services Limited (Formerly Dcit, Known As Updater Services Private Vs. Central Circle -2(3), Limited), No.2/302-A, Uds Salai, Chennai. Off Old Mahabalipuram Road, Thoraipakkam, Chennai – 600 097. [Pan:Aaacu-6845-J] (अपीलाथ%/Appellant) (&'थ%/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. K. Prasanna, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, C.I.T
Section 115QSection 250Section 263Section 391Section 77A

156 & 157 Ltd. taxmann.com 136 • Although the above rulings were rendered in the context of Section 14A, the principles establish shall squarely apply to the instant, case and accordingly, there shall be a presumption that the non-interest bearing equity funds were utilized for the payment of buyback consideration and hence, Section 36(1)(iii) would not be applicable. This

Showing 1–20 of 265 · Page 1 of 14

...
23
Section 80P(2)(d)21
Section 80I20

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. UPDATER SERVICES LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by both the assessee and the Revenue, as well as the grounds raised in the cross-objections filed by the assessee, are treated as allowed for statistical...

ITA 1616/CHNY/2025[2017]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:1339 /Chny/2025 िनधा#रण वष# / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Updater Services Limited (Formerly Dcit, Known As Updater Services Private Vs. Central Circle -2(3), Limited), No.2/302-A, Uds Salai, Chennai. Off Old Mahabalipuram Road, Thoraipakkam, Chennai – 600 097. [Pan:Aaacu-6845-J] (अपीलाथ%/Appellant) (&'थ%/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. K. Prasanna, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, C.I.T
Section 115QSection 250Section 263Section 391Section 77A

156 & 157 Ltd. taxmann.com 136 • Although the above rulings were rendered in the context of Section 14A, the principles establish shall squarely apply to the instant, case and accordingly, there shall be a presumption that the non-interest bearing equity funds were utilized for the payment of buyback consideration and hence, Section 36(1)(iii) would not be applicable. This

M/S. DISHNET WIRELESS LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CC - 1 (4),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for\nstatistical purposes

ITA 283/CHNY/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Aug 2025AY 2009-10
Section 14Section 238Section 250

disallowed by Ld. AO was\n'unrealised' foreign exchange capital loss when the Ld. AO has clearly\nspecified in the assessment order that the said loss is realised in nature.\n9. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld.\nCITA) as well as the Ld. AO has erred in not appreciating that realised

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

ITA 173/CHNY/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2024AY 2020-2021

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.

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.V. Aroon Prasad, Addl. CIT
Section 14ASection 2

156/-. However, the TDS allowed by rectification order under section 154 of the Act dated 21.12.2022 is only at ₹.402,06,11,108/- and TDS credit disallowed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MADURAI vs. RAMCO INDUSTRIES LIMITED, CHENNAI

Appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2901/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Apr 2025AY 2013-14
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

156 ITD\n72 wherein it has been held that the addition on account of disallowance u/s.\n14A r.w.Rule 8D being expenditure in relation to earning of exempt income to\nBook Profit u/s I 15JB is justified.\n(7) For these and such other grounds that may be adduced at the time of\nhearing and it is prayed that the order

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(1), CHENNAI vs. REPCO HOME FINANCE P LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA no

ITA 2885/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: JCITFor Respondent: Shri M. Viswanathan, C.A
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 36(1)(viii)

disallowed under section 43B which, as stated above, was inserted with effect from 1-4-1984. It is also relevant to note that the first proviso which came into force with effect from 1-4-1988 was not on the statute book when the assessments were made in the case of Allied Motors (P.) Ltd. (supra). However, the assessee contended

SRINIVASA FASHINS PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. ITO CORPORATE WARD-6(4), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1396/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Duvvuru R.L.Reddy)नधा+रण वष+ /Assessment Year: 2014-15 Heard Through Video Conferencing V. M/S.Srinivasa Fashions Pvt. Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, No.57G, Sidco Industrial Estate, Corporate Ward-6(4), Ambattur, Chennai. Chennai-600 098. [Pan: Aaics 9511 R] (अपीलाथ./Appellant) (/0यथ./Respondent) : अपीलाथ. क1 ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.N.Vijay Kumar, Ca : Mr.Ar.V.Sreenivasan, Jcit /0यथ. क1 ओर से /Respondent By : 28.09.2020 सुनवाई क1 तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 28.09.2020 घोषणा क1 तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar:

For Respondent: 28.09.2020
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 68

disallowed under section 43B which, as stated above, was inserted with effect from 1-4-1984. It is also relevant to note that the first proviso which came into force with effect from 1-4-1988 was not on the statute book when the assessments were made in the case of Allied Motors (P.) Ltd. (supra). However, the assessee contended

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SICAL LOGISTICS LTD., CHENNAI

ITA 1697/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Milind Madhukar, JCIT &For Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 10Section 14A

disallowed the claim of the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee went in appeal before the CIT(Appeals). 14. On appeal, the CIT(Appeals), after considering the CBDT Circular No.2/2002 dated 15.2.2002 and 4/2004 dated 13.5.2004, relied on by the assessee, observed that these are issued by the CBDT in relation to a clarification regarding Tax Deduction at Source u/s.193

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SICAL LOGISTICS LTD., CHENNAI

ITA 1695/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Milind Madhukar, JCIT &For Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 10Section 14A

disallowed the claim of the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee went in appeal before the CIT(Appeals). 14. On appeal, the CIT(Appeals), after considering the CBDT Circular No.2/2002 dated 15.2.2002 and 4/2004 dated 13.5.2004, relied on by the assessee, observed that these are issued by the CBDT in relation to a clarification regarding Tax Deduction at Source u/s.193

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SICAL LOGISTICS LTD., CHENNAI

ITA 1696/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Milind Madhukar, JCIT &For Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 10Section 14A

disallowed the claim of the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee went in appeal before the CIT(Appeals). 14. On appeal, the CIT(Appeals), after considering the CBDT Circular No.2/2002 dated 15.2.2002 and 4/2004 dated 13.5.2004, relied on by the assessee, observed that these are issued by the CBDT in relation to a clarification regarding Tax Deduction at Source u/s.193

SWELECT ENERGY SYSTEMS LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(2), CHENNAI

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

ITA 2652/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2652/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Swelect Energy System Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 5, Numeric House, Vs. Income Tax, Sir P.S. Sivasami Salai, Corporate Circle -6(2), Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. Chennai. [Pan: Aaacn2366F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 07.04.2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19.04.2021 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)-15, Chennai, Dated 29.06.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds: “1. The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 15, Chennai Dated 29.06.2018 In I.T.A.No.517/2016-17//Cit(A)-15 For The Above Mentioned Assessment Year Is Contrary To Law, Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case. 2. The Cit (Appeals) Erred In Sustaining The Disallowance Of Notional Expenses Aggregating To Rs.2,49,84,018/- (Rs.2,51, 76,518 - Rs.1,92,500) For Maintaining Tax Free Portfolio/For Earning Tax Free Income To The Extent Of Rs,3,74,62,711/- On The Application Of Section 14A Of The Act Read With Rule 8D

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, JCIT
Section 14A

disallowance of the assessee that it was unrealistic to state that only ₹.1,92,500/- was made as expenses to maintain the investment amount of ₹.393,01,06,156/-, by invoking the provisions of section

SRINIVASAN MOHAMMAD IIBRAHIM,MADURAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD-2(3), MADURAI

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

ITA 234/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.233 & 234/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Srinivasan Mohammad Ibrahim, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 69, South Marret Street, Non Corporate Ward 2(3), Madurai South, South Gate S.O., Chennai. Madurai 625 001. [Pan: Ailpm0929R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri I Dinesh, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri R. V. Aroon Prasad, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.07.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi:

For Appellant: Shri I Dinesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. V. Aroon Prasad, Addl. CIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 154Section 234Section 68

156/- made under section 68 of the Act. 4. At the outset, we note that the assessment was completed under section 147 read with section 144B of the Act by disallowing

SRINIVASAN MOHAMMAD IBRAHIM,MADURAI vs. ITO,NON-CORPORATE WRD-2(3), MADURAI

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

ITA 233/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.233 & 234/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Srinivasan Mohammad Ibrahim, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 69, South Marret Street, Non Corporate Ward 2(3), Madurai South, South Gate S.O., Chennai. Madurai 625 001. [Pan: Ailpm0929R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri I Dinesh, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri R. V. Aroon Prasad, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.07.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi:

For Appellant: Shri I Dinesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. V. Aroon Prasad, Addl. CIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 154Section 234Section 68

156/- made under section 68 of the Act. 4. At the outset, we note that the assessment was completed under section 147 read with section 144B of the Act by disallowing

RECKITT BENCKISER SCHOLL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KANCHEEPURAM vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 756/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.756/Mds/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Reckitt Benckiser Scholl The Deputy Commissioner Of India Private Limited V. Income Tax, (Formerly Known As M/S. Corporate Circle – V (1), Reckitt Benekiser Scholl India Chennai Limited). Plot F 73/74, Sipcot Industrial Park, Irungattukottai, Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram – 602 117

For Appellant: Shri S.P. Chidambaram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Milind Madhukar Bhusari, CIT
Section 10BSection 143(3)

disallowed by the Appellant. 5. Set off of brought forward business loss before allowing deduction under Section 10B of the Act. 5.1 The DRP/AO erred in setting off the brought forward business loss of earlier years from profits of the undertaking before allowing deduction under Section 10B of the Act. 5.2 The DRP/AO failed to appreciate that the term ‘total

M/S. CEEBROS HOTELS PVT. LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CC - 1 (2),, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3372/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Mr. Abani Kanta Nayak, CITFor Respondent: 09.02.2021
Section 36(1)(ii)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

disallowance of the interest expenses. 6. The CIT (Appeals) failed to appreciate that the conclusion reached on the non commencement of the project which was related to the claim of the interest expenses was wholly unjustified and ought to have appreciated that the commencement of the project/business under consideration should be reckoned from the date of the purchase

VYASARPADI CO-OP. INDUSTRIAL ESTATE LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 254/CHNY/2017[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Apr 2017AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Sanjay Aroraआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.252, 253 & 254/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 1996-97 To 1998-99

For Appellant: Ms. S. Sriniranjani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shiva Srinivas, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(d)

disallowed the claim of the assessee under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act in respect of interest income received by the assessee on the fixed deposit with Tamil Nadu Industrial Co-operative Bank Ltd. The assessee subsequently filed application under Section 154 of the Act on the ground that there is an error in the order of the Assessing

VYASARPADI CO-OP. INDUSTRIAL ESTATE LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 253/CHNY/2017[1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Apr 2017AY 1997-98

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Sanjay Aroraआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.252, 253 & 254/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 1996-97 To 1998-99

For Appellant: Ms. S. Sriniranjani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shiva Srinivas, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(d)

disallowed the claim of the assessee under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act in respect of interest income received by the assessee on the fixed deposit with Tamil Nadu Industrial Co-operative Bank Ltd. The assessee subsequently filed application under Section 154 of the Act on the ground that there is an error in the order of the Assessing

INTEGRATED SERVICE POINT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), CHENNAI

Accordingly, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos. 1881, 1882, and 1883/Chny/2025 for A.Ys. 2016-17, 2019-20, and 2022-23 are allowed

ITA 1882/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2019-20 & 2022-23

For Appellant: Mr. Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Mr. Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 134(4)Section 250

disallowance at 20% of alleged bogus purchases as against appellant’s voluntary disallowance of 12% in ROI u/s 148. 3.1 On facts and under the circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai erred in adjudicating the disallowances at 20% of the alleged bogus purchases, which is over and above the disallowances

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. INTEGRATED SERVICE POINT LIMITED, ANNA NAGAR

Accordingly, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos. 1881, 1882, and 1883/Chny/2025 for A.Ys. 2016-17, 2019-20, and 2022-23 are allowed

ITA 1879/CHNY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2019-20 & 2022-23

For Appellant: Mr. Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Mr. Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 134(4)Section 250

disallowance at 20% of alleged bogus purchases as against appellant’s voluntary disallowance of 12% in ROI u/s 148. 3.1 On facts and under the circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai erred in adjudicating the disallowances at 20% of the alleged bogus purchases, which is over and above the disallowances

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MADURAI vs. RAMCO INDUSTRIES LIMITED, RAJAPALAYAM

Appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 2883/CHNY/2024[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2025

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.2883 & 2884/Chny/2024. (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2018-2019 & 2020-2021) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Ramco Industries Limited, Income Tax, 47, Psk Nagar, Corporate Circle, Rajapalayam 626 108. Madurai [Pan Aaacr 5284J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. S. Muralidhar & Shri J. Prabhakar, F.C.As. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. R. Bhoopathi, Addl. Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri. S. Muralidhar and Shri JFor Respondent: Shri. R. Bhoopathi, Addl. CIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

156 ITD 72 wherein it has been held that the addition on account of disallowance u/s 14A r.w.Rule 8D being expenditure in relation to earning of exempt income to Book Profit u/s 115JB is justified. (6) For these and such other grounds that may be adduced at the time of hearing and it is prayed that the order