M/S MADRAS RACE CLUB,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENRAL CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Hon’Bleshri Manu Kumar Giriand Hon’Ble Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.688/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2007-2008 M/S.Madras Race Club, The Deputy Commissioner Of Race Course Road, Vs. Income Tax, Guindy Industrial Estate S.O., Central Circle 1(2) Guindy, Chennai Chennai 600 032. Pan: Aaacm 7640R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. V. Nandakumar, Irs, Cit.

reassessment proceedings, the AO had picked up two more issues. (1) the losses incurred by the Assessee is loss to which sec.74A applies and hence cannot be set

INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, LTU-2,, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1570 & 1571/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18 Indian Overseas Bank, The Principal Commissioner Of 763, Anna Salai, V. Income Tax, Anna Road, Chennai -4, Chennai – 600 002. Chennai -600 034. [Pan: Aaaci-1223-J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. C. Naresh, Ca : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.12.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha:

setting the gross gain against the gross loss, an amount Rs.28.72 crores being the net gain was credited to the foreign currency translation reserve account. Since the entire an amount of gain of Rs.59.55 crores was related to non-monetary items, the same was not offered for taxation, However, no evidences were submitted in support of the claim that

INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, LTU-2,, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1570 & 1571/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18 Indian Overseas Bank, The Principal Commissioner Of 763, Anna Salai, V. Income Tax, Anna Road, Chennai -4, Chennai – 600 002. Chennai -600 034. [Pan: Aaaci-1223-J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. C. Naresh, Ca : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.12.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha:

setting the gross gain against the gross loss, an amount Rs.28.72 crores being the net gain was credited to the foreign currency translation reserve account. Since the entire an amount of gain of Rs.59.55 crores was related to non-monetary items, the same was not offered for taxation, However, no evidences were submitted in support of the claim that

INTERNATIONAL SEAPORT DREDGING PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. PCIT - 1, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)

loss, it does not include unabsorbed depreciation or unabsorbed development rebate. We agree with the High Court." In view of the above decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Shri Subhulaxmi Mills Ltd, (supra) the assessee has claimed that the position is thus settled that the carry forward and set off of unabsorbed depreciation is not governed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT LTD, CHENNAI

In the result, the the appeals filed by the assessee is allowed and the assessee is allowed and the

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

loss of assessee. Therefore, according to Ld Therefore, according to Ld. AR, since the impugned notice(s) (s) u/s 148 has been issued by JAO and not by the NFAC, there is per been issued by JAO and not by the NFAC, there is per-se contravention of se contravention of the provisions of the Act, thus violat the provisions

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT LTD, CHENNAI

In the result, the the appeals filed by the assessee is allowed and the assessee is allowed and the

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

loss of assessee. Therefore, according to Ld Therefore, according to Ld. AR, since the impugned notice(s) (s) u/s 148 has been issued by JAO and not by the NFAC, there is per been issued by JAO and not by the NFAC, there is per-se contravention of se contravention of the provisions of the Act, thus violat the provisions

SOTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the the appeals filed by the assessee is allowed and the assessee is allowed and the

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

loss of assessee. Therefore, according to Ld Therefore, according to Ld. AR, since the impugned notice(s) (s) u/s 148 has been issued by JAO and not by the NFAC, there is per been issued by JAO and not by the NFAC, there is per-se contravention of se contravention of the provisions of the Act, thus violat the provisions

SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the the appeals filed by the assessee is allowed and the assessee is allowed and the

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

loss of assessee. Therefore, according to Ld Therefore, according to Ld. AR, since the impugned notice(s) (s) u/s 148 has been issued by JAO and not by the NFAC, there is per been issued by JAO and not by the NFAC, there is per-se contravention of se contravention of the provisions of the Act, thus violat the provisions

SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the the appeals filed by the assessee is allowed and the assessee is allowed and the

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

loss of assessee. Therefore, according to Ld Therefore, according to Ld. AR, since the impugned notice(s) (s) u/s 148 has been issued by JAO and not by the NFAC, there is per been issued by JAO and not by the NFAC, there is per-se contravention of se contravention of the provisions of the Act, thus violat the provisions

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE, MADURAI vs. M/S RAMCO SYSTEMS LIMITED, RAJAPALAYAM

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

loss,\nwhen carried forward, was eligible for set off only against business income\nand not against any other head of income. And that the carry forward was\nalso restricted to eight assessment years succeeding the assessment year\nin which the depreciation was first computed. Hence, the set off of\nunabsorbed depreciation for AY 2000-01 of Rs.1

FLSMIDTH PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. PCIT- 1, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1636/Chny/2024 िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Flsmidth Pvt. Ltd., The Principal Commissioner Of No.34, Egatoor, Kelambakkam Vs. Income Tax-1, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Chennai. Chennai – 603 103. [Pan: Aaacf 4997N]

set off of brought forward loss and unabsorbed depreciation to the extent of Rs. 7,49,50,348/- though there were no loss to be carried forward for further orders. iv. The assessee has shown Rs.1,08,26,88,201/- as unearned revenue which have been taxed as income as the assessee followed approval methods. 4. The Ld. PCIT after

ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. CAPGEMINI TECHNOLOGY SERVICES INDIA LIMITED (FORMERLY FUTURE SOFT PRIVATE LIMITED), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.420/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2006-07 V. The Acit, Capgemini Technology Corporate Circle-1(1), Services India Ltd., Block 3, ‘C’ Wing, 4Th Floor, Chennai. Capgemini Knowledge Park, Airoli Knowledge Park, Thane Belapur Road, Navi Mumbai- 400 708. [Pan: Aaacf 0482 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

loss. Filing a revised return under Section 139(5) of the IT Act and taking a contrary stand and/or claiming the exemption, which was specifically not claimed earlier while filing the original return of income is not permissible. By filing the revised return of income, the assessee cannot be permitted to substitute the original return of income filed under section

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

set aside and that of the Assessing officer restored. 2. In its appeal, besides challenging confirmation of quantum additions towards disallowance of provision for forex loss of ₹.31,18,92,950/- and disallowance of loss on forward contracts at ₹.41,31,84,699/-, the assessee has challenged reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income

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

set aside and that of the Assessing officer restored. 2. In its appeal, besides challenging confirmation of quantum additions towards disallowance of provision for forex loss of ₹.31,18,92,950/- and disallowance of loss on forward contracts at ₹.41,31,84,699/-, the assessee has challenged reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI vs. N RAMASAMY, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.Gआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A Nos.127 & 128/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2015-2016 & 2016-2017 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shri. N. Ramasamy, Income Tax, No.14/19, Saraswathi Street, Central Circle 2(2), Mahaingapuram, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 034. [Pan Adupr 8003P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Irs, Cit. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.12.2023. घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.12.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh:

set aside and remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer. This issue of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. 14. The next issue in this appeal of the Revenue is with regard to order of CIT(A) deleting the addition of attributable expenses such as boarding and lodging, commission paid, office building maintenance and travelling amounting

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI vs. N RAMASAMY, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.Gआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A Nos.127 & 128/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2015-2016 & 2016-2017 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shri. N. Ramasamy, Income Tax, No.14/19, Saraswathi Street, Central Circle 2(2), Mahaingapuram, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 034. [Pan Adupr 8003P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Irs, Cit. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.12.2023. घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.12.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh:

set aside and remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer. This issue of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. 14. The next issue in this appeal of the Revenue is with regard to order of CIT(A) deleting the addition of attributable expenses such as boarding and lodging, commission paid, office building maintenance and travelling amounting

BRAHMAR CELLULOSE PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.189/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 Brahmar Cellulose Products Private Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, Ameen Manors, S1 & S2, Income Tax, Second Floor, B Block, No. 138, Corporate Circle 1(2), Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai. Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aadcb3888M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : None ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06.08.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.08.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

reassessment proceedings initiated by issuing notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] and completing the 3 I.T.A. No.189/Chny/24 assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act is invalid, thus, ground Nos. 1 & 2 as raised by the assessee are dismissed. 5. Ground No. 3 raised by the assessee in challenging the action

KAG INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. PCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R.Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 1366/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 The Pcit (Central), M/S. Kag India Pvt Ltd., V. Chennai -2. No. 264/15-1, Sathiyanathan Complex, Velachery Road, East Tambaram, Chennai – 600 059. [Pan: Aadck-5381-Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. Y. Sridhar, Fca ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 21.11.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.12.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

reassessed has the effect of reducing the loss or converting such loss into income.” Having considered the facts, in this case, it is undisputed that assessee’s case would not fall in any of the sub clause (b) to (g) of sub-section (2) of Section 270A of the Act, and the only clause which remains is clause

THANARAJ SUMATHI,MAYILADUTHURAI vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KUMBAKONAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.:2031/Chny/2025 यनिाारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2019-20 Thanaraj Sumathi, Income Tax Officer, No.3/25, North Street, Vs. Ward-1 Moovalur, Kumbakonam. Mayiladuthurai – 609806. Tamil Nadu. [Pan:Knyps-1061-J] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थीकीओरसे/Appellant By : Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate. प्रत्यर्थीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anitha, Cit. सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.10.2025 घोर्णाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14.10.2025

loss of assessee. Therefore, for the purposes of making assessment or reassessment, the provisions of Section 144B of the Act would be applicable as no such manner for reassessment is separately provided in the Scheme. For issuing notice, the term "to the extent provided in Section 144B of the Act" is not relevant. The Scheme provides that the notice under