COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI

disallowance under section 14A of\nthe Act.\n\n5. Without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT(A) has erred in facts and\nlaw in not appreciating that the provisions of section 14A of the Act read\nwith Rule 8D

COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI

disallowance under section 14A of\nthe Act.\n5. Without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT(A) has erred in facts and\nlaw in not appreciating that the provisions of section 14A of the Act read\nwith Rule 8D

COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI

disallowance under section 14A of\nthe Act.\n5. Without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT(A) has erred in facts and\nlaw in not appreciating that the provisions of section 14A of the Act read\nwith Rule 8D

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

disallowance under section 14A of\nthe Act.\n5. Without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT(A) has erred in facts and\nlaw in not appreciating that the provisions of section 14A of the Act read\nwith Rule 8D

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

disallowance under section 14A of\nthe Act.\n5. Without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT(A) has erred in facts and\nlaw in not appreciating that the provisions of section 14A of the Act read\nwith Rule 8D

COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1),, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1193, 1194, 1205, 1206 & 1207/Chny/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs Cognizant Technology Solutions The Asst. Commissioner India Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, No.5/535, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Central Circle 1(1), Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 096. Pan : Aaacd 3312M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1262, 1263, 1264, 1265 & 1266/Chny/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Cognizant Technology Income Tax, Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle 1(1), No.5/535, Okkiam Chennai. Thoraipakkam, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai – 600 096. Pan : Aaacd 3312M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

disallowance under section 14A of the Act. 5. Without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT(A) has erred in facts and law in not appreciating that the provisions of section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D

COGNIZANT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1),, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1193, 1194, 1205, 1206 & 1207/Chny/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs Cognizant Technology Solutions The Asst. Commissioner India Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, No.5/535, Okkiam Thoraipakkam, Central Circle 1(1), Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 096. Pan : Aaacd 3312M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1262, 1263, 1264, 1265 & 1266/Chny/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Cognizant Technology Income Tax, Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle 1(1), No.5/535, Okkiam Chennai. Thoraipakkam, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai – 600 096. Pan : Aaacd 3312M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

disallowance under section 14A of the Act. 5. Without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT(A) has erred in facts and law in not appreciating that the provisions of section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LTU CIRCLE 1 CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. CARBORUNDUM UNIVERSAL LIMITED, CHENNAI

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./ It(Tp)A Nos.2, 3 & 4/Chny/2025 िनधा@रण वष@ /Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2017-18

8D(2)(iii) to be restricted to 0.5% of the investments which has actually yielded exempt income during the year, would equally apply for determining disallowance u/s14A for this year also. With the above direction for computation of disallowance the issue regarding the disallowance under Section

IDFC LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT COMPANY CIRCLE II(3), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA\nNo

disallowance of mark-to-market losses was also deemed allowable.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": [ "Section 14A", "Rule 8D", "Section 36(1)(vii)", "Section

M/S. ASHOK LEYLAND LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, NCC-8(1), LTU-II, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

disallowance made under Section 14Aread with llowance made under Section 14Aread with Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Rule 8D

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

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

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

disallowance under Section 14A of the Act. 1.1.1. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) ought to have held that section 14A read with Rule 8D

IDFC LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CO. CIRCLE - II (3),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.877/Chny/2018 & 677/Chny/2020 िनधा&रण वष& /Assessment Years: 2010-11

section 14A read with Rule 8D ought to have been deleted as the Assessing Officer ("the AO") had not ITA No.877, 878/Chny/2018 & 677/Chny/2020 :- 3 -: arrived at and recorded an objective satisfaction regarding the incorrectness of the Assessee's stand. ii. Even if Rule 8D is applied, then net interest to be considered for disallowance

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI vs. IDFC LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.877/Chny/2018 & 677/Chny/2020 िनधा&रण वष& /Assessment Years: 2010-11

section 14A read with Rule 8D ought to have been deleted as the Assessing Officer ("the AO") had not ITA No.877, 878/Chny/2018 & 677/Chny/2020 :- 3 -: arrived at and recorded an objective satisfaction regarding the incorrectness of the Assessee's stand. ii. Even if Rule 8D is applied, then net interest to be considered for disallowance

ACITLTU-2, CHENNAI vs. ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.895/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ashok Leyland Limited, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of 1, Sardar Patel Road, Guindy, Income Tax, Chennai 600 032. Company Circle – Ltu, Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca4651L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.945/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Ashok Leyland Limited, Income Tax, 1, Sardar Patel Road, Guindy, Large Taxpayer Unit – 2, Chennai. Chennai 600 032. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate (Virtual) ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 10.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 05.02.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Dated 28.12.2017 Passed By The Ld.

disallowance under section 14A r.w. Rule 8D considering the disallowance already made by the assessee. Having aggrieved, an appeal preferred

ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT COMPANY CIRCLE 1 (1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.895/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ashok Leyland Limited, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of 1, Sardar Patel Road, Guindy, Income Tax, Chennai 600 032. Company Circle – Ltu, Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca4651L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.945/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Ashok Leyland Limited, Income Tax, 1, Sardar Patel Road, Guindy, Large Taxpayer Unit – 2, Chennai. Chennai 600 032. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate (Virtual) ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 10.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 05.02.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Dated 28.12.2017 Passed By The Ld.

disallowance under section 14A r.w. Rule 8D considering the disallowance already made by the assessee. Having aggrieved, an appeal preferred

ACIT, LTU-2,, CHENNAI vs. ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

disallowing a part of interest payments under section 14A of the Act read with rule 8D(2)(ii) of I.T Rules

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

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)

disallowance of ₹.13,87,85,866/- under section 14A of the Act r.w. Rule 8D after allowing voluntary disallowance under

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

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)

disallowance of ₹.13,87,85,866/- under section 14A of the Act r.w. Rule 8D after allowing voluntary disallowance under