ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 8(1)-LTU-2, , CHENNAI vs. M/S. ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

68,77,636/- being 200% of the ITA Nos.554 & 561/Chny/2023 (AY 2018-19) M/s. Ashok Leyland Ltd. :: 3 :: aggregate expenditure u/s 35(2AB) of the Act. The AO in the course of assessment, had required the assessee to submit the Form 3CL issued by the DSIR, to which the assessee is noted to have submitted that, the DSIR

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 of the Act. The CIT(Appeals) allowed the claim of the assessee on the ground that disallowance made under Section 40A(7

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 of the Act. The CIT(Appeals) allowed the claim of the assessee on the ground that disallowance made under Section 40A(7

PRODAPT SOLUTIONS PVT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1015/Mds/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 M/S. Prodapt Solutions Pvt Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of No.9, Seshadri Road, V. Income Tax, Alwarpet, Corporate Circle –5(2), Chennai – 600 018. Chennai – 600 034. Pan : Aaacz0985G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Vivekanandan, Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 24.10.2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.01.2017

10A of the Act. The sole crux of the issue lies on the date on which the production is actually commenced. For claiming exemption, the Ld. AR drew our attention to the paper book, where the assessee’s company name was changed from earlier Zeetron Solutions Pvt. Ltd to present Prodapt Solutions Pvt. Ltd on 22.05.2000, and approval from Software

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

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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NUMGAMBAKKAM vs. JSR INFRA DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

10A, East Cross Road, Gandhi Nagar, Vellore-632 006. [PAN: AADCJ 4440 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by Ms.Swapna Nanu Ambatt, CIT for Mr. Nilay Baran Som, CIT : ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent by Mr. Venkat Raman CA : सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date of Hearing 15.01.2025 : घोषणाक"तारीख /Date of Pronouncement 28.02.2025 आदेश

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

68,14,24,514: 6.1. The CIT(A) is not justified in merely following the CIT(A) NFAC's preceding year's order i.e. for AY 2018-19 and erred in directing AO to adopt an incorrect margin of 6.09% instead of the margin of 11.51% as claimed by the appellant for the eligible unit. 6.2. The CIT(A)-NFAC

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

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

ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT NON CORP CIRCLE 8(1) LTU - II, CHENNAI

Bench: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member), SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nआयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1402/Chny/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2019-20\nM/s. Ashok Leyland Ltd.,\nNo.1, Sardar Patel Road,\nGuindy, Chennai-600 032.\n[PAN: AAAСА 4651 L]\n(अपीलार्थी/Appellant)\nv.\nThe DCIT,\nNCC-8(1),\nLTU-II,\nChennai.\n(प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)\nआयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1663/Chny/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2019-20\nThe DCIT,\nNCC-8,\nChennai.\n(अपीलार्थी/Appellant)\nv.\nM/s. Ashok Leyl

68,14,24,514:\n6. 1. The CIT(A) is not justified in merely following the CIT(A) NFAC's\npreceding year's order i.e. for AY 2018-19 and erred in directing AO to\nadopt an incorrect margin of 6.09% instead of the margin of 11.51% as\nclaimed by the appellant for the eligible unit

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

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

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

SREE VENKATESWARA EDUCATIONAL TRUST,KRISHNAGIRI vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD,, SALEM

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1338 & 1339/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sree Venkateswara Educational Trust, The Income Tax Officer, 655/20 & 600, Jagilkathirampatti Vs. Exemptions Ward, Village & Post, Pochampalli Taluk, Salem. Krishnagiri District 635 206. [Pan:Aaits5220J ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 10.12.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.12.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Salem, Both Dated 25.03.2019 For The Assessment Year 2013-14 Passed Against The Order Under Section 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] As Well As Under Section 154 Of The Act. Against The Order Under Section 154 Of The Act, The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds: “1. The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Is Not Justified In Holding That Non-Allowance Of Expenditure Incurred To Earn Gross Receipts From A College & School Involves A Complex & Debatable Legal Issue.

68 ITD 95 Mum, 135 ITR 485 Mad, 56 ITD 37 Del Trib, 125 ITR 531 MP, 162 ITR 612 Guj). 5. Application made for charitable purposes out of income earned alone is allowable, only if a Trust is registered under section 12AA and not the expenses incurred for purpose of earning income. 6. Observation of the Commissioner (Appeals