BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

26 results for “reassessment u/s 147”+ Section 10Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai85Delhi63Bangalore35Hyderabad27Chennai26Jaipur23Kolkata22Lucknow11Pune10Indore7Cochin6Cuttack5Ahmedabad4Calcutta2Varanasi2Karnataka1Jodhpur1Raipur1Surat1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)40Section 10A38Section 14736Section 4024Section 80I22Deduction21Addition to Income19Section 153A16Section 139

FICHTNER CONSULTING ENGINEERS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT (OSD) CORPORATE CIRCLE 2, CHENNAI

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

ITA 959/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 959/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Fichtner Consulting Assistant Commissioner Of Engineers (India) Pvt Ltd., V. Income Tax (Osd), No. 165, 9Th Floor, Menon Corporate Circle -2, Eternity St. Mary’S Road, Chennai – 600 034. Alwarpet, Chennai – 600 018. [Pan: Aaacf-5620-Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. N. Arjun Raj, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12.07.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.10.2023

For Appellant: Shri. N. Arjun Raj, CAFor Respondent: Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)Section 147

147 of the Act, for the reasons recorded as per which income chargeable to tax has been escaped assessment on account of ineligible claim of exemption u/s. 10B of the Act, and accordingly, notice u/s. 148 of the Act dated 23.03.2016, was issued and duly served on the assessee. In response to notice u/s. 148 of the Act dated

Showing 1–20 of 26 · Page 1 of 2

12
Reopening of Assessment12
Disallowance12
Reassessment11

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. MASCON GLOBAL LTD., CHENNAI

Accordingly, the ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1139/CHNY/2008[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jun 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Srinivasa Rao, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

147 of the Act for the assessment years 2003-04, 2004-05 [second reassessment order] and 2009-10 were also initiated and against the appellate orders, the Revenue preferred further appeals before the Tribunal. Now, we shall take Revenue appeals, in which assessment order under section 143(3) of the Act was passed. 8 I.T.A. No.1139/Chny/08, 1135/Chny/10 & C.O. No. 69/Chny/17

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR M/S. MASCON GLOBAL LTD. (IN LIQUIDATION), CHENNAI

Accordingly, the ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 632/CHNY/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jun 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Srinivasa Rao, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

147 of the Act for the assessment years 2003-04, 2004-05 [second reassessment order] and 2009-10 were also initiated and against the appellate orders, the Revenue preferred further appeals before the Tribunal. Now, we shall take Revenue appeals, in which assessment order under section 143(3) of the Act was passed. 8 I.T.A. No.1139/Chny/08, 1135/Chny/10 & C.O. No. 69/Chny/17

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR M/S. MASCON GLOBAL LTD. (IN LIQUIDATION), CHENNAI

Accordingly, the ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 633/CHNY/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jun 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Srinivasa Rao, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

147 of the Act for the assessment years 2003-04, 2004-05 [second reassessment order] and 2009-10 were also initiated and against the appellate orders, the Revenue preferred further appeals before the Tribunal. Now, we shall take Revenue appeals, in which assessment order under section 143(3) of the Act was passed. 8 I.T.A. No.1139/Chny/08, 1135/Chny/10 & C.O. No. 69/Chny/17

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR M/S. MASCON GLOBAL LTD. (IN LIQUIDATION), CHENNAI

Accordingly, the ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 634/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Srinivasa Rao, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

147 of the Act for the assessment years 2003-04, 2004-05 [second reassessment order] and 2009-10 were also initiated and against the appellate orders, the Revenue preferred further appeals before the Tribunal. Now, we shall take Revenue appeals, in which assessment order under section 143(3) of the Act was passed. 8 I.T.A. No.1139/Chny/08, 1135/Chny/10 & C.O. No. 69/Chny/17

ST. JOHN FREIGHT SYSTEMS LTD.,TUTICORIN vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, MADURAI

In the result appeals filed in ITA Nos

ITA 188/CHNY/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Apr 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Arun Khodpia, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.188 & 2898 To 2900/Chny/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08 To 2010-11 V. M/S.St.John Freight – The Dy. Commissioner- Systems Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, C-98, Sipcot Complex, Central Circle-1, Harbour Express Road, Madurai. Tuticorin-628 008. [Pan:Aaacs 4697 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, Adv. ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.03.2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2023

For Appellant: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 80ASection 80I

reassessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147, were as under: - 1. As per provisions of section 80AC, no deduction u/s 80IA shall be allowed unless the assessee furnishes a Return of Income for such Assessment Year on or before the due date of filing of return u/s 139 (1) of the Act. 2. The assessee has failed to enclose the certificate

ST. JOHN FREIGHT SYSTEMS LTD.,TUTICORIN vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, MADURAI

In the result appeals filed in ITA Nos

ITA 2898/CHNY/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Apr 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Arun Khodpia, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.188 & 2898 To 2900/Chny/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08 To 2010-11 V. M/S.St.John Freight – The Dy. Commissioner- Systems Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, C-98, Sipcot Complex, Central Circle-1, Harbour Express Road, Madurai. Tuticorin-628 008. [Pan:Aaacs 4697 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, Adv. ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.03.2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2023

For Appellant: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 80ASection 80I

reassessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147, were as under: - 1. As per provisions of section 80AC, no deduction u/s 80IA shall be allowed unless the assessee furnishes a Return of Income for such Assessment Year on or before the due date of filing of return u/s 139 (1) of the Act. 2. The assessee has failed to enclose the certificate

ST. JOHN FREIGHT SYSTEMS LTD.,TUTICORIN vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, MADURAI

In the result appeals filed in ITA Nos

ITA 2899/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Arun Khodpia, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.188 & 2898 To 2900/Chny/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08 To 2010-11 V. M/S.St.John Freight – The Dy. Commissioner- Systems Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, C-98, Sipcot Complex, Central Circle-1, Harbour Express Road, Madurai. Tuticorin-628 008. [Pan:Aaacs 4697 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, Adv. ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.03.2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2023

For Appellant: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 80ASection 80I

reassessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147, were as under: - 1. As per provisions of section 80AC, no deduction u/s 80IA shall be allowed unless the assessee furnishes a Return of Income for such Assessment Year on or before the due date of filing of return u/s 139 (1) of the Act. 2. The assessee has failed to enclose the certificate

ST. JOHN FREIGHT SYSTEMS PVT. LTD.,,TUTUCORIN vs. DCIT, CC-1,, MADURAI

In the result appeals filed in ITA Nos

ITA 2900/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Arun Khodpia, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.188 & 2898 To 2900/Chny/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08 To 2010-11 V. M/S.St.John Freight – The Dy. Commissioner- Systems Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, C-98, Sipcot Complex, Central Circle-1, Harbour Express Road, Madurai. Tuticorin-628 008. [Pan:Aaacs 4697 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, Adv. ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.03.2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2023

For Appellant: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 80ASection 80I

reassessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147, were as under: - 1. As per provisions of section 80AC, no deduction u/s 80IA shall be allowed unless the assessee furnishes a Return of Income for such Assessment Year on or before the due date of filing of return u/s 139 (1) of the Act. 2. The assessee has failed to enclose the certificate

EH BUILDING CONSULTANCY PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORP CIR 2(2), CHENNAI

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

ITA 578/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147

147 of the Act are dismissed. 6. On the second issue of deduction u/s. 10A of the Act claimed by the assessee, the Ld. CIT(A) has captured the factual development on the issue and given his findings which are reproduced from pare 5.3 of the impugned order: “5.3 The matter is considered. The factual developments on thee issue

DCIT, DINDIGUL vs. BNAZRUM AGRO EXPORTS (P) LTD., DINDIGUL

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes and the cross-objection of the assessee is dismissed as not pressed

ITA 485/CHNY/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.485/Mds/2015 & C.O. No.41/Mds/2015 (In I.T.A. No.485/Mds/2015) "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Bnazrum Agro Exports (P) Ltd., Income Tax, V. Sirumalai Road, Erandalaparai, Circle – I, Dindigul. Rettiarpatti Post, Dindigul – 624 006. Pan : Aabcb 2418 B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respondent & Cross-Objector)

For Appellant: Shri R. Duraipandian, JCITFor Respondent: Shri R. Kumar, Advocate
Section 10BSection 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

u/s 139(1) of the Act. (2) The CIT(A) has not given its reason why and what basis it is condoning the delay of filing the return of income by the respondent. (3) The CIT(A) erred in relying on case laws of Chennai and Hyderabad Tribunals which were clearly distinguished on facts

ACIT, CC - 1 (2),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. CDM SMITH GLOBAL SERVICES PVT. LTD.,, CHENNAI

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

ITA 2620/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, JCITFor Respondent: Shri Harpreet Singh Ajmani
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149

reassessment proceeding light of the decision of the Hon'b1e Jurisdictional High Court of Madras, in the case of M/s Sword G1oba1 India (P.) Ltd. VS ACTT, Co. Circle VI(4) in Writ Petition No. 1738 of 2O15 dated July 15, 2015, held that " Under section 147 cases having wilfully made false or untrue statements at the time of original

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

ITA 1742/CHNY/2024[2011- 12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2024

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

For Appellant: Ms.Komali Krishna, CIT
Section 147Section 250Section 80Section 80C(2)(a)Section 80I

147 is dismissed. 4.0 The next issue raised vide ground of appeal number 2 is regarding the action of Ld CIT (A) in confirming the set off of loss u/s 80 IC in pant nagar unit of Rs 2.12 crores of AY 2010-11 with the income of the said init in AY 2011-12 . The Ld counsel

ECO TECH SOFTWARE PVT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3094/CHNY/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Mar 2015AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godaraआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3094/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2001-02 M/S Eco Tech Software Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of G-42, First Avenue, V. Income Tax, Anna Nagar East, Company Circle Ii(3), Chennai - 600 102. Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Aaace 6684 R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. Raghunathan, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri P. Radhakrishnan, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 37(1)

section 37(1) of the Act and termed the said - - 3 I.T.A. No. 3094/Mds/2014 outgo as ‘wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business’. The Assessing Officer in reassessment framed on 12.12.2008 observed that the assessee sold the same software in domestic and export sales, it had debited the impugned expenses written off in the Profit & Loss account

FORD MOTOR PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1519/CHNY/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2017AY 2007-08

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

Section 10ASection 143(3)

section 10A and B. The assessee has claimed the set of losses of Rs.64,38,865/- from the total income instead of carrying forward of the losses holding the unit eligible for deduction u/s.10AA, as a separate independent unit. Therefore the AO completed the reassessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 re-computing the total income and allowed the loss before

PENTA MEDIA GRAPHICS LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2003-04 is allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal for AY 2002-03 is dismissed

ITA 1403/CHNY/2015[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1403 & 1404/Chny/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2002-03 & 2003-04 M/S. Penta Media Graphics Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of ‘Taurus’, No. 25, First Main Road, Income Tax, Media Circle I, Room No. 311, 3Rd Floor, New Block, United India Colony Kodambakkam, Chennai 600 024. 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aaacp1647B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Sree Lakshmi Valli, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Guru Bashyam, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06.07.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.07.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 14, Chennai Dated 27.03.2015 & 31.03.2015 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2002-03 & 2003-04 Respectively.

For Appellant: Sree Lakshmi Valli, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Guru Bashyam, CIT-DR
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 263

reassessment dated 3.7.2008. Sec.263 provides for a revision of an order of assessment if the CIT is of the opinion that the said order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. In the instant case in so far as the opinion has been formed by the Assessing Authority and not the Commissioner of Income Tax, jurisdiction u/s

PENTA MEDIA GRAPHICS LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2003-04 is allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal for AY 2002-03 is dismissed

ITA 1404/CHNY/2015[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2022AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1403 & 1404/Chny/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2002-03 & 2003-04 M/S. Penta Media Graphics Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of ‘Taurus’, No. 25, First Main Road, Income Tax, Media Circle I, Room No. 311, 3Rd Floor, New Block, United India Colony Kodambakkam, Chennai 600 024. 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aaacp1647B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Sree Lakshmi Valli, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Guru Bashyam, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06.07.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.07.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 14, Chennai Dated 27.03.2015 & 31.03.2015 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2002-03 & 2003-04 Respectively.

For Appellant: Sree Lakshmi Valli, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Guru Bashyam, CIT-DR
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 263

reassessment dated 3.7.2008. Sec.263 provides for a revision of an order of assessment if the CIT is of the opinion that the said order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. In the instant case in so far as the opinion has been formed by the Assessing Authority and not the Commissioner of Income Tax, jurisdiction u/s

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SUTHERLAND GLOBAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 242/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Rotti (CA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abani Kanta Nayak (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 40

147 on 28.02.2014. Though the assessee has raised multiple grounds of appeal, however, the only ground urged before us is ground no.2 which read as under: - 2. That the Learned CIT(A) has erred in upholding the disallowance of Business Development Commission and arriving at the conclusion that payments made by the Appellant to US Parent Company towards Business development

SUTHERLAND GLOBAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 2003/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Rotti (CA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abani Kanta Nayak (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 40

147 on 28.02.2014. Though the assessee has raised multiple grounds of appeal, however, the only ground urged before us is ground no.2 which read as under: - 2. That the Learned CIT(A) has erred in upholding the disallowance of Business Development Commission and arriving at the conclusion that payments made by the Appellant to US Parent Company towards Business development

SUTHERLAND GLOBAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 2004/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Rotti (CA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abani Kanta Nayak (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 40

147 on 28.02.2014. Though the assessee has raised multiple grounds of appeal, however, the only ground urged before us is ground no.2 which read as under: - 2. That the Learned CIT(A) has erred in upholding the disallowance of Business Development Commission and arriving at the conclusion that payments made by the Appellant to US Parent Company towards Business development