Search: disallowance

SHRIRAM CAPITAL LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 513/CHNY/2015[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jun 2015AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.512 &513 /Mds/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-2011 & 2011- 2012)

For Appellant: Shri. R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. N. Rengaraj, IRS, CIT

Section 14A

disallowed the same. If the expenditure is incurred for the purpose of business, is made possible as obligation expenditure cannot be held as enduring benefit. 16. We have to see the nature of liability of net value of the payment and whether the expenditure is capital or revenue which is wholly and exclusively used for the purpose of business carried

SHRIRAM CAPITAL LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 512/CHNY/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jun 2015AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.512 &513 /Mds/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-2011 & 2011- 2012)

For Appellant: Shri. R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. N. Rengaraj, IRS, CIT

Section 14A

disallowed the same. If the expenditure is incurred for the purpose of business, is made possible as obligation expenditure cannot be held as enduring benefit. 16. We have to see the nature of liability of net value of the payment and whether the expenditure is capital or revenue which is wholly and exclusively used for the purpose of business carried

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. GREEN HOUSE PROMOTERS P. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 1785/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jun 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1785, 1796 & 1828/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2010-11, 2011-12 & 2009-2010. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S. Green House Promoters Tax Vs. Pvt. Ltd, Company Circle Ii(1) No.4,Rama Rao Street, Chennai. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [Pan Aaccg 2333B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Supriyo Pal, IRS, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. Y. Sridhar, C.A

Section 194CSection 40Section 4U

438/--. Hence, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and disallowed the same

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. GREEN HOUSE PROMOTERS PRIVATE LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 1796/CHNY/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jun 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1785, 1796 & 1828/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2010-11, 2011-12 & 2009-2010. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S. Green House Promoters Tax Vs. Pvt. Ltd, Company Circle Ii(1) No.4,Rama Rao Street, Chennai. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [Pan Aaccg 2333B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Supriyo Pal, IRS, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. Y. Sridhar, C.A

Section 194CSection 40Section 4U

438/--. Hence, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and disallowed the same

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. GREEN HOUSE PROMOTERS PRIVATE LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 1828/CHNY/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jun 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1785, 1796 & 1828/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2010-11, 2011-12 & 2009-2010. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S. Green House Promoters Tax Vs. Pvt. Ltd, Company Circle Ii(1) No.4,Rama Rao Street, Chennai. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [Pan Aaccg 2333B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Supriyo Pal, IRS, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. Y. Sridhar, C.A

Section 194CSection 40Section 4U

438/--. Hence, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and disallowed the same

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

ITA 3113/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

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)

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 92BSection 92C

disallowance under section 14A of the Act r.w Rule 8D(2)(ii) of interest expenditure should be deleted by relying upon the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT (2021) 438

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

ITA 3251/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

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)

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 92BSection 92C

disallowance under section 14A of the Act r.w Rule 8D(2)(ii) of interest expenditure should be deleted by relying upon the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT (2021) 438

IDFC FIRST BANK LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, RANGE CORPORATE CIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI

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

ITA 221/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, C.A ""For Respondent: Shri R.Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

438 ITR 1 (SC), wherein it is held that shares and securities held by the bank are stock in trade and all income received on such shares and securities must be considered as business income and this is why section 14A of the Act would not get attracted to such income. The learned counsel for the assessee stated that

MAGICK WOODS EXPORTS P LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 2105/CHNY/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jun 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

Section 1Section 10BSection 10fSection 143(3)Section 2Section 250(6)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 438

disallowance under section 438 and is based on the decision of apex Court in the case of Commissioner Of Income

NLC INDIA LIMITED,CUDDALORE vs. DCIT, NON CORP. CIRCLE 8(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 271/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member), SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Raghavan Ramabadran, AdvFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, IRS, CIT

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144CSection 14A

disallowance under Section 14A could not have been made. The Assessee wishes to rely on PCIT v. Ashok Apparels (P.) Ltd., (2019 106 taxmann.com 63 (Bombay) for the above proposition. 6. Per contra the ld. CIT-DR Mr. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, vehemently supported the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A). He further contended that ITA Nos.270 & 271 /Chny/2024

NLC INDIA LIMITED,CUDDALORE vs. DCIT, NON CORP. CIRCLE 8(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 270/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND HON’BLE SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Raghavan Ramabadran, AdvFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, IRS, CIT

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144CSection 14A

disallowance under Section 14A could not have been made. The Assessee wishes to rely on PCIT v. Ashok Apparels (P.) Ltd., (2019 106 taxmann.com 63 (Bombay) for the above proposition. 6. Per contra the ld. CIT-DR Mr. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, vehemently supported the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A). He further contended that ITA Nos.270 & 271 /Chny/2024

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1, COIMBATORE vs. INDO SHELL MOULD LIMITED, COIMBATORE

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 3091/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकरअपीलसं/.I.T.A. No. 3091/Chny/2017 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. S. Pandian, JCIT

Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 438Section 43B

disallowance can be made u/s. 43B and accordingly deleted the addition made by the AO. 3. Aggrieved, the Revenue filed this appeal with the following grounds of appeal: “1.The order of the ld. CIT(A), Coimbatore is against the facts and circumstances of the case and is erroneous by law. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. M/S ORCHID PHARMA LTD (FORMERLY KNOWS AS M/S ORCHID CHEMICALS & PHARMACEUTICALS LTD), CHENNAI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 650/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Dec 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 650 & 651/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Orchid Pharma Ltd., Tax, Vs. (Formerly Known As M/S. Orchid Central Circle – 1(1), Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals Ltd.,) Chennai . 313, Orchid Towers, Valluvar Kottam High Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aaaco 0402B] (&'यथ(/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

For Respondent: Shri. M. Srinivasa Rao, CIT

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 438Section 43B

disallowance made u/s 36(1)(va) relying on decisions of various Hon’ble High Courts, which held that all contributions to ESI/PF made within the due date u/s 139(1) of the IT Act is deductible u/s 438(b) of the IT Act, when the deduction on account of remittance of employee’s contribution to welfare funds is governed

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. M/S ORCHID PHARMA LTD (FORMERLY KNOWS AS M/S ORCHID CHEMICALS & PHARMACEUTICALS LTD), CHENNAI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 651/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 650 & 651/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Orchid Pharma Ltd., Tax, Vs. (Formerly Known As M/S. Orchid Central Circle – 1(1), Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals Ltd.,) Chennai . 313, Orchid Towers, Valluvar Kottam High Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aaaco 0402B] (&'यथ(/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

For Respondent: Shri. M. Srinivasa Rao, CIT

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 438Section 43B

disallowance made u/s 36(1)(va) relying on decisions of various Hon’ble High Courts, which held that all contributions to ESI/PF made within the due date u/s 139(1) of the IT Act is deductible u/s 438(b) of the IT Act, when the deduction on account of remittance of employee’s contribution to welfare funds is governed

ORDAIN HEALTH CARE GLOBAL PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE -5(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 211/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Dec 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 211/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Ordain Health Care The Dcit, Global Pvt. Ltd., V. Corporate Circle – 5(1), Khivraj Complex Ii, Fourth Floor Chennai - 34 No.480, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai – 600 035. Pan: Aabco5860A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri R. Sandeep Bagmar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anitha,Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 10.11.2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 02.12.2020

For Appellant: Shri R. Sandeep Bagmar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha,JCIT

Section 194Section 250(6)Section 271Section 32Section 43B

section 271(1 )(c) of the Act without appreciating that there was no failure on the part of the Appellant in complying with notices during the course of assessment proceedings or any attempt to conceal income / furnish inaccurate particulars of income. 6. Relief 6.1 The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend and/Or withdraw the above ground of appeal

SUJATHA PUGAZENDHI,CHENNAI vs. ADIT CPC, BANGALORE

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

ITA 113/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 113/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Sujatha Pugazendhi, Assistant Commissioner Of No. 275D (Old 249), J.J. Road, V. Income Tax, Kasthuri Estate, Teynampet, Non-Corporate Ward 3(3), Chennai – 600 018. No. 121, Mahatma Gandhi [Pan: Bidps-3602-L] Road, Chennai 600 034.. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. A. Mahesh, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 234ASection 36Section 80ASection 80J

438 - Held, yes - Whether non obstante clause under section 431 could not apply in case of amounts which were held in trust as was case of employee': contribution which were deducted from their income and was not part assessee-employer': income, thus, said clause would not absolve assessee-employer from its liability to deposit employee's contribution on or before

M/S EMPEE DISTILLERIES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. PCIT-1, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 716/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.716/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 V. M/S.Empee Distilleries Ltd., The Pcit, 72, Greams Road, Chennai. Thousand Lights, Chennai-600 006. [Pan: Aaace 1687 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Shri M.Karunakaran, Adv. : ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By Shri V. Nandakumar, Cit : सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date Of Hearing 06.06.2024 : घोषणाक"तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 21.06.2024

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

section 438 which (h) was not Paid on or before the due date for furnishing the return ITA No.716 /Chny/2023 (AY 2018-19) M/s.Empee Distilleries Ltd. :: 8 :: Disallowance

SELVA GOLD COVERING PVT. LTD.,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, the Revenue's appeal is dismissed

ITA 693/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar"नधा(रण वष( /Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Ms.R.Anitha, JCITFor Respondent: 11.11.2019

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 43B

Section 43B of the 1961 Act , by holding as under: “8. On the disallowance of PF & ESI: The AO disallowed Rs. 7,10,666/- employees contribution & ESI Rs. 73,244/- which was remitted to Government before the due date and filed return u/s. 139(1). The CIT(A) held as under: "22. I have carefully perused the facts in issue

SAHAI & SONS (I) LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

ITA 1447/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Shri. N. Muralikumaran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. D. Prabhu Mukunth Arun

Section 132Section 153A

Section 68 of the Act, from sales accounted by the assessee. As mentioned by us at para 53 and 54 above, it is an undisputed position that credits in bullion margin money account were generally transferred to sales account. Addition of credit in bullion margin money account has been sustained by us, only to the extent not transferred/accounted

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1), CHENNAI vs. SHIV SAHAI & SONS (INDIA) LTD., CHENNAI

ITA 1988/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Shri. N. Muralikumaran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. D. Prabhu Mukunth Arun

Section 132Section 153A

Section 68 of the Act, from sales accounted by the assessee. As mentioned by us at para 53 and 54 above, it is an undisputed position that credits in bullion margin money account were generally transferred to sales account. Addition of credit in bullion margin money account has been sustained by us, only to the extent not transferred/accounted