BHARAT TECHNOLOGIES AUTO COMPONENTS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO, COMPANY WARD 1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1841, 1842 & 1843/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2006-07 V. M/S. Bharat Technologies Auto – The Ito, Components Ltd., Company Ward-1(1), 177 Raheja Towers, Chennai. 7Th Floor, Unit No.708, Beta Wing, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002. [Pan: Aabcb 9835 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

disallowance the claim of carry forward of business loss to the tune of Rs. 1,25,40,145/- in terms of Section 72A

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

Accordingly, this ground of Revenue is dismissed

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

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

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

72A. Apart from\nthat, it is noticed that Section 194A(1) of the Act which provides that if\nany specified person is obliged to pay to a resident any income by\nway of interest is obliged to deduct tax at source, however, Section\n194A(3) provides that Section 194A(1) shall not apply if the payment\nhas been made

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

72A. Apart from\n28\nITA Nos .661 & 914/19, 202,203/23 others\nthat, it is noticed that Section 194A(1) of the Act which provides that if\nany specified person is responsible for paying to a resident any income by\nway of interest is obliged to deduct tax at source. However, Section\n194A(3) provides that Section 194A(1) shall

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

72A. Apart from\nthat, it is noticed that Section 194A(1) of the Act which provides that if\nany specified person is obliged to pay to a resident any income by\nway of interest is obliged to deduct tax at source, however, Section\n194A(3) provides that Section 194A(1) shall not apply if the payment\nhas been made

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

72A,72AB and 72AA deal with the exceptions. In respect of carry forward of loss and set off in the cases of amalgamation or demerger etc. Sec.72A is attracted. In this section for the definition ITA Nos. 5416 & 5417/Del/2017 along with other cases Accumulated Loss, the loss under the Profits and Gains of Business or Profession(Not being a loss

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

72A,72AB and 72AA deal with the exceptions. In respect of carry forward of loss and set off in the cases of amalgamation or demerger etc. Sec.72A is attracted. In this section for the definition ITA Nos. 5416 & 5417/Del/2017 along with other cases Accumulated Loss, the loss under the Profits and Gains of Business or Profession(Not being a loss

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

72A. Apart from\n28\nITA Nos .661 & 914/19, 202,203/23 others\nthat, it is noticed that Section 194A(1) of the Act which provides that if\nany specified person is responsible for paying to a resident any income by\nway of interest is obliged to deduct tax at source, however, Section\n194A(3) provides that Section 194A(1) shall

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

72A. Apart from\n28\nITA Nos .661 & 914/19, 202,203/23 others\nthat, it is noticed that Section 194A(1) of the Act which provides that if\nany specified person is responsible for paying to a resident any income by\nway of interest is obliged to deduct tax at source, however, Section\n194A(3) provides that Section 194A(1) shall

T V SUNDARAM IYENGAR & SONS LIMITED,MADURAI vs. DCIT, CC - 2, , MADURAI

Appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1803/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-2014. M/S. T.V. Sundram Iyengar & The Deputy Commissioner Sons Private Limited, Vs. Of Income Tax, No.7B, Tvs Building, Corporate Circle 2, West Veli Street. Madurai. Madurai 625 001. Pan: Aabct 0159K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Irs, Cit

disallowed the whole demerger expenditure of Rs.1099.56 lakhs and then allowed one-fifth of the above expenditure of Rs 219.91 lakhs towards amortization u/s 35DD. The ld. PCIT further noted that a perusal of the assessment records shows that on demerger, the assessee was allowed to carry forward and set off of the losses of the demerged company

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

72A. Apart from that, it is noticed that, Section 194A(1) of the Act which\nprovides that if any specified person is responsible for paying to a resident any\nincome by way of interest is obliged to deduct tax at source, however, Section\n194A(3) provides that Section 194A(1) shall not apply if the payment has been made

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

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

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

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

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

DANALAXMI JEWELLERS (INDIA) PVT. LTD,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CORORAE CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.471/Chny/2023 िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Year: 2014-15

Section 72A(6) of the Act and therefore any recovery of theft gold should be included in the income of appellant by same account. :- 3 -: 4. The Ld. A.R argued that the gold stolen earlier year was recovered during this year and has been shown as income in the hands of the director and therefore, taxing it again will