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

reassessment order dated 31.01.2023 consequent to the DRP’s direction dated 09.01.2023 is bad in law as the same is time barred. The Ld.AR submitted if the DRP’s e-mail dated 09.01.2023 is reckoned as a direction in terms of Section 144C(5

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

reassessment order dated 31.01.2023 consequent to the DRP’s direction dated 09.01.2023 is bad in law as the same is time barred. The Ld.AR submitted if the DRP’s e-mail dated 09.01.2023 is reckoned as a direction in terms of Section 144C(5

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

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

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

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

5%.", "result": "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)

5,23,70,910/- to M/s. Jan De Nul Luxembourg towards lease rent for hiring vessels & equipments. However there is no TDS compliance in respect of the same. Hence the said expenses are to be disallowed u/s 40(a)(i) and brought to tax. Further the assessee had retention money payable of ₹.9,11,96,169/-. This liability accrues only

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

COASTAL ENERGY PVT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1337/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Coastal Energy Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 4, Buharia Towers, 5Th Floor, Income Tax, Moores Road, Chennai 600 006. Corporate Circle 1(2), Chennai. [Pan:Aaacc4160A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1354/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Coastal Energy Pvt. Ltd., No. 4, Buharia Towers, 5Th Floor, Income Tax, Central Circle 1(1), Moores Road, Chennai 600 006. Chennai. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, Fca Department By : Shri R. Mohan Reddy, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 26.06.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.09.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

reassessment proceedings, the loss claimed by the assessee on foreign exchange 4 I.T.A. Nos.1354 & 1337/Chny/18 fluctuation to the extent of ₹.41,31,84,609/- and the loss claimed on account of restatement of the payables to the extent of ₹.40,98,03,268/- was disallowed and accordingly, the Assessing Officer has completed the assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. COASTAL ENERGY PVT LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1337/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Coastal Energy Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 4, Buharia Towers, 5Th Floor, Income Tax, Moores Road, Chennai 600 006. Corporate Circle 1(2), Chennai. [Pan:Aaacc4160A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1354/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Coastal Energy Pvt. Ltd., No. 4, Buharia Towers, 5Th Floor, Income Tax, Central Circle 1(1), Moores Road, Chennai 600 006. Chennai. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, Fca Department By : Shri R. Mohan Reddy, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 26.06.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.09.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

reassessment proceedings, the loss claimed by the assessee on foreign exchange 4 I.T.A. Nos.1354 & 1337/Chny/18 fluctuation to the extent of ₹.41,31,84,609/- and the loss claimed on account of restatement of the payables to the extent of ₹.40,98,03,268/- was disallowed and accordingly, the Assessing Officer has completed the assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s

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]

section 144C of the Act is not maintainable as the assessee was not an “eligible assessee” in the year under consideration. 3 I.T.A. No.489/Chny/25 4. The ld. DR Shri C. Sivakumar, Addl. CIT relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A). 5. Having heard the submissions of the ld. AR and the ld. DR, we note that admittedly

DASSAULT SYSTEMES SIMULIA CORP,CHENNAI vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAX)-1 (1), CHENNAI

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.349/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-2016) Dassault Systemes Simulia Corp, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of C/O. Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp, Income Tax, 7Th Floor, Asv Ramana Towers, International Taxation 1(1) 52,Venkatnarayana Road, Chennai. Chennai 600 017. [Pan: Aadcd 3705D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. S.P. Chidambaram, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Irs, Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.08.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

reassessment proceedings merely reflects a "change in opinion" and therefore, lacks jurisdiction under Section 147 of the Act and thus, is invalid and void ab initio. 3.6. The Ld. AO erred in passing an order on an issue different from the reason for which it was reopened. The Ld. AO passed an order restricting the TDS credits available in Form

MANIMOZHIAN VAIDEKI,SIVAGANGAI vs. ACIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION CIRCLE,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.:2025/Chny/2025 यनिाारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2016-17 Manimozhian Vaideki, The Assistant Commissioner No.77, Ward-1, Devappattu Vs. Of Income Tax, Kallal, International Taxation Circle, Sivagangai, Madurai. Tamil Nadu-630 305. [Pan:Azcpv7593C] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थीकीओरसे/Appellant By : Mr.N.Arjun Raj, Advocate प्रत्यर्थीकीओरसे/Revenue By : Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.Cit

144C(5) of the Act and before the finalization of the final assessment order, the Assessee opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The said Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme application stood rejected by the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax. Thereafter, the Assessee filed a rectification petition before the Learned PCIT which was stated to be not disposed

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

M/S WORLDPART LTD., ,- vs. DCIT, INTNL TAXN CIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.740 & 741/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Worldpart Limited, Income Tax, International Taxation 3, Julia House, Themistocles Dervis, Circle 2(2), Chennai. Nicosia 106600, Foreign Cyprus Represented By: M/S. K M Mohandass & Co., No. 36, 1St Street, Sait Colony, Egmore, Chennai 600 008. [Pan:Aaacw9185B] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.758, 759 & 760/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S. World Part Limited, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of C/O B S R & Company, 9Th Floor, Income Tax, International Taxation Business Plaza, Westin Hotel Circle 2(2), Chennai. Campus, 36/3-B Koregaon Park Annex, Mundhwa Road, Ghorpadi, Pune, Maharashtra 411 001. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit Assessee By Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 23.01.2024 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.02.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao:

section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(3) of the Act dated 25.02.2019. It is admitted position that facts as well as issues are quite identical in all the appeals. For the purpose of adjudication, facts from case records of assessment year 2013-14 are culled out in this order. 2. The sole issue as raised for the revenue for assessment years

M/S WORLDPART LTD., ,- vs. DCIT, INTNL TAXN CIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.740 & 741/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Worldpart Limited, Income Tax, International Taxation 3, Julia House, Themistocles Dervis, Circle 2(2), Chennai. Nicosia 106600, Foreign Cyprus Represented By: M/S. K M Mohandass & Co., No. 36, 1St Street, Sait Colony, Egmore, Chennai 600 008. [Pan:Aaacw9185B] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.758, 759 & 760/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S. World Part Limited, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of C/O B S R & Company, 9Th Floor, Income Tax, International Taxation Business Plaza, Westin Hotel Circle 2(2), Chennai. Campus, 36/3-B Koregaon Park Annex, Mundhwa Road, Ghorpadi, Pune, Maharashtra 411 001. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit Assessee By Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 23.01.2024 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.02.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao:

section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(3) of the Act dated 25.02.2019. It is admitted position that facts as well as issues are quite identical in all the appeals. For the purpose of adjudication, facts from case records of assessment year 2013-14 are culled out in this order. 2. The sole issue as raised for the revenue for assessment years

DCIT, INTNL TAXN CIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI vs. M/S WORLDPART LTD., , NICOSIA

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.740 & 741/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Worldpart Limited, Income Tax, International Taxation 3, Julia House, Themistocles Dervis, Circle 2(2), Chennai. Nicosia 106600, Foreign Cyprus Represented By: M/S. K M Mohandass & Co., No. 36, 1St Street, Sait Colony, Egmore, Chennai 600 008. [Pan:Aaacw9185B] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.758, 759 & 760/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S. World Part Limited, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of C/O B S R & Company, 9Th Floor, Income Tax, International Taxation Business Plaza, Westin Hotel Circle 2(2), Chennai. Campus, 36/3-B Koregaon Park Annex, Mundhwa Road, Ghorpadi, Pune, Maharashtra 411 001. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit Assessee By Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 23.01.2024 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.02.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao:

section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(3) of the Act dated 25.02.2019. It is admitted position that facts as well as issues are quite identical in all the appeals. For the purpose of adjudication, facts from case records of assessment year 2013-14 are culled out in this order. 2. The sole issue as raised for the revenue for assessment years