COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI

6 -\nITA Nos.1193, 1194, 1205 to 1207,\n1262 to 1266/CHNY/2024\n\nupheld the action of the A.O. vide Para no. 3.4.5 in it's order. The\nrelevant Para no. 3.4.5 is reproduced below.\n\n“\n3.4.5 Although the Appellant claims to have not incurred any expenditure in\nrespect of exempt income, the Appellant has maintained common set of\nbooks

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

6\nAY 2012-13\nAssessee (ITA No. 1205/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 5\nAY 2013-14\nAssessee (ITA No. 1206/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 4\nAY 2014-15\nAssessee (ITA No. 1207/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 4\n4.1 The facts relating to the issue of disallowance under Section 14A\nof the Act is common for all the AYs being

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

6\nAY 2012-13\nAssessee (ITA No. 1205/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 5\nAY 2013-14\nAssessee (ITA No. 1206/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 4\nAY 2014-15\nAssessee (ITA No. 1207/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 4\n\n4.1 The facts relating to the issue of disallowance under section 14A\nof the Act is common for all the AYs being

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

6\nAY 2012-13\nAssessee (ITA No. 1205/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 5\nAY 2013-14\nAssessee (ITA No. 1206/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 4\nAY 2014-15\nAssessee (ITA No. 1207/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 4\n4.1 The facts relating to the issue of disallowance under section 14A\nof the Act is common for all the AYs being

COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI

6\nAY 2012-13\nAssessee (ITA No. 1205/CHNY/2024) 2 to 5\nAY 2013-14\nAssessee (ITA No. 1206/CHNY/2024) 2 to 4\nAY 2014-15\nAssessee (ITA No. 1207/CHNY/2024) 2 to 4\n4.1 The facts relating to the issue of disallowance under Section 14A\nof the Act is common for all the AYs being

COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI

6\nAY 2012-13\nAssessee (ITA No. 1205/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 5\nAY 2013-14\nAssessee (ITA No. 1206/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 4\nAY 2014-15\nAssessee (ITA No. 1207/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 4\n4.1 The facts relating to the issue of disallowance under section 14A\nof the Act is common for all the AYs being

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

6\nAY 2012-13\nAssessee (ITA No. 1205/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 5\nAY 2013-14\nAssessee (ITA No. 1206/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 4\nAY 2014-15\nAssessee (ITA No. 1207/CHNY/2024)\n2 to 4\n4.1 The facts relating to the issue of disallowance under section 14A\nof the Act is common for all the AYs being

COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1),, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1193, 1194, 1205, 1206 & 1207/Chny/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs Cognizant Technology Solutions The Asst. Commissioner India Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, No.5/535, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Central Circle 1(1), Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 096. Pan : Aaacd 3312M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1262, 1263, 1264, 1265 & 1266/Chny/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Cognizant Technology Income Tax, Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle 1(1), No.5/535, Okkiam Chennai. Thoraipakkam, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai – 600 096. Pan : Aaacd 3312M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

6. Facts for AY 2011-12 to AY 2014-15: During the A.Y. 2011- 12 to A.Y.2014-15, the assessee has not earned any income from its investments which are exempt under the provisions of the Act. The AO has computed expenditure in relation to earning exempt income by applying Rule 8D and disallowed the same under section

COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1),, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1193, 1194, 1205, 1206 & 1207/Chny/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs Cognizant Technology Solutions The Asst. Commissioner India Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, No.5/535, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Central Circle 1(1), Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 096. Pan : Aaacd 3312M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1262, 1263, 1264, 1265 & 1266/Chny/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Cognizant Technology Income Tax, Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle 1(1), No.5/535, Okkiam Chennai. Thoraipakkam, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai – 600 096. Pan : Aaacd 3312M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

6. Facts for AY 2011-12 to AY 2014-15: During the A.Y. 2011- 12 to A.Y.2014-15, the assessee has not earned any income from its investments which are exempt under the provisions of the Act. The AO has computed expenditure in relation to earning exempt income by applying Rule 8D and disallowed the same under section

M/S ENRIA ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(4), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Das

6 March, 2022 passed by Respondent No.1 under Section 270AA (4) of the Act is set aside and Respondent No.1 is directed to grant immunity under Section 270AA of the Act to the Petitioner.” 7. This Court is of the opinion that the only addition in the assessment order framed by Respondent No.1 is in respect of disallowance under section

M/S ENRICE ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Das

6 March, 2022 passed by Respondent No.1 under Section 270AA (4) of the Act is set aside and Respondent No.1 is directed to grant immunity under Section 270AA of the Act to the Petitioner.” 7. This Court is of the opinion that the only addition in the assessment order framed by Respondent No.1 is in respect of disallowance under section

PRAKASHCHAND JAIN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CC2(3), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.68/Chny/2024 िनधा रण वष /Assessment Year: 2017-18 Prakashchand Jain, The Dy. Commissioner Of V. 39 & 40 Bakers Street, Income Tax, Choolai, Chennai – 600 112. Central Circle-2(3), Chennai. [Pan: Ahhpp 1690D] (अपीलाथ$/Appellant) (%&थ$/Respondent) अपीलाथ$कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate %&थ$कीओरसे /Respondent By Shri R. Clement Ramesh : Kumar, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10.12.2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 07.03.2025 :

6 March, 2022 passed by Respondent No.1 under Section 270AA (4) of the Act is se No.1 under Section 270AA (4) of the Act is set aside and t aside and Respondent No.1 is directed to grant immunity under Respondent No.1 is directed to grant immunity under Respondent No.1 is directed to grant immunity under Section 270AA

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)

disallowance and the ld. CIT(A) to confirm the same. 40. The Bangalore Benches of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Mahindra Electric Mobility Ltd. v. ACIT in ITA No.641/Bang/2017 vide order dated 14.09.2018 had held that prior to 01.07.2016 Form No.3CL has no legal sanctity and it is only w.e.f. 01.07.2016 with the amendment to Rule 6

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)

disallowance and the ld. CIT(A) to confirm the same. 40. The Bangalore Benches of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Mahindra Electric Mobility Ltd. v. ACIT in ITA No.641/Bang/2017 vide order dated 14.09.2018 had held that prior to 01.07.2016 Form No.3CL has no legal sanctity and it is only w.e.f. 01.07.2016 with the amendment to Rule 6

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, HYDERABAD vs. VIRTUSA CONSULTING SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI TAMIL NADU

In the result, the ground of appeal in Ground No 2-4 in IT(TP)A No

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathait (Tp) A No.:42/Chny/2024 & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2262/Chny/2024 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2012-13

6 to 42 of the caselaw paper book - Digital Equipment India Ltd. vs DCIT (103 TTJ 329) – Refer pages 43 to 52 of the caselaw paper book :-8-: IT(TP)A No. 42/Chny/2024 I.T.A. Nos.:2262, 2631 & 2632 /Chny/2024 - CIT vs Hindustan Lever Ltd., Chennai (221 Taxman 71) – Refer pages 53 to 55 of the caselaw paper book - Karumuthu Thiagaraja

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 8 1 (INCHARGE), HYDERABAD vs. VIRTUSA CONSULTING SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, TAMIL NADU

In the result, the ground of appeal in Ground No 2-4 in IT(TP)A No

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathait (Tp) A No.:42/Chny/2024 & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2262/Chny/2024 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2012-13

6 to 42 of the caselaw paper book - Digital Equipment India Ltd. vs DCIT (103 TTJ 329) – Refer pages 43 to 52 of the caselaw paper book :-8-: IT(TP)A No. 42/Chny/2024 I.T.A. Nos.:2262, 2631 & 2632 /Chny/2024 - CIT vs Hindustan Lever Ltd., Chennai (221 Taxman 71) – Refer pages 53 to 55 of the caselaw paper book - Karumuthu Thiagaraja

VIRTUSA CONSULTING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CC-5(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the ground of appeal in Ground No 2-4 in IT(TP)A No

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathait (Tp) A No.:42/Chny/2024 & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2262/Chny/2024 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2012-13

6 to 42 of the caselaw paper book - Digital Equipment India Ltd. vs DCIT (103 TTJ 329) – Refer pages 43 to 52 of the caselaw paper book :-8-: IT(TP)A No. 42/Chny/2024 I.T.A. Nos.:2262, 2631 & 2632 /Chny/2024 - CIT vs Hindustan Lever Ltd., Chennai (221 Taxman 71) – Refer pages 53 to 55 of the caselaw paper book - Karumuthu Thiagaraja

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE LTU-1, CHENNAI, NUNGAMBAKKAM vs. ORIENT GREEN POWER COMPANY LIMITED , CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

Disallowance of Management fee - The Transfer Pricing Officer erred in determining the Arms Length Price for management fee paid to Shriram Industrial Holdings at NIL against Rs.4,04,49,600/- claimed by the appellant and recommending downward adjustment of Rs.4,04,49,600/- of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer erred in making an addition of downward adjustment suggested