ACIT LTU 2, CHENNAI vs. NLC INDIA LIMITED, NEYVELI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for both assessment years are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 868 & 869/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. Nlc India Ltd., The Dcit, (Formerly Known As Neyveli V. Company Circle Vi(4), Lignite Corporation Ltd.), Chennai. Block-1, Corporate Office, Neyveli Township, Cuddalore District, Neyveli – 607 801. Pan: Aaacn1121C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 952 & 953/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Dcit, M/S. Nlc India Ltd., Company Circle Vi(4), V. (Formerly Known As Neyveli Chennai. Lignite Corporation Ltd.), Block-1, Corporate Office, Neyveli Township, Cuddalore District, Neyveli – 607 801. Pan: Aaacn1121C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Raghavan Ramabadran, Ca : राज"कीओरसे /Revenue By Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, Cit

80I and 80J, have consistently held that expansion in production of the existing product in a geographically separate and independent undertaking will be entitled to relief under those sections. In fact, the heading of these section as well as 80-lA is “Deduction in respect of profits and gains from industrial undertakings or enterprise engaged in infrastructure development

ACIT LTU 2, CHENNAI vs. NLC INDIA LIMITED, NEYVELI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for both assessment years are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 868 & 869/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. Nlc India Ltd., The Dcit, (Formerly Known As Neyveli V. Company Circle Vi(4), Lignite Corporation Ltd.), Chennai. Block-1, Corporate Office, Neyveli Township, Cuddalore District, Neyveli – 607 801. Pan: Aaacn1121C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 952 & 953/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Dcit, M/S. Nlc India Ltd., Company Circle Vi(4), V. (Formerly Known As Neyveli Chennai. Lignite Corporation Ltd.), Block-1, Corporate Office, Neyveli Township, Cuddalore District, Neyveli – 607 801. Pan: Aaacn1121C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Raghavan Ramabadran, Ca : राज"कीओरसे /Revenue By Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, Cit

80I and 80J, have consistently held that expansion in production of the existing product in a geographically separate and independent undertaking will be entitled to relief under those sections. In fact, the heading of these section as well as 80-lA is “Deduction in respect of profits and gains from industrial undertakings or enterprise engaged in infrastructure development

NLC INDIA LTD.,NEYVELI vs. DCIT LTU II, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for both assessment years are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 868 & 869/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. Nlc India Ltd., The Dcit, (Formerly Known As Neyveli V. Company Circle Vi(4), Lignite Corporation Ltd.), Chennai. Block-1, Corporate Office, Neyveli Township, Cuddalore District, Neyveli – 607 801. Pan: Aaacn1121C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 952 & 953/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Dcit, M/S. Nlc India Ltd., Company Circle Vi(4), V. (Formerly Known As Neyveli Chennai. Lignite Corporation Ltd.), Block-1, Corporate Office, Neyveli Township, Cuddalore District, Neyveli – 607 801. Pan: Aaacn1121C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Raghavan Ramabadran, Ca : राज"कीओरसे /Revenue By Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, Cit

80I and 80J, have consistently held that expansion in production of the existing product in a geographically separate and independent undertaking will be entitled to relief under those sections. In fact, the heading of these section as well as 80-lA is “Deduction in respect of profits and gains from industrial undertakings or enterprise engaged in infrastructure development

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 is noted to have made on mere suspicion and unfounded, baseless observations, as already discussed above. 5.20 According to us, the fact that high profits were earned by the eligible unit in comparison to other units by itself cannot lead to conclusion that the deduction claimed u/s 80-IC was excessive. It is well known that higher or lower

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

Bench: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member), SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nआयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1402/Chny/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2019-20\nM/s. Ashok Leyland Ltd.,\nNo.1, Sardar Patel Road,\nGuindy, Chennai-600 032.\n[PAN: AAAСА 4651 L]\n(अपीलार्थी/Appellant)\nv.\nThe DCIT,\nNCC-8(1),\nLTU-II,\nChennai.\n(प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)\nआयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1663/Chny/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2019-20\nThe DCIT,\nNCC-8,\nChennai.\n(अपीलार्थी/Appellant)\nv.\nM/s. Ashok Leyl

disallowance is noted to have made on mere suspicion and\nunfounded, baseless observations, as already discussed above.\n5.20 According to us, the fact that high profits were earned by the\neligible unit in comparison to other units by itself cannot lead to\nconclusion that the deduction claimed u/s 80-IC was excessive. It is well\nknown that higher or lower

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

80I(6) is pari materia to section 80IA(5)], as discussed in following paragraphs. :- 7 -: 7.6 The appellant in its submissions dated 12.03.2024 has further relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT, Chennai in the case of ACIT Vs. TVS Motor Company Ltd. (ITA No. 1782/Chny/2012) (Order dated 13.04.2022) whereby the Tribunal allowed the claim of the assessee

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. NEYVELI LIGNITE CORPORATION LIMITED, NEYVELI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue as well as the appeal of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

80I and 80J, have consistently held that expansion in production of the existing product in a geographically separate and independent undertaking will be entitled to relief under those sections. In fact, the heading of these section as well as 80-lA is “Deduction in respect of profits and gains from industrial undertakings or enterprise engaged in infrastructure development

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. NEYVELI LIGNITE CORPORATION LIMITED, NEYVELI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue as well as the appeal of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

80I and 80J, have consistently held that expansion in production of the existing product in a geographically separate and independent undertaking will be entitled to relief under those sections. In fact, the heading of these section as well as 80-lA is “Deduction in respect of profits and gains from industrial undertakings or enterprise engaged in infrastructure development

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. NEYVELI LIGNITE CORPORATION LIMITED, NEYVELI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue as well as the appeal of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

80I and 80J, have consistently held that expansion in production of the existing product in a geographically separate and independent undertaking will be entitled to relief under those sections. In fact, the heading of these section as well as 80-lA is “Deduction in respect of profits and gains from industrial undertakings or enterprise engaged in infrastructure development

NEYVELI LIGNITE CORPORATION LTD.,CUDDALORE vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue as well as the appeal of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

80I and 80J, have consistently held that expansion in production of the existing product in a geographically separate and independent undertaking will be entitled to relief under those sections. In fact, the heading of these section as well as 80-lA is “Deduction in respect of profits and gains from industrial undertakings or enterprise engaged in infrastructure development

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. NEYVELI LIGNITE CORPORATION LIMITED, NEYVELI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue as well as the appeal of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

80I and 80J, have consistently held that expansion in production of the existing product in a geographically separate and independent undertaking will be entitled to relief under those sections. In fact, the heading of these section as well as 80-lA is “Deduction in respect of profits and gains from industrial undertakings or enterprise engaged in infrastructure development

THE PERIA KARAMALAI TEA & PRODUCE CO.LTD.,COIMBATORE vs. THE DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1, COIMBATORE

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

disallowance of income from sale of trees claimed as exempt amounting to Rs.29,99,360/-. Subsequently, the assessee’s case was reopened u/s.147 of the Act to examine the claim of deduction u/s.80IA of the Act, for considering the claim of deduction in the initial year and the period for which deduction can be claimed. The assessee was supplied

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. LASER SOFT INFOSYSTEM PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

Section 80I(2) of the Act applicable for the purposes of Explanation u/s.10A(2) of the Act as the value of old machinery used is less than 20% of the total value of the machinery. As regards to other conditions are concerned, the ld. CIT(A) held that ITA No.1346 to 1348/16 :- 5 -: mere transfer or re-deployment

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. LASER SOFT INFOSYSTEM PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

Section 80I(2) of the Act applicable for the purposes of Explanation u/s.10A(2) of the Act as the value of old machinery used is less than 20% of the total value of the machinery. As regards to other conditions are concerned, the ld. CIT(A) held that ITA No.1346 to 1348/16 :- 5 -: mere transfer or re-deployment

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. LASER SOFT INFOSYSTEM PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

Section 80I(2) of the Act applicable for the purposes of Explanation u/s.10A(2) of the Act as the value of old machinery used is less than 20% of the total value of the machinery. As regards to other conditions are concerned, the ld. CIT(A) held that ITA No.1346 to 1348/16 :- 5 -: mere transfer or re-deployment

CHANDRA RAMESH,CHENNAI vs. ACIT(OSD), CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

80I, which was disallowed and penalty was levied for concealment of this issue. Madras High Court held that there is no case of concealment as the assessee was under bonafide belief that he was entitled to the exemption and hence claimed the same. In spite of pointing out the facts and the ratios, the Ld. CIT(A) unfortunately confirmed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , NUNGAMBAKKAM vs. OLYMPIA TECH PARK (CHENNAI) PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

section 801A(4), viz., (1) development of industrial park, (ii) development and operation of industrial park and (iii) operation and maintenance of industrial park; the assessee (transferee) is not a developer of industrial park but is only carrying out operation and maintenance of the industrial park and accordingly only the part of income as is attributable to "operation and maintenance

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NUNGAMBAKKAM vs. OLYMPIA TECH PARK (CHENNAI) PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

section 801A(4), viz., (1) development of industrial park, (ii) development and operation of industrial park and (iii) operation and maintenance of industrial park; the assessee (transferee) is not a developer of industrial park but is only carrying out operation and maintenance of the industrial park and accordingly only the part of income as is attributable to "operation and maintenance

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , NUNGAMBAKKAM vs. OLYMPIA TECH PARK (CHENNAI) PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

section 801A(4), viz., (1) development of industrial park, (ii) development and operation of industrial park and (iii) operation and maintenance of industrial park; the assessee (transferee) is not a developer of industrial park but is only carrying out operation and maintenance of the industrial park and accordingly only the part of income as is attributable to "operation and maintenance