TITAN COMPANY LIMITED 9EARSTWHILE KNOWN AS TITAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED),KRISHNAGIRI vs. ACIT LTU 1, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

disallowance holding that the assessee could not prove that the provision towards customer loyalty programme is based on some scientific method and moreover, the finding of fact given by the AO that the rate of redemption was at great variation viz-a-viz, the provision made is correct. Hence, he confirmed the ITA Nos.518, 505, 506 & 507/Chny/2020 action

TITAN COMPANY LIMITED 9EARSTWHILE KNOWN AS TITAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED),KRISHNAGIRI vs. ACIT LTU 1, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

disallowance holding that the assessee could not prove that the provision towards customer loyalty programme is based on some scientific method and moreover, the finding of fact given by the AO that the rate of redemption was at great variation viz-a-viz, the provision made is correct. Hence, he confirmed the ITA Nos.518, 505, 506 & 507/Chny/2020 action

TITAN COMPANY LIMITED 9EARSTWHILE KNOWN AS TITAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED),KRISHNAGIRI vs. ACIT LTU 1, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

disallowance holding that the assessee could not prove that the provision towards customer loyalty programme is based on some scientific method and moreover, the finding of fact given by the AO that the rate of redemption was at great variation viz-a-viz, the provision made is correct. Hence, he confirmed the ITA Nos.518, 505, 506 & 507/Chny/2020 action

TITAN COMPANY LIMITED 9EARSTWHILE KNOWN AS TITAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED),KRISHNAGIRI vs. ACIT LTU 1, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

disallowance holding that the assessee could not prove that the provision towards customer loyalty programme is based on some scientific method and moreover, the finding of fact given by the AO that the rate of redemption was at great variation viz-a-viz, the provision made is correct. Hence, he confirmed the ITA Nos.518, 505, 506 & 507/Chny/2020 action

FUJI ELECTRIC INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

disallowed the same on the ground that provision is not allowable as per the Act. Aggrieved, the Assessee filed objections before DRP. The DRP sustained both the additions made by the AO on the premise that year end provisions without payment of TDS are not allowable. Against the final assessment order, now the Assessee is agitating both the aforesaid issues

WHEELS INDIA LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT LARGE TAX PAYER UMIT-1, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment years 2013-14 & 2014-15 are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1604 & 1605/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

245/- 5) Disallowance u/s. 35(2AB) 48,19,513/- 6) Disallowance of excess depreciation 2,54,584/- of Printers & Scanners 7) Disallowance u/s. 14A r.w. Rule 8D 91,52,609/- 8) Disallowance u/s. 80IC 24,84,941/- 5. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and challenged various additions made

WHEELS INDIA LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT LARGE TAX PAYER UMIT-1, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment years 2013-14 & 2014-15 are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1604 & 1605/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

245/- 5) Disallowance u/s. 35(2AB) 48,19,513/- 6) Disallowance of excess depreciation 2,54,584/- of Printers & Scanners 7) Disallowance u/s. 14A r.w. Rule 8D 91,52,609/- 8) Disallowance u/s. 80IC 24,84,941/- 5. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and challenged various additions made

ACIT LTU 1 CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. WHEELS INDIA LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment years 2013-14 & 2014-15 are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1604 & 1605/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

245/- 5) Disallowance u/s. 35(2AB) 48,19,513/- 6) Disallowance of excess depreciation 2,54,584/- of Printers & Scanners 7) Disallowance u/s. 14A r.w. Rule 8D 91,52,609/- 8) Disallowance u/s. 80IC 24,84,941/- 5. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and challenged various additions made

ACIT LTU 1 CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. WHEELS INDIA LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment years 2013-14 & 2014-15 are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1604 & 1605/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

245/- 5) Disallowance u/s. 35(2AB) 48,19,513/- 6) Disallowance of excess depreciation 2,54,584/- of Printers & Scanners 7) Disallowance u/s. 14A r.w. Rule 8D 91,52,609/- 8) Disallowance u/s. 80IC 24,84,941/- 5. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and challenged various additions made

LIFECELL INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3334/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Lifecell International Assistant Commissioner Of Private Ltd., V. Income Tax, No. 26, Vandalur Corporate Circle 4(1), Kelambakkam Main Road, Chennai. Keelakkottaiyur, Chennai. [Pan: Aaeca-7997-B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Ajith Kumar Choradia, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. S. Senthil Kumaran, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04.01.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

disallowed the expenditure of Rs. 24,809 on the ground that the amount was not actually spent. The assessee ultimately succeeded in the Supreme Court. It was held by the Supreme Court that the expression "profits or gains" in section 10(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 should be understood in its commercial sense and there

ACIT, LTU CIRCLE 1 CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. CARBORUNDUM UNIVERSAL LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos. 139, 140 & 117/Chny/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2018-19)

disallowance under section 40 (a)(ia): Rs.1,40,83,245/-. The written submissions of the appellant are reproduced below: During

ACIT, CIRCLE LTU-1,, CHENNAI vs. CARBORUNDUM UNIVERSAL LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos. 139, 140 & 117/Chny/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2018-19)

disallowance under section 40 (a)(ia): Rs.1,40,83,245/-. The written submissions of the appellant are reproduced below: During

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE LTU-1, , CHENNAI vs. CARBORUNDUM UNIVERSAL LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos. 139, 140 & 117/Chny/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2018-19)

disallowance under section 40 (a)(ia): Rs.1,40,83,245/-. The written submissions of the appellant are reproduced below: During

M/S. KARUR VYSYA BANK,,KARUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 2 (1),, TRICHY

section 36(1)(vii) by\nthe Finance Act, 2013.\n4.4. The learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the prudential write\noff of Rs. 103,67,40,537/- cannot be allowed as deduction as\nthe same was not debited to P&L A/с.\n4.5. The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the\nprudential write

SUNDARAM FASTENERS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(2), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3236/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 V. M/S.Sundram Fasteners Ltd., The Dcit, 98-A, 7Th Floor, Corporate Circle-6(2), Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Chennai. Mylapore, Chennai-600 004. [Pan: Aaacs 8779 D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

245 Total disallowance u/s. 14A r.w. Rule 8D 3,79,47,451 M/s.Sundram Fasteners Ltd. :: 29 :: 11.1 It is noted that the assessee had suo moto disallowed Rs.2,03,990/- The Ld.AR assailing the action of the AO submitted that no disallowance under Rule 8D(ii) can be made, because, the investment made for earning exempt income was only Rs.132

CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, NON CORP CIRCLE 8, CHENNAI

In the result, Revenue Appeal for AY 2012-13 stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

section 194J are applicable on payment made by the TPAs to hospitals etc. In the said circular, it was clarified that TPAs who are making payment on behalf of insurance companies to hospitals for settlement of medical/insurance bills etc., are liable to be deduct TDS u/s.194J on such payments. Therefore, we are of the considered view that when the CBDT

CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, NON CORP WARD 8, CHENNAI

In the result, Revenue Appeal for AY 2012-13 stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

section 194J are applicable on payment made by the TPAs to hospitals etc. In the said circular, it was clarified that TPAs who are making payment on behalf of insurance companies to hospitals for settlement of medical/insurance bills etc., are liable to be deduct TDS u/s.194J on such payments. Therefore, we are of the considered view that when the CBDT

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OFFICER , CHENNAI vs. CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, Revenue Appeal for AY 2012-13 stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

section 194J are applicable on payment made by the TPAs to hospitals etc. In the said circular, it was clarified that TPAs who are making payment on behalf of insurance companies to hospitals for settlement of medical/insurance bills etc., are liable to be deduct TDS u/s.194J on such payments. Therefore, we are of the considered view that when the CBDT

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NUNGAMBAKKAM CHENNAI vs. CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, Revenue Appeal for AY 2012-13 stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

section 194J are applicable on payment made by the TPAs to hospitals etc. In the said circular, it was clarified that TPAs who are making payment on behalf of insurance companies to hospitals for settlement of medical/insurance bills etc., are liable to be deduct TDS u/s.194J on such payments. Therefore, we are of the considered view that when the CBDT