DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, COIMBATORE vs. M/S. RP INFRA PROJECTS LIMITED, ERODE

In the result, all these four appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

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

disallowance of deduction claimed u/s.80IA of the Act made by the assessing officer primarily on the ground that the assessee was merely executing works contracts and did not satisfy the conditions stipulated u/s.80IA(4), under BOT/BOOT models by holding as under: “4. It is noticed that assessee has claimed deduction of Rs. 4,11,08,393/- under section 801A

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, COIMBATORE vs. M/S RPP INFRA PROJECTS LIMITED, ERODE

In the result, all these four appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

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

disallowance of deduction claimed u/s.80IA of the Act made by the assessing officer primarily on the ground that the assessee was merely executing works contracts and did not satisfy the conditions stipulated u/s.80IA(4), under BOT/BOOT models by holding as under: “4. It is noticed that assessee has claimed deduction of Rs. 4,11,08,393/- under section 801A

DCIT , COIMBATORE vs. M/S RPP INFRA PROJECTS LIMITED , ERODE

In the result, all these four appeals filed by the Revenue are\ndismissed

9 supra, it is noticed that the appellant has satisfied all\nthe conditions stipulated under section 80IA(4) relating to (i)primary\nconditions as per sec 80 IA(4) inasmuch as all these jobs clearly\nsatisfy all the requirements stipulated by sec 80IA(4), the excerpts of\nwhich are reproduced as follows: “... any enterprise carrying on the\nbusiness of developing

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, COIMBATORE vs. M/S RPP INFRA PROJECTS LIMITED, ERODE

In the result, all these four appeals filed by the Revenue are\ndismissed

9 supra, it is noticed that the appellant has satisfied all\nthe conditions stipulated under section 80IA(4) relating to (i)primary\nconditions as per sec 80 IA(4) inasmuch as all these jobs clearly\nsatisfy all the requirements stipulated by sec 80IA(4), the excerpts of\nwhich are reproduced as follows: “... any enterprise carrying on the\nbusiness of developing

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

disallowance U/s. 80IC - Rs. 1,68,14,24,514: 6.1. The CIT(A) is not justified in merely following the CIT(A) NFAC's preceding year's order i.e. for AY 2018-19 and erred in directing AO to adopt an incorrect margin of 6.09% instead of the margin of 11.51% as claimed by the appellant for the eligible unit

TITAN COMPANY LIMITED,HOSUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - LTU 2 (IC), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal raised by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1742/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2011-12 Titan Company Limited, Assistant Commissioner Of No.3, Sipcot Industrial Complex, Income Tax, Hosur, Krishnagiri, Ltu-2, Tamil Nadu-635126 Chennai [Pan: Aaact5131A] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri Abhay Kumar, C.A अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Ms.Komali Krishna, Cit प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10.09.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04.12.2024

9 -: "5.1 All income for the purposes of computation of total income is to be classified under the following heads of income and computed in accordance with the provisions of Chapter IVof the Act- • Salaries • Income from house property • Profits and gains of business and profession • Capital gains • Income from other sources 5.2 The income computed under various heads

ST. JOHN FREIGHT SYSTEMS PVT. LTD.,,TUTUCORIN vs. DCIT, CC-1,, MADURAI

In the result appeals filed in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Arun Khodpia, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.188 & 2898 To 2900/Chny/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08 To 2010-11 V. M/S.St.John Freight – The Dy. Commissioner- Systems Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, C-98, Sipcot Complex, Central Circle-1, Harbour Express Road, Madurai. Tuticorin-628 008. [Pan:Aaacs 4697 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, Adv. ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.03.2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2023

9 :: The Deputy Commissioner of Income tax ought to have appreciated that as per second proviso to section 153A, where assessment/reassessment for any assessment year filing within the period of six assessment years referred as in section 153A, pending on the date of initiation of search under section 132 shall abate. The Deputy Commissioner of Income tax ought to have

ST. JOHN FREIGHT SYSTEMS LTD.,TUTICORIN vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, MADURAI

In the result appeals filed in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Arun Khodpia, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.188 & 2898 To 2900/Chny/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08 To 2010-11 V. M/S.St.John Freight – The Dy. Commissioner- Systems Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, C-98, Sipcot Complex, Central Circle-1, Harbour Express Road, Madurai. Tuticorin-628 008. [Pan:Aaacs 4697 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, Adv. ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.03.2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2023

9 :: The Deputy Commissioner of Income tax ought to have appreciated that as per second proviso to section 153A, where assessment/reassessment for any assessment year filing within the period of six assessment years referred as in section 153A, pending on the date of initiation of search under section 132 shall abate. The Deputy Commissioner of Income tax ought to have

ST. JOHN FREIGHT SYSTEMS LTD.,TUTICORIN vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, MADURAI

In the result appeals filed in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Arun Khodpia, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.188 & 2898 To 2900/Chny/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08 To 2010-11 V. M/S.St.John Freight – The Dy. Commissioner- Systems Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, C-98, Sipcot Complex, Central Circle-1, Harbour Express Road, Madurai. Tuticorin-628 008. [Pan:Aaacs 4697 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, Adv. ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.03.2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2023

9 :: The Deputy Commissioner of Income tax ought to have appreciated that as per second proviso to section 153A, where assessment/reassessment for any assessment year filing within the period of six assessment years referred as in section 153A, pending on the date of initiation of search under section 132 shall abate. The Deputy Commissioner of Income tax ought to have

ST. JOHN FREIGHT SYSTEMS LTD.,TUTICORIN vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, MADURAI

In the result appeals filed in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Arun Khodpia, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.188 & 2898 To 2900/Chny/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08 To 2010-11 V. M/S.St.John Freight – The Dy. Commissioner- Systems Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, C-98, Sipcot Complex, Central Circle-1, Harbour Express Road, Madurai. Tuticorin-628 008. [Pan:Aaacs 4697 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, Adv. ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.03.2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2023

9 :: The Deputy Commissioner of Income tax ought to have appreciated that as per second proviso to section 153A, where assessment/reassessment for any assessment year filing within the period of six assessment years referred as in section 153A, pending on the date of initiation of search under section 132 shall abate. The Deputy Commissioner of Income tax ought to have

C.E.S.ONYX PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

Appeals of the assessee are dismissed

disallowances\nmade by A.O u/s. 801A(4) of the Act.\n7. The Ld. AR before us has submitted that the agreement entered\ninto with CoC, the municipal authority with M/s. CGEA Asia Holdings\nPvt. Ltd. On the 26th November 1999 is a concession agreement and\nnot a contract for executing any work therefore, the work cannot be\ntreated as work

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, TRICHY, TRICHY vs. KUMARASAMY RAMAKRISHNAN, KARUR

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं/.Ita Nos.:3315, 3316 & 3321/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2019-20, 2020-21 & 2018-19

801A, it is prerequisite that the assessee has not formed the new business with machinery previously used. 2.5 The Ld. CIT (A) erred in not observing that, as per Explanation 2 to subsection 3 of 80IA, if the total value of used plant, machinery in the new business is less than 20% then clause ii) of section 80IA(3) will

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NUMGAMBAKKAM vs. JSR INFRA DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

801A of the Act was not made by the assesse in the original ITR filed by the assessee u/s 139(1) o filed by the assessee u/s 139(1) on 30.11.2016. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee ignoring the The Ld.CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee ignoring the The Ld.CIT

ROOTS INDUSTRIES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE (1), COIMBATORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.46/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. M/S.Roots Industries India Pvt. Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner – R.K.G. Industrial Estate, Of Income Tax, Ganapathy, Corporate Circle-(1), Coimbatore-641 006. Coimbatore. [Pan: Aabcr 0314 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

disallowance of the claim, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The appellate authority has allowed the appeal, thereby granting the claim of the assessee made under Section 80IB of the Act. It was against the said order, the Revenue has preferred appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, which came to be dismissed under the impugned

ARUNA ALLOY STEELS PRIVATES LIMITED,MADURAI vs. ACIT,CORP. CIRCLE-1, MADURAI, MADURAIQ

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

disallowance of the claim, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The appellate authority has allowed the appeal, thereby granting the claim of the assessee made under Section 80IB of the Act. It was against the said order, the Revenue has preferred appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, which came to be dismissed under the impugned

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MADURAI vs. RAMCO INDUSTRIES LIMITED , CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

801A(7) which reads as under:- "The deduction under sub-section (1) from profits and gains derived from an undertaking shall not be admissible unless the accounts of the undertaking for the previous year relevant to the assessment year for which the deduction is claimed have been audited by an accountant as defined in the Explanation below sub-section

DIGVIJAI POLYTEX PRIVATE LIMITED,RAJAPALAYAM vs. ACIT CORP CIRCLE, MADURAI

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.343/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Digvijai Polytex Private Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of 61, Kumarasamy Raja Nagar, Income Tax, Rajapalayam 626 108. Corporate Circle, Madurai. [Pan: Aaacd 9673K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. J. Prabhakar & Shri. S. Muralidhar, Chartered Accountants. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. Arv Srinivasan, Irs, Addl. Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 18.06.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 20.06.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

section 801A of the Act. Therefore, the CPC has rightly disallowed the deduction claimed by the appellant on this income to the extent of Rs. 12,69,246/-.’’ 4. On further appeal before us, Ld.AR, Shri J Prabhakar CA, relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/ Reliance Energy Ltd. [2021] 127 taxmann.com

MARUDHAMALAI SRE DHANDAPANI SPINNING MILLS,KARAMADAI vs. DCIT,CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 11/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Marudhamalai Sri Dhandapani Deputy Commissioner Of Spinning Mills, V. Income Tax, 142B Bettathapuram Pudur, Centralized Processing Centre, Karmadai Post – 641 104. Bengaluru – 560 500. [Pan: Aagfm-4590-F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

9. We have heard both the parties, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below along with case laws cited by both parties. We find that the learned CIT(A) has recorded categorical findings, in light of the provision of section 80AC and held that nowhere, in the section, it was provided that