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

iia) 2) Disallowance of loss on foreign 17,04,55,000/- exchange fluctuation 3) Disallowance u/s. 40(a)(i) 3,44,60,790/- 4) Disallowance u/s. 36(1)(iii) 1,32,38,245/- 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

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

iia) 2) Disallowance of loss on foreign 17,04,55,000/- exchange fluctuation 3) Disallowance u/s. 40(a)(i) 3,44,60,790/- 4) Disallowance u/s. 36(1)(iii) 1,32,38,245/- 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

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

iia) 2) Disallowance of loss on foreign 17,04,55,000/- exchange fluctuation 3) Disallowance u/s. 40(a)(i) 3,44,60,790/- 4) Disallowance u/s. 36(1)(iii) 1,32,38,245/- 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

ACIT CIRCLE 1, TRICHY vs. DALMIA CEMENT BHARAT LTD., DALMIAPURAM

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2013-14] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.63/Chny/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.3157/Chny2017) [Assessment Year: 2013-14] M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. The Assistant Commissioner Of Dalmiapuram, Income Tax, Circle-1, Tamilnadu-621651 Vs Williams Road, Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan- Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2014-15] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue

section 32(1)(iia). We have noted that the issue for the two years is based on identical facts and hence decision taken qua ITA No.3157 for AY 2013-14 shall apply mutatis mutandis to ITA No.3158 for AY 2014-15. For the purpose of this order, we consider the fact and figures for AY 2013-14. As per brief

ACIT CIRCLE 1, TRICHY vs. DALMIA CEMENT BHARAT LTD., DALMIAPURAM

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2013-14] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.63/Chny/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.3157/Chny2017) [Assessment Year: 2013-14] M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. The Assistant Commissioner Of Dalmiapuram, Income Tax, Circle-1, Tamilnadu-621651 Vs Williams Road, Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan- Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2014-15] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue

section 32(1)(iia). We have noted that the issue for the two years is based on identical facts and hence decision taken qua ITA No.3157 for AY 2013-14 shall apply mutatis mutandis to ITA No.3158 for AY 2014-15. For the purpose of this order, we consider the fact and figures for AY 2013-14. As per brief

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)

section 32(1)(iia) of the Act amounting to ₹.2,58,45,663/- during the year at the rate of 10% (50% of 20%) in respect of second-half additions made to plant and machinery during the preceding assessment year 2011-12. However, by following the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Wheels India

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)

section 32(1)(iia) of the Act amounting to ₹.2,58,45,663/- during the year at the rate of 10% (50% of 20%) in respect of second-half additions made to plant and machinery during the preceding assessment year 2011-12. However, by following the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Wheels India

M/S. CHENNAI NOBLE HOSPITALS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD-1(3), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadish

disallowed the benefit u/s 115BAA for this AY 2023-24. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further referred second proviso to sub-section (5) of section 3 115BAA and submits that once option has been exercised by the assessee for any previous year, it cannot be subsequently withdrawn for the same or any previous year. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. ASTROTECH STEELS PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

The appeal stand dismissed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1150/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Dcit M/S Astrotech Steels Private Limited बनाम/ Corporate Circle-1(1) 19, Ii Floor, Right Wing, Ghatala Towers, Chennai. Avenue Road, Nungambakkam Vs. Chennai-34. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aakca-0128-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar (Jcit)- Ld. Sr. Dr " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri T. Vasudevan (Advocate) -Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Final Hearing : 27-06-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-07-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

disallowance. 5. During appellate proceedings, the assessee submitted that it was not mandatory to file this form and it was a regulatory measure only. 4 Reliance was placed on the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs Jayanthilal Patel (2001) (248 ITR 199) and Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case

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)

32(1)(iia) amounting to Rs.2,62,21,548/-. The appellant has filed the following written submissions on this issue. The same is reproduced below for the sake of clarity: The Deputy Commissioner erred by disallowing the assessee company's claim of Rs.262.22 lakhs being the balance additional depreciation under the category 'Plant & Machinery' and 'Energy saving devices

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)

32(1)(iia) amounting to Rs.2,62,21,548/-. The appellant has filed the following written submissions on this issue. The same is reproduced below for the sake of clarity: The Deputy Commissioner erred by disallowing the assessee company's claim of Rs.262.22 lakhs being the balance additional depreciation under the category 'Plant & Machinery' and 'Energy saving devices

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)

32(1)(iia) amounting to Rs.2,62,21,548/-. The appellant has filed the following written submissions on this issue. The same is reproduced below for the sake of clarity: The Deputy Commissioner erred by disallowing the assessee company's claim of Rs.262.22 lakhs being the balance additional depreciation under the category 'Plant & Machinery' and 'Energy saving devices

M/S. ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 8(1)-LTU-2, , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

32(1)(iia) of the Act on the same. The Ld. CIT, DR appearing before us are was unable to controvert the same. We therefore do not see any reason to interfere with the order of Ld. CIT(A) in this regard and accordingly dismiss this ground of the Revenue. ITA Nos.554 & 561/Chny/2023 (AY 2018-19) M/s. Ashok Leyland

ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 8(1)-LTU-2, , CHENNAI vs. M/S. ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

32(1)(iia) of the Act on the same. The Ld. CIT, DR appearing before us are was unable to controvert the same. We therefore do not see any reason to interfere with the order of Ld. CIT(A) in this regard and accordingly dismiss this ground of the Revenue. ITA Nos.554 & 561/Chny/2023 (AY 2018-19) M/s. Ashok Leyland

T vs. MOTOR COMPANY LTD.,CHENNAIVS.ACIT, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.672/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S.Tvs Motor Co. Ltd., V. The Acit, No.29, Haddows Road, Corporate Circle – 3(1), Chennai-600 006. Chennai. [Pan: Aaacs 7032 B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

disallowance of loss on actual re is against the disallowance of loss on actual re is against the disallowance of loss on actual re- payment of External Commercial Borrowings (hereinafter in short ‘ECB’) payment of External Commercial Borrowings (hereinafter in short ‘ECB’) payment of External Commercial Borrowings (hereinafter in short ‘ECB’) loan during the year. 8.1 The brief facts

ACIT, LTU-2,, CHENNAI vs. ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

32(1)(iia) of the Act on the same. The Ld. CIT, DR appearing before us are was unable to controvert the same. We therefore do not see any reason to interfere with the order of Ld. CIT(A) in this regard and accordingly dismiss this ground of the Revenue.” 5.2 The Ld. CIT, DR was not able to distinguish

M/S T vs. MOTOR COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAIVS.ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 3 (1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and the assessee are\ndecided as under:-\n\n| ITA Nos\n| Assessment\nYear\nResult\n| IT(TP)A No

1)(iia) of Rs.3,67,47,054/- being\n20% of the asset value of Rs.18,77,35,270/-, which was made during the\ncourse of assessment proceedings. The assessee had claimed before\nthe Ld.AO that it had omitted to claim the impugned depreciation in its\nReturn of Income. The Ld.AO rejected the claim by applying the\ndecision

CRAFTSMAN AUTOMATION LTD.,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT,CC-2, COIMBATORE

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.177/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 Craftsman Automation Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of ‘Senthel Towers’, 4Th Floor, Income Tax, 1078, Avinashi Road, Corporate Circle 2, Coimbatore 641 018. Coimbatore 641 018. [Pan:Aabcc2461K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaragahavan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M. Rajan, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 08.03.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.03.2023 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-1, Coimbatore, Dated 30.03.2021 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2015-16 Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

32(1)(iia) of the Income tax Act, the claim of additional depreciation relating to the fixed assets that were put into use during the previous 3 I.T.A. No.177/Chny/21 assessment year is not an allowable deduction. Such type of claim is allowable only from A.Y.2046-17 as the concerned section was amended only with effect from A.Y.2016-17. Therefore the allowance