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

In the result appeals filed in ITA Nos

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

68,84,120. This return claimed an deduction of Rs.1,31,84,425 u/s.80IA(4). But, since the original return was not filed in time, the claim of deduction claimed u/s.80IA(4) was denied because of the provisions of section 80AC. As per the provisions of Section 80AC, no deduction u/s.80IA shall be levied unless the assessee furnishes

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

In the result appeals filed in ITA Nos

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

68,84,120. This return claimed an deduction of Rs.1,31,84,425 u/s.80IA(4). But, since the original return was not filed in time, the claim of deduction claimed u/s.80IA(4) was denied because of the provisions of section 80AC. As per the provisions of Section 80AC, no deduction u/s.80IA shall be levied unless the assessee furnishes

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

In the result appeals filed in ITA Nos

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

68,84,120. This return claimed an deduction of Rs.1,31,84,425 u/s.80IA(4). But, since the original return was not filed in time, the claim of deduction claimed u/s.80IA(4) was denied because of the provisions of section 80AC. As per the provisions of Section 80AC, no deduction u/s.80IA shall be levied unless the assessee furnishes

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

In the result appeals filed in ITA Nos

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

68,84,120. This return claimed an deduction of Rs.1,31,84,425 u/s.80IA(4). But, since the original return was not filed in time, the claim of deduction claimed u/s.80IA(4) was denied because of the provisions of section 80AC. As per the provisions of Section 80AC, no deduction u/s.80IA shall be levied unless the assessee furnishes

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. AJUBA SOLUTIONS INDIA P LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 792 & 793/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Ajuba Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, V. 12-02, Tidel Park, Corporate Circle -1(1), 4, Canal Bank Road, Taramani, Chennai - 600 034. Chennai - 600 113. Pan : Aacca 8448 D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

68,379/-. Similarly, for assessment year 2010-11, a sum of `20,13,939/- was claimed as income derived from undertaking for the purpose of exemption under Section 10A

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. AJUBA SOLUTIONS INDIA P LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 792 & 793/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Ajuba Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, V. 12-02, Tidel Park, Corporate Circle -1(1), 4, Canal Bank Road, Taramani, Chennai - 600 034. Chennai - 600 113. Pan : Aacca 8448 D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

68,379/-. Similarly, for assessment year 2010-11, a sum of `20,13,939/- was claimed as income derived from undertaking for the purpose of exemption under Section 10A

GDA TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for ays 2010-11 & 2011-12 are

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

section 10A (1) of the IT Act, deduction is to be :-3-: I.T.A. N0s. 1080 & 1801/Mds/2016 allowed from the total income after setting off of brought forward losses. The CBDT vide circular dated 16.07.2013 (File No. 279/Misc./M-116/2012-IT) has clarified this procedure. This resulted in excess allowance of deduction u/s. 10A as given under: Profit before deduction u/s. 10A

GDA TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for ays 2010-11 & 2011-12 are

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

section 10A (1) of the IT Act, deduction is to be :-3-: I.T.A. N0s. 1080 & 1801/Mds/2016 allowed from the total income after setting off of brought forward losses. The CBDT vide circular dated 16.07.2013 (File No. 279/Misc./M-116/2012-IT) has clarified this procedure. This resulted in excess allowance of deduction u/s. 10A as given under: Profit before deduction u/s. 10A

ITO, WARD-2,, PERAMBALUR vs. SHRI S.B. RAJA,, ARIYALUR

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3189/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 Income Tax Officer, Shri. S.B. Raja, Ward -2, V. No. 14, North Street, Perambalur. Soorkuzhi, Andimadam, Udayarpalayam Tulak, Ariyalur 621 801. [Pan: Anzpr 3754L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Dr. I.P. Roopa, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 05.01.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.01.2022

10A was allowed in excess, was hased on nothing but a change of opinion on same facts and circumstances which were already in his knowledge even during origins! assessment proceedings - Held, yes [Para 13] [ :-9-: ITA No: 3189/Chny/2019 Case 4 (2017J85taxmann.com 131 (Madras) HIGH COURT OF MADRAS Gay Travels (P.) Ltd. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Company Circle

INVESTOR FINANCIAL EDUCATION ACADEMY,CHENNAI vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) - 4, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the substantial questions of law framed for consideration, are answered in favour of the assessee

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3006 & 3007/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2018-19 M/S. Investor Financial Education Vs. The Income Tax Officer Academy, 5A, 5Th Floor, Kences Tower, (Exemption) - 4, No. 1, Ramakrishnan Street, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 017. [Pan:Aacci5911R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M. Rajan, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 08.02.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12.04.2022 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 (Exemptions), Chennai Both Dated 28.09.2018 Passed Under Section 80G(5)(Vi) As Well As 12Aa Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Originally Filed The Application In Form No. 10A For Registration Under Section 12Aa Of The 2

10A filed by the assessee on 02.03.2017 towards grant of registration under section 12AA of the Act, the assessee preferred further appeal before the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court and the Hon’ble High Court, vide its order in T.C.A. No. 900 of 2018 dated 04.09.2020, allowed the appeal of the assessee and therefore, the ld. Counsel prayed that

INVESTOR FINANCIAL EDUCATION ACADEMY,CHENNAI vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) - 4, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the substantial questions of law framed for consideration, are answered in favour of the assessee

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3006 & 3007/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2018-19 M/S. Investor Financial Education Vs. The Income Tax Officer Academy, 5A, 5Th Floor, Kences Tower, (Exemption) - 4, No. 1, Ramakrishnan Street, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 017. [Pan:Aacci5911R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M. Rajan, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 08.02.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12.04.2022 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 (Exemptions), Chennai Both Dated 28.09.2018 Passed Under Section 80G(5)(Vi) As Well As 12Aa Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Originally Filed The Application In Form No. 10A For Registration Under Section 12Aa Of The 2

10A filed by the assessee on 02.03.2017 towards grant of registration under section 12AA of the Act, the assessee preferred further appeal before the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court and the Hon’ble High Court, vide its order in T.C.A. No. 900 of 2018 dated 04.09.2020, allowed the appeal of the assessee and therefore, the ld. Counsel prayed that

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. POLARIS FINANCIAL TECHNOLOGY LTD., CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

68,777/- under Section 14A of the Act being the proportionate expenditure for earning the exempted income. The main contention of the assessee before this Tribunal is that no expenditure was incurred for earning dividend income, therefore, there cannot be any disallowance. 7. We have carefully gone through the provisions of Section 14A of the Act and Rule

M/S. STANADYNE INDIA PVT. LTD.,TIRUVALLUR vs. ACIT, CC-IV(4), CHENNA

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

section 10A of the Act is a provision for deduction,\nthe stage of deduction would be while computing the gross total\nincome of the eligible undertaking under Chapter-IV of the Act not at\nthe stage of computation of total income under Chapter-VI. In view of\nthe above, the A.O is directed to allow the claim of deduction

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. RENAULT NISSAN TECHNOLOGY & BUSINESS CENTRE INDAI PRIVATE LIMITED, KANCHEEPURAM

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

68 taxmann.com 233], wherein it was held that mere incurring of expenditure in foreign currency would not tantamount to automatic reduction of such expenditure from export turnover while computing deduction under section 1OA of the Act. As mentioned earlier, the Appellant rendered services out of its SEZ Unit located in Mahindra World City, Kancheepuram — Chennai, India. Therefore, the expenditure

RENAULT NISSAN TECHNOLOGY & BUSINESS CENTRE INDAI PRIVATE LIMITED,KANCHEEPURAM vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

68 taxmann.com 233], wherein it was held that mere incurring of expenditure in foreign currency would not tantamount to automatic reduction of such expenditure from export turnover while computing deduction under section 1OA of the Act. As mentioned earlier, the Appellant rendered services out of its SEZ Unit located in Mahindra World City, Kancheepuram — Chennai, India. Therefore, the expenditure

GOOD SHEPHERD HOLISTIC EDUCATIONAL TRUST,TRICHY vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), TRICHY

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

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:3105/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2018-19 Good Shepherd Holistic The Income Tax Officer, Educational Trust, Vs. Ward 1(1), Plot No.452, Usman Ali Nagar, Trichy. Kk Nagar, Trichy – 620 021. Pan: Aactg 1957E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri N. Arjun Raj, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Sita Krishnamoorthy, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10.06.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.06.2025

68,612/- submitted by the assessee, it is noticed that it consists of Charity of Rs. 64,112/- and Donation of Rs. 4.500/-. Further, on perusal of ledger account of charity, it is noticed that the assessee has claimed payments in this regard on various dates and has submitted documents in respect of payments of Rs.12,112/-, which

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE LTU-1, CHENNAI, NUNGAMBAKKAM vs. ORIENT GREEN POWER COMPANY LIMITED , CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

68,141/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO made reference to TPO for determining arm’s length price of specified domestic transaction. The TPO, Chennai passed an order u/s.92CA(3) on 30.10.2017 disallowing Rs.4,04,49,600/-. Subsequently, the AO has completed the assessment u/s.143(3) r.w.s 92CA r.w.s 144C(1) on 29.01.2018 by making following additions

SRI VENKATESWARA ORPHANAGE KADUVELI,THANJAVUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD,, TRICHY

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

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

10A on 16.04.2020 which was subsequently rejected by the ld.CIT(E) vide order dated 06.11.2020 stating that the assessee failed to respond to the notices served. However, subsequent application dated 27.02.2022 was allowed and registration was granted for Assessment Year 2022-23 to 2026-27. The assessee further contended that the provision inserting Section 12(ac) of the Finance