HANEDA TRADING AND CONSTRUCTION SDN BHN,WEST MALAYSIA vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1072 & 2073/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2014-15 Haneda Trading & The Deputy Commissioner Construction Sdn Bhd, Vs. Of Income Tax, Suite 10-01 Subang Square, Circle 1(2), Corporate Tower, Chennai. 47500, Jalan Ss, 15/4G, Subang Jaya Selangor, West Malaysia Pan: Aagch 2363G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Arjun Raj, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17.06.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.06.2025

2. The CIT (Appeals) - 16, Chennai erred in confirming the assumption of jurisdiction under Section 147 of the Act and consequently erred in confirming the order of reassessment passed under Section 147 r.w.s 144C

HANEDA TRADING AND CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD,WEST MALAYSIA vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1072 & 2073/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2014-15 Haneda Trading & The Deputy Commissioner Construction Sdn Bhd, Vs. Of Income Tax, Suite 10-01 Subang Square, Circle 1(2), Corporate Tower, Chennai. 47500, Jalan Ss, 15/4G, Subang Jaya Selangor, West Malaysia Pan: Aagch 2363G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Arjun Raj, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17.06.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.06.2025

2. The CIT (Appeals) - 16, Chennai erred in confirming the assumption of jurisdiction under Section 147 of the Act and consequently erred in confirming the order of reassessment passed under Section 147 r.w.s 144C

YUGENDIRAN VISHNUPRIYA,CHENNAI vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), CHENNAI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3241 &3242/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2016-2017 & 2017-18) Yugendiran Vishnupriya Vs. Income Tax Officer, Door No.284/3, International Tax, Thiruveni Colony, Bellyarea, Ward 2(2) Anna Nagar, Chennai-600040 Chennai. [Pan: Apzpv 9903M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr. Y. Sridhar, F.C.A ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.02.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.03.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

144C(5) dated 26.02.2024. 2. The registry has noted delay of 202 days in filing the appeals. Considering the reasons as stated in the affidavit by the Assessee i.e; ‘instead of preferring appeals before the Tribunal had filed appeals before the CIT(A)’, we condone the delay and treat the reasons as ‘sufficient cause’ and admit the appeal for adjudication

YUGENDIRAN VISHNUPRIYA,CHENNAI vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), CHENNAI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3241 &3242/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2016-2017 & 2017-18) Yugendiran Vishnupriya Vs. Income Tax Officer, Door No.284/3, International Tax, Thiruveni Colony, Bellyarea, Ward 2(2) Anna Nagar, Chennai-600040 Chennai. [Pan: Apzpv 9903M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr. Y. Sridhar, F.C.A ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.02.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.03.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

144C(5) dated 26.02.2024. 2. The registry has noted delay of 202 days in filing the appeals. Considering the reasons as stated in the affidavit by the Assessee i.e; ‘instead of preferring appeals before the Tribunal had filed appeals before the CIT(A)’, we condone the delay and treat the reasons as ‘sufficient cause’ and admit the appeal for adjudication

SRI MAHARAJA REFINERIES,ERODE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-I,, ERODE

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

reassessment or fresh order under section 92CA, as the case may be,\nsuch effect shall be given within a period of three months from the end of the month in\nwhich order under section 250 or section 254 or section 260 or section 262 is received\nby the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or\nCommissioner

M/S. CASTLEWICK FZE,DUBAI vs. ACIT,INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI

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

144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter\ncalled 'the Act'). The relevant Assessment Year is 2018-19.\n2.\nBrief facts of the case are as follows: The assessee is a\ncompany incorporated in UAE. During the assessment year 2018-19,\nthe assessee was in receipt of income of Rs.90 lakhs from an Indian\ncustomer named M/s. Gannon Dunkerley

SRI MAHARAJA REFINERIES,ERODE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ERODE

reassessment or fresh order under section 92CA, as\nthe case may be, such effect shall be given within a\nperiod of three months from the end of the month in\nwhich order under section 250 or section 254 or section\n260 or section 262 is received by the Principal Chief\nCommissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal\nCommissioner or Commissioner

HYUNDAI TRANSYS INC,REPUBLIC OF KOREA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.338/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-2016) Hyundai Transys Inc, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of 105, Sindang Income Tax, 1 Ro Seongyeon, International Tax, Myeon, Corporate Circle 1(1) Seosan, Ccn 356851 Chennai. Korea.

144C(13) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') is bad in law and is contrary to the facts and circumstances of the present case. The detailed grounds of appeal being independent and without prejudice to one another, including the position in law and facts is set out in the ensuing paragraphs. 2. Ground 2 Addition of Guarantee Fees

DHANUSHKODI HARIDEERTHAM,PUDUKOTTAI vs. ITO, INTL TAXNL WARD 2(1), CHENNAI

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

sections": [ "147", "143(3)", "148", "142(1)", "148A", "149", "144C(13)", "56(2)(vii)", "133(6)", "144C(1)" ], "issues": "Whether the reassessment

DCIT,CC-2(1), CHENNAI vs. M/S, JAN DE NUL DREDGING (I)(P)LTD, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.870/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Jan De Nul Dredging (I)(P) Ltd., “Capital”, 10Th Floor, No. 554/555, Income Tax, Corporate Circle 2(1), Room No. 511, 5Th Floor, Wanaparthy Mount Road, Chennai 600 018. Block, No. 121, M.G. Road, Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aaacj6482G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ashik Shah, C.A. & Ms. C. Sowndarya, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 02.02.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08.02.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 6, Chennai, Dated 26.08.2020 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Facts Are, In Brief, That The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Dredging Services & Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2011-12 On 30.11.2011 Admitting Total Income Of ₹.3,86,20,850/-. The Return Filed By The Assessee Was Initially Processed Under Section 143(1)

2. The Assessing Officer must have reason to believe that such escapement has occurred by reason of either omission or failure on part of the assessee to disclose fully or truly all material facts necessary for his assessment of that year or failure on part of the assessee to make a return of income under section 139 or in response

REDINGTON DISTRIBUTION PTE LTD.,SINGAPORE vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAX CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the captioned appeals (ITA Nos

2) of the Act\nThe Appellant craves leave to add, alter, vary, omit, substitute or amend the\nabove grounds of appeal, at any time before or at the time of appeal, so as to\nenable the Hon'ble Tribunal to decide the appeal in accordance with the law.\n3. Redington Distribution Pte Limited (the Company' or 'the\nAppellant/Assessee' or 'RDPL

REDINGTON DISTRIBUTION PTE LTD.,SINGAPORE vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAX CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI

reassessment proceedings were concluded with an order dated\n25.11.2019, passed under Sections 143(3) read with 147 and 144C(13)\nof the Act. In this order, an addition of Rs.17,61,12,836/- was made\ntowards profits allegedly attributable to a Permanent Establishment (PE)\nin India, resulting in a tax demand of Rs.20,82,31,507.\nProceedings under MAP\nPage

REDINGTON DISTRIBUTION PTE LTD.,SINGAPORE vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAX CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the captioned appeals (ITA Nos

reassessment proceedings were concluded with an order dated\n25.11.2019, passed under Sections 143(3) read with 147 and 144C(13)\nof the Act. In this order, an addition of Rs.17,61,12,836/- was made\ntowards profits allegedly attributable to a Permanent Establishment (PE)\nin India, resulting in a tax demand of Rs.20,82,31,507.\n\nProceedings under

M/S. REDINGTON DISTRIBUTION PTE LTD.,SINGAPORE vs. DCIT, INTL TAX CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the captioned appeals (ITA Nos

reassessment proceedings were concluded with an order dated\n25.11.2019, passed under Sections 143(3) read with 147 and 144C(13)\nof the Act. In this order, an addition of Rs.17,61,12,836/- was made\ntowards profits allegedly attributable to a Permanent Establishment (PE)\nin India, resulting in a tax demand of Rs.20,82,31,507.\nProceedings under MAP\nWhile

REDINGTON DISTRIBUTION PTE LTD.,SINGAPORE vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAX CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the captioned appeals (ITA Nos

reassessment proceedings were concluded with an order dated\n25.11.2019, passed under Sections 143(3) read with 147 and 144C(13)\nof the Act. In this order, an addition of Rs.17,61,12,836/- was made\ntowards profits allegedly attributable to a Permanent Establishment (PE)\nin India, resulting in a tax demand of Rs.20,82,31,507.\nProceedings under MAP\nWhile

RAMASAMY PUSHPA,NAMAKKAL vs. ITO, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION WARD-2(1), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.489/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 Ramasamy Pushpa, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, D.No. 2/31, Sankarampalayam Village, International Taxation Ward 2(1), Kumaripalayam Post, Chennai. Namakkal 637 015. [Pan:Cvwpp7128R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.A ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C. Sivakumar, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 21.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 02.09.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 13.01.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-16, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The Assessee Raised 6 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Confirming The Order Of The Assessing Officer Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short]

2 I.T.A. No.489/Chny/25 ignoring the amendment with reference to section 144C of the Act w.e.f. 01.04.2020. 3. At the outset, we note that the ld. AR Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.A. submits that the proviso to section 144C of the Act is not applicable to the assessee since no transfer pricing issue is involved in the case of the assessee

REDINGTON DISTRIBUTION PTE LTD.,SINGAPORE vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAX CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the captioned appeals (ITA Nos

reassessment proceedings were concluded with an order dated\n25.11.2019, passed under Sections 143(3) read with 147 and 144C(13)\nof the Act. In this order, an addition of Rs.17,61,12,836/- was made\ntowards profits allegedly attributable to a Permanent Establishment (PE)\nin India, resulting in a tax demand of Rs.20,82,31,507.\nProceedings under MAP\nWhile

REDINGTON DISTRIBUTION PTE LTD.,SINGAPORE vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAX CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the captioned appeals (ITA Nos

reassessment proceedings were concluded with an order dated\n25.11.2019, passed under Sections 143(3) read with 147 and 144C(13)\nof the Act. In this order, an addition of Rs.17,61,12,836/- was made\ntowards profits allegedly attributable to a Permanent Establishment (PE)\nin India, resulting in a tax demand of Rs.20,82,31,507.\nProceedings under MAP\nWhile

REDINGTON DISTRIBUTION PTE LTD.,SINGAPORE vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAX CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the captioned appeals (ITA Nos

reassessment proceedings were concluded with an order dated\n25.11.2019, passed under Sections 143(3) read with 147 and 144C(13)\nof the Act. In this order, an addition of Rs.17,61,12,836/- was made\ntowards profits allegedly attributable to a Permanent Establishment (PE)\nin India, resulting in a tax demand of Rs.20,82,31,507.\nProceedings under MAP\nITA