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.

41 results for “disallowance”+ Section 194A(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai136Delhi55Chennai41Bangalore36Chandigarh34Pune27Jaipur24Ahmedabad23Hyderabad20Rajkot19Surat17Kolkata16Visakhapatnam14Nagpur11Jodhpur8Raipur6Cochin6Cuttack5Ranchi4Allahabad3Lucknow3Patna2SC2Indore2Guwahati1Panaji1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 14A42Section 4035Disallowance30Section 143(3)26Addition to Income26Deduction25Section 194A24Section 36(1)(vii)24Section 36(1)(viia)18

INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,LTU(2), CHENNAI

Accordingly, this ground of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 203/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.661/Chny/2019, 202 & 203/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-2018) Indian Overseas Bank, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of 763, Anna Salai, Income Tax, Chennai 600 002. Ltu (2) Chennai. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.914/Chny/2019, 253 & 254/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17&2017-2018) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Indian Overseas Bank, Income Tax, 763, Anna Salai, Ltu (2) Chennai 600 002. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaci 1223J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. C. Naresh, C.A., Department By : Shri. A. Sasikumar, Irs. Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 14.11.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.12.2024

For Appellant: Shri. C. Naresh, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. A. Sasikumar, IRS. CIT
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 250Section 36(1)(vii)

Showing 1–20 of 41 · Page 1 of 3

TDS17
Section 25013
Section 115J12
Section 36(1)(viia)

disallowed u/s. 43B for the reason that leave provision is a contractual liability and therefore, it cannot be treated at par with tax, duty, cess or fee u/s. 43B. However, in the SLP (Civil) Nos. 22889/2008 dated 08.05.2009 in the case of CIT &ors. Vs M/s. Exide Industries Ltd & ANR, wherein, the Apex Court held that “ pending hearing and final

JCIT(OSD) CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI vs. INDIAN BANK, CHENNAI

ITA 517/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Nov 2024AY 2016-17
Section 250Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

disallow Rs.975,23,37,141/-. The\nLd. Counsel for the assesse informed that the Ld. First Appellate\nAuthority considered the issue of interpretation of Rule-6ABA for the\npurposes of section 36(1)(viia) and granted relief to the assesse.\nWhile doing so, he relied, inter-alia, upon the decision of Coordinate\nBench of this Tribunal in the case

COONOOR COOPERATIVE URBANK BANK LIMITED,COONOOR vs. DCIT,, OOTY

In the result, the appeal of the assesseein ITA No

ITA 228/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.228/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-2015) Coonoor Co-Operative Urban Bank Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, Income Tax, No.15, Mount Road, Circle I, Coonoor. Ooty. [Pan: Aaaac 0793M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Miss N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. Arv Srinivasan, Irs, Addl. Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 20.06.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27.08.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Miss N.V. Lakshmi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. ARV Srinivasan, IRS, Addl. CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 194ASection 36Section 40

Section 194A, 194A(3)(v), 194A(3)(vila)(b) and 194A(3) (i) (b) and disallowed the same on the ground

JCIT(OSD) CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI vs. INDIAN BANK, CHENNAI

ITA 526/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Nov 2024AY 2017-18
Section 250Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

disallow Rs.975,23,37,141/-. The\nLd. Counsel for the assesse informed that the Ld. First Appellate\nAuthority considered the issue of interpretation of Rule-6ABA for the\npurposes of section 36(1)(viia) and granted relief to the assesse.\nWhile doing so, he relied, inter-alia, upon the decision of Coordinate\nBench of this Tribunal in the case

JCIT(OSD) CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI vs. INDIAN BANK, CHENNAI

ITA 527/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Nov 2024AY 2018-19
Section 250Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

disallow Rs.975,23,37,141/-. The\nLd. Counsel for the assesse informed that the Ld. First Appellate\nAuthority considered the issue of interpretation of Rule-6ABA for the\npurposes of section 36(1)(viia) and granted relief to the assesse.\nWhile doing so, he relied, inter-alia, upon the decision of Coordinate\nBench of this Tribunal in the case

JCIT(OSD) CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI vs. INDIAN BANK, CHENNAI

ITA 516/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Nov 2024AY 2015-16
For Appellant: \nShri M.Sanjeev Aditya, C.AFor Respondent: \nMs.Nayani Swapna, CIT
Section 250Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

disallow Rs.975,23,37,141/-. The\r\nLd. Counsel for the assesse informed that the Ld. First Appellate\r\nAuthority considered the issue of interpretation of Rule-6ABA for the\r\npurposes of section 36(1)(viia) and granted relief to the assesse.\r\nWhile doing so, he relied, inter-alia, upon the decision of Coordinate\r\nBench of this

ACIT, NON-CORPORATE CIRLE-8, CHENNAI vs. INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK, CHENNAI

ITA 253/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Dec 2024AY 2016-17
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 250Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

disallowed u/s. 43B for the reason that leave\nprovision is a contractual liability and therefore, it cannot be\ntreated at par with tax, duty, cess or fee u/s. 43B. However,\nin the SLP (Civil) Nos. 22889/2008 dated 08.05.2009 in the\ncase of CIT &ors. Vs M/s. Exide Industries Ltd & ANR,\nwherein, the Apex Court held that “ pending hearing and final

INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK,CHENNAI vs. ACIT LTU-2, CHENNAI

ITA 661/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Dec 2024AY 2015-16
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 250Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

disallowed u/s. 43B for the reason that leave\nprovision is a contractual liability and therefore, it cannot be\ntreated at par with tax, duty, cess or fee u/s. 43B. However,\nin the SLP (Civil) Nos. 22889/2008 dated 08.05.2009 in the\ncase of CIT &ors. Vs M/s. Exide Industries Ltd & ANR,\nwherein, the Apex Court held that “ pending hearing and final

ACIT LTU-2, CHENNAI vs. INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK, CHENNAI

ITA 914/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Dec 2024AY 2015-16
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 250Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

disallowed u/s. 43B for the reason that leave\nprovision is a contractual liability and therefore, it cannot be\ntreated at par with tax, duty, cess or fee u/s. 43B. However,\nin the SLP (Civil) Nos. 22889/2008 dated 08.05.2009 in the\ncase of CIT &ors. Vs M/s. Exide Industries Ltd & ANR,\nwherein, the Apex Court held that “ pending hearing and final

ACIT, NON-CORPORATE CIRLE-8, CHENNAI vs. INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK, CHENNAI

ITA 254/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Dec 2024AY 2017-18
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 250Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

disallowed u/s. 43B for the reason that leave\nprovision is a contractual liability and therefore, it cannot be\ntreated at par with tax, duty, cess or fee u/s. 43B. However,\nin the SLP (Civil) Nos. 22889/2008 dated 08.05.2009 in the\ncase of CIT &ors. Vs M/s. Exide Industries Ltd & ANR,\nwherein, the Apex Court held that “ pending hearing and final

INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,LTU(2), CHENNAI

ITA 202/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Dec 2024AY 2016-17
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 250Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

disallowed u/s. 43B for the reason that leave\nprovision is a contractual liability and therefore, it cannot be\ntreated at par with tax, duty, cess or fee u/s. 43B. However,\nin the SLP (Civil) Nos. 22889/2008 dated 08.05.2009 in the\ncase of CIT &ors. Vs M/s. Exide Industries Ltd & ANR,\nwherein, the Apex Court held that “ pending hearing and final

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SALEM vs. GOVINDA RAJULU SRINIVASAN, SALEM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1245/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.Bhupendran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs.C. Yamuna, CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 40Section 40A(3)

Disallowance u/s 40A(3) - Rs.40,72,980 5. And the Ld.CIT(A) found that the AO didn’t made any additions qua issues for which the assessment was reopened (as stated in the reasons Govinda Rajulu Srinivasan :: 4 :: recorded before issuing notice u/s.148 of the Act). Thus he found force in the legal issue raised by the assessee, by relying

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI vs. BAY FORGE LTD, KANCHEEPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed as academic

ITA 1462/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:1462/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2009-10 & C.O No.76/Chny/2019 [In I.T.A. No.1462/Chny/2019] The Dcit, Bay Forge Limited, Corporate Circle -1(2), Vs. Palayanoor Po Chennai. Vedanthangal Road, Pukkath Village, Madurantakam Taluk, Kancheepuram – 603 308. Pan: Aaacf 0453D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) राज" की ओर से /Revenue By : Dr. R. Mohan Reddy, Cit िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Raghav Menon, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16.02.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.02.2023

For Appellant: Shri Raghav Menon, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. R. Mohan Reddy, CIT
Section 143Section 40Section 43B

section 194A(3) (iii) and hence it was not liable to deduct tax on the interest payments. Taking into account the facts, circumstances and the evidences furnished by the appellant I am inclined to accept the contentions of the appellant. The disallowance

POUN POULTRY FARM,PALANI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, DINDIGUL

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

ITA 448/CHNY/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.448/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Poun Poultry Farm, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of 188, Anna Nagar, Palani, Income Tax, Dindigul Dt. - 624 601, Circle 1, Dindigul. Tamil Nadu. [Pan:Aadfp6850E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkatraman, F.C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M. Rajan, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 02.05.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.05.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Madurai – 1, Madurai, Dated 26.03.2022 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2017-18 Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkatraman, F.C.AFor Respondent: Shri M. Rajan, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40

194A of the Act, [SI. No. 3&4]. On perusal of the records, the ld. PCIT has noted that the assessee has reported in the Form 3CD that tax has 3 I.T.A. No. 448/Chny/22 been deducted on the contract payment of ₹.2,30,74,120/- mentioned at SI. No. 1 above. However, the details of TDS made and copies

M/S. CITY UNION BANK,,KUMBAKONAM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 2 (1),, TRICHY

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 672/CHNY/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1120 & 1121/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Asst. Commissioner Of Income- Administrative Office V. Tax, “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 672/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of Administrative Office V. Income-Tax, “Narayana” Circle -2(1), 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Trichy. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1418 & 1419/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, V. Administrative Office “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 636/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, V. Administrative Office “Narayana” Circle -2(1), 24-B, Gandhi Nagar

For Respondent: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, CIT

3,53,83,891/-. The assessee has claimed deduction towards Corporate Social Responsibilities expenses. The Assessing Officer disallowed CSR expenses on the ground that, as per Explanation (2) to section 37 of the Act, CSR expenses cannot be allowed as deduction to be an expenditure incurred by the assessee for the purpose of business or profession. 5.1 The Ld. Counsel

DCIT CIRCLE-2(1), TRICHY vs. CITY UNION BANK LIMITED, KUMBAKONAM

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 636/CHNY/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1120 & 1121/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Asst. Commissioner Of Income- Administrative Office V. Tax, “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 672/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of Administrative Office V. Income-Tax, “Narayana” Circle -2(1), 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Trichy. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1418 & 1419/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, V. Administrative Office “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 636/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, V. Administrative Office “Narayana” Circle -2(1), 24-B, Gandhi Nagar

For Respondent: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, CIT

3,53,83,891/-. The assessee has claimed deduction towards Corporate Social Responsibilities expenses. The Assessing Officer disallowed CSR expenses on the ground that, as per Explanation (2) to section 37 of the Act, CSR expenses cannot be allowed as deduction to be an expenditure incurred by the assessee for the purpose of business or profession. 5.1 The Ld. Counsel

ACIT CIRCLE 1, KUMBAKONAM vs. CITY UNION BANK LTD., KUMBAKONAM

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1419/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1120 & 1121/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Asst. Commissioner Of Income- Administrative Office V. Tax, “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 672/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of Administrative Office V. Income-Tax, “Narayana” Circle -2(1), 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Trichy. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1418 & 1419/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, V. Administrative Office “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 636/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, V. Administrative Office “Narayana” Circle -2(1), 24-B, Gandhi Nagar

For Respondent: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, CIT

3,53,83,891/-. The assessee has claimed deduction towards Corporate Social Responsibilities expenses. The Assessing Officer disallowed CSR expenses on the ground that, as per Explanation (2) to section 37 of the Act, CSR expenses cannot be allowed as deduction to be an expenditure incurred by the assessee for the purpose of business or profession. 5.1 The Ld. Counsel

ACIT CIRCLE 1, KUMBAKONAM vs. CITY UNION BANK LTD., KUMBAKONAM

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1418/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1120 & 1121/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Asst. Commissioner Of Income- Administrative Office V. Tax, “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 672/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of Administrative Office V. Income-Tax, “Narayana” Circle -2(1), 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Trichy. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1418 & 1419/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, V. Administrative Office “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 636/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, V. Administrative Office “Narayana” Circle -2(1), 24-B, Gandhi Nagar

For Respondent: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, CIT

3,53,83,891/-. The assessee has claimed deduction towards Corporate Social Responsibilities expenses. The Assessing Officer disallowed CSR expenses on the ground that, as per Explanation (2) to section 37 of the Act, CSR expenses cannot be allowed as deduction to be an expenditure incurred by the assessee for the purpose of business or profession. 5.1 The Ld. Counsel

CITY UNION BANK LIMITED,KUMBAKONAM vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1, KUMBAKONAM

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1121/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1120 & 1121/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Asst. Commissioner Of Income- Administrative Office V. Tax, “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 672/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of Administrative Office V. Income-Tax, “Narayana” Circle -2(1), 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Trichy. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1418 & 1419/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, V. Administrative Office “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 636/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, V. Administrative Office “Narayana” Circle -2(1), 24-B, Gandhi Nagar

For Respondent: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, CIT

3,53,83,891/-. The assessee has claimed deduction towards Corporate Social Responsibilities expenses. The Assessing Officer disallowed CSR expenses on the ground that, as per Explanation (2) to section 37 of the Act, CSR expenses cannot be allowed as deduction to be an expenditure incurred by the assessee for the purpose of business or profession. 5.1 The Ld. Counsel

CITY UNION BANK LIMITED,KUMBAKONAM vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1, KUMBAKONAM

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1120/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1120 & 1121/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Asst. Commissioner Of Income- Administrative Office V. Tax, “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 672/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of Administrative Office V. Income-Tax, “Narayana” Circle -2(1), 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Trichy. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1418 & 1419/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, V. Administrative Office “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 636/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, V. Administrative Office “Narayana” Circle -2(1), 24-B, Gandhi Nagar

For Respondent: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, CIT

3,53,83,891/-. The assessee has claimed deduction towards Corporate Social Responsibilities expenses. The Assessing Officer disallowed CSR expenses on the ground that, as per Explanation (2) to section 37 of the Act, CSR expenses cannot be allowed as deduction to be an expenditure incurred by the assessee for the purpose of business or profession. 5.1 The Ld. Counsel