RANE ENGINE VALVE LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE-5(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

80G of the Act without adducing any reasons or providing an opportunity to the Appellant. 10.1 At the outset, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that the AO while computing income has disallowed the claim of deduction claimed by assessee u/s.80G of the Act amounting to Rs.20.60 lakhs. The ld.counsel stated that the AO has not discussed this issue

RANE ENGINE VALVE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5 (1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

80G of the Act without adducing any reasons or providing an opportunity to the Appellant. 10.1 At the outset, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that the AO while computing income has disallowed the claim of deduction claimed by assessee u/s.80G of the Act amounting to Rs.20.60 lakhs. The ld.counsel stated that the AO has not discussed this issue

RANE ENGINE VALVES LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

80G of the Act without adducing any reasons or providing an opportunity to the Appellant. 10.1 At the outset, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that the AO while computing income has disallowed the claim of deduction claimed by assessee u/s.80G of the Act amounting to Rs.20.60 lakhs. The ld.counsel stated that the AO has not discussed this issue

RANE ENGINE VALVE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

80G of the Act without adducing any reasons or providing an opportunity to the Appellant. 10.1 At the outset, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that the AO while computing income has disallowed the claim of deduction claimed by assessee u/s.80G of the Act amounting to Rs.20.60 lakhs. The ld.counsel stated that the AO has not discussed this issue

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)

5) Depreciation on know-how fees 24,652/- 6) Brand value depreciation 83,057/- 7) Disallowance of export commission u/s. 40(a)(і) 1,40,83,245/- 8) Disallowance of excess depreciation: Printer, UPS, Scanner 3,66,828/- & Router 10,32,028/- Software 6,20,000/- 9) Excess deduction u/s.35(2AB) 10) Disallowance of Principal amount

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)

5) Depreciation on know-how fees 24,652/- 6) Brand value depreciation 83,057/- 7) Disallowance of export commission u/s. 40(a)(і) 1,40,83,245/- 8) Disallowance of excess depreciation: Printer, UPS, Scanner 3,66,828/- & Router 10,32,028/- Software 6,20,000/- 9) Excess deduction u/s.35(2AB) 10) Disallowance of Principal amount

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)

5) Depreciation on know-how fees 24,652/- 6) Brand value depreciation 83,057/- 7) Disallowance of export commission u/s. 40(a)(і) 1,40,83,245/- 8) Disallowance of excess depreciation: Printer, UPS, Scanner 3,66,828/- & Router 10,32,028/- Software 6,20,000/- 9) Excess deduction u/s.35(2AB) 10) Disallowance of Principal amount

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. STERLITE INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LTD., TUTICORIN

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.318 & 319/Mds/2008 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1020/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1665/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07

VI, Chennai - 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue by : Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee by : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate ITA No.1020,1665 & 1386/Mds/10 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 13.02.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 29.03.2017 आदेश /O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. STERLITE INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LTD., TUTICORIN

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.318 & 319/Mds/2008 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1020/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1665/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07

VI, Chennai - 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue by : Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee by : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate ITA No.1020,1665 & 1386/Mds/10 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 13.02.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 29.03.2017 आदेश /O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S STERLITE INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LTD., CHENNAI

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.318 & 319/Mds/2008 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1020/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1665/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07

VI, Chennai - 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue by : Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee by : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate ITA No.1020,1665 & 1386/Mds/10 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 13.02.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 29.03.2017 आदेश /O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN

M/S. STERLITE INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LTD.,MADURAI vs. ADDITIONAL CIT, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.318 & 319/Mds/2008 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1020/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1665/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07

VI, Chennai - 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue by : Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee by : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate ITA No.1020,1665 & 1386/Mds/10 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 13.02.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 29.03.2017 आदेश /O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN

M/S STERLITE INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LTD.,TUTICORIN vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.318 & 319/Mds/2008 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1020/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1665/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07

VI, Chennai - 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue by : Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee by : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate ITA No.1020,1665 & 1386/Mds/10 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 13.02.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 29.03.2017 आदेश /O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S STERLITE INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LTD., TUTICORIN

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.318 & 319/Mds/2008 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1020/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1665/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07

VI, Chennai - 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue by : Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing Counsel "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee by : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate ITA No.1020,1665 & 1386/Mds/10 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 13.02.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 29.03.2017 आदेश /O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN

ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT NON CORP CIRCLE 8(1) LTU - II, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1402/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. Ashok Leyland Ltd., No.1, Sardar Patel Road, Guindy, Chennai-600 032. [Pan: Aaaса 4651 L] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. The Dcit, Ncc-8(1), Ltu-Ii, Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1663/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2019-20 The Dcit, Ncc-8, Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. M/S. Ashok Leyland Ltd., No.1, Sardar Patel Road, Guindy, Chennai-600 032. [Pan: Aaaса 4651 L] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Assessee By : Mr.R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate Department By : Ms.Ann Marry Baby, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04.06.2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07.07.2025 आदेश / Order Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Cross-Appeals Preferred By The Assessee As Well As The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax

Section 80-IA(8) of the Act. According to us, the sale price cannot further be segregated by imputing price attributable to marketing and R&D efforts for the simple reason that there is no such provision contained in law. We agree with the Ld. AR that, the method of computation to be adopted by the assessee, in line with

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

Section 80-IA(8) of the Act. According to us, the sale price cannot further be segregated by imputing price attributable to marketing and R&D efforts for the simple reason that there is no such provision contained in law. We agree with the Ld. AR that, the method of computation to be adopted by the assessee, in line with

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE, CHENNAI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT vs. THE INDIAN INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY, CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.679/Chny/2024 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Dy. Commissioner Of The Indian Institute Of Engineering Income Tax, Vs. Technology, Exemptions Circle, 363, Arcot Road, Kodambakkam, Chennai. Chennai – 600 024. [Pan: Aaatt 2768C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथH की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate JkथH की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N. Sanjay Gandhi, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.06.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.08.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per S.R. Raghunatha, A.M : This Appeal By The Revenue Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter “Cit(A)] In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1059500064(1), Dated 09.01.2024. The Assessment Was Framed By The Assessing Officer For The Assessment Year 2012-13 U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Vide Order Dated 20.03.2015. :- 2 -: 2. There Is A Delay Of 06 Days In Filing The Appeal By The Revenue.

vi) of the Act for the assessment year 2014~15. 13. We are conscious of the fact that the assessment year under consideration is 2012~13. Nevertheless, in the first paragraph of the order of the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax~3, Chennai dated 30.9.2015, there is a reference to the fact that several documents placed by the assessee were

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. NARESH PRASAD AGARWAL, CHENNAI

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

Section 143(3) of the Act. For all the other years, ITA Nos. 1447, 1448, 1988, :- 6 -: 1989, 1449 to 1455, 1485 to 1491/17. proceedings for assessment which are under challenge before us, were u/s.153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act. 4. During the search a hard disk which containing books of accounts of the assessee and two diaries numbered

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

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

Section 143(3) of the Act. For all the other years, ITA Nos. 1447, 1448, 1988, :- 6 -: 1989, 1449 to 1455, 1485 to 1491/17. proceedings for assessment which are under challenge before us, were u/s.153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act. 4. During the search a hard disk which containing books of accounts of the assessee and two diaries numbered