INDIA PISTONS LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2339 & 2340/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2010-11 & 2011-12. M/S. India Pistons Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Huzur Gardens, Income Tax, Sembium, Corporate Circle 2(2) Chennai 600 011. Chennai.

68,73,550/-. While doing so, the Assessing Officer made disallowance of "2,02,62,946/- u/s.14A of the Act, additional depreciation of "41,54,090/- and export promotion expenditure of "21,00,000/-. Being aggrieved, an appeal was preferred before ld. CIT(A), 5. who vide impugned order had partly allowed the appeal by setting aside the issue

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI vs. INDIA PISTON LTD., CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2339 & 2340/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2010-11 & 2011-12. M/S. India Pistons Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Huzur Gardens, Income Tax, Sembium, Corporate Circle 2(2) Chennai 600 011. Chennai.

68,73,550/-. While doing so, the Assessing Officer made disallowance of "2,02,62,946/- u/s.14A of the Act, additional depreciation of "41,54,090/- and export promotion expenditure of "21,00,000/-. Being aggrieved, an appeal was preferred before ld. CIT(A), 5. who vide impugned order had partly allowed the appeal by setting aside the issue

INDIA PISTONS LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2339 & 2340/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2010-11 & 2011-12. M/S. India Pistons Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Huzur Gardens, Income Tax, Sembium, Corporate Circle 2(2) Chennai 600 011. Chennai.

68,73,550/-. While doing so, the Assessing Officer made disallowance of "2,02,62,946/- u/s.14A of the Act, additional depreciation of "41,54,090/- and export promotion expenditure of "21,00,000/-. Being aggrieved, an appeal was preferred before ld. CIT(A), 5. who vide impugned order had partly allowed the appeal by setting aside the issue

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI vs. INDIA PISTON LTD., CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2339 & 2340/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2010-11 & 2011-12. M/S. India Pistons Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Huzur Gardens, Income Tax, Sembium, Corporate Circle 2(2) Chennai 600 011. Chennai.

68,73,550/-. While doing so, the Assessing Officer made disallowance of "2,02,62,946/- u/s.14A of the Act, additional depreciation of "41,54,090/- and export promotion expenditure of "21,00,000/-. Being aggrieved, an appeal was preferred before ld. CIT(A), 5. who vide impugned order had partly allowed the appeal by setting aside the issue

S.P.MANI AND MOHAN DAIRY,ERODE vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1, ERODE

In the result, both the appeals filed by assessee and revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar

32(1)(iia) of the 1961 Act, vide appellate order dated 14.02.2018 passed by learned CIT(A). ITA Nos.1321 & 1403/Chny/2018 :- 15 -: 8.5 The learned CIT(A) directed AO to allow interest expenses claimed by the assessee with respect to term loans borrowed for chilling plant located at Navalpatty Village in accordance with provisions of Section 36(1

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

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

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P.George

68,564 : 2,79,910 -------------- -------------- Assessed Book Profit : 9,66,375 -------------- 7. Share of loss from the two firms were debited by the assessee in its Profit & Loss A/c and the profit shown in the P&L A/c was after these debits. What can be added to the profit as shown in the Profit & Loss A/c and what

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

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

ACIT, LTU-2,, CHENNAI vs. ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

iia) of the Act on the same. The Ld. CIT, DR appearing before us are was unable to controvert the same. We therefore do not see any reason to interfere with the order of Ld. CIT(A) in this regard and accordingly dismiss this ground of the Revenue.” 5.2 The Ld. CIT, DR was not able to distinguish the above

M/S. CHENNAI PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, both the assessee’s and the Revenue’s appeals are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1858/Mds/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 Chennai Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Asst. Commissioner Of Income Refinery House, Manali, Vs. Tax, Chennai – 600 068 Company Circle-I(3), [Pan: Aaacm 4392C] Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

68,52,209 Total provisions made in the books: (I+II+III) 2,31,65,656 That being so, how, we wonder, would the same be deductible for the current year? The allowability, i.e., assuming it to be deductible u/s. 37(1), would only be when the costs, identified and confirmed as dead costs, were provided for in the books

T vs. MOTOR COMPANY LTD.,CHENNAIVS.ACIT, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.672/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S.Tvs Motor Co. Ltd., V. The Acit, No.29, Haddows Road, Corporate Circle – 3(1), Chennai-600 006. Chennai. [Pan: Aaacs 7032 B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

68,031 Amount spent in excess as service provider Amount spent in excess as service provider 12,85,95,729 Mark-up @ 6.12% 78,70,058 The amount by which the assessee company should have been The amount by which the assessee company should have been 13,64,65,787 reimbursed by A.E, and for which the reimbursed

ARUNA ALLOY STEELS PRIVATES LIMITED,MADURAI vs. ACIT,CORP. CIRCLE-1, MADURAI, MADURAIQ

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

68 of the Act, on the ground that for the purpose of claiming deduction, the assessee did not file necessary certificate in Form 10CCB of the Act along with the return of income, which was filed on 18.7.2005 declaring the income as Rs.1,02,11,036/-. 3. As against the disallowance of the claim, the assessee filed an appeal before

ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED,,CHENNAI vs. ACIT,, CHENNAI

iia) of the Act on the same.\nThe Ld. CIT, DR appearing before us are was unable to controvert the\nsame. We therefore do not see any reason to interfere with the order of\nLd. CIT(A) in this regard and accordingly dismiss this ground of the\nRevenue.\"\n5.2\nThe Ld. CIT, DR was not able to distinguish the above

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. ASHOK LEYLAND LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2825, 2826 & 2827/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-2008. The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Ashok Leyland Ltd, Income Tax, Vs. No.1, Sardar Patel Road, Large Taxpayer Unit -Ii, Guindy, Chennai 600 101. Chennai 600 032. [Pan Aaaca 4651L] (Department) (Assessee )

32,297/-/ 32.1 As discussed in ITA No.2836/Mds/2014 in assessment year 2005-2006 in para 9.3, this ground of the assessee is allowed. 33. The eighth ground raised by the assessee is with regard to restriction to 100% of the weighted deduction on R & D expenditure of "2,73,24,500/-. ITA Nos.2825 to 2827, 2834 :- 56 -: to 2839/Mds/2014

ASHOK LEYLAND LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2825, 2826 & 2827/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-2008. The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Ashok Leyland Ltd, Income Tax, Vs. No.1, Sardar Patel Road, Large Taxpayer Unit -Ii, Guindy, Chennai 600 101. Chennai 600 032. [Pan Aaaca 4651L] (Department) (Assessee )

32,297/-/ 32.1 As discussed in ITA No.2836/Mds/2014 in assessment year 2005-2006 in para 9.3, this ground of the assessee is allowed. 33. The eighth ground raised by the assessee is with regard to restriction to 100% of the weighted deduction on R & D expenditure of "2,73,24,500/-. ITA Nos.2825 to 2827, 2834 :- 56 -: to 2839/Mds/2014

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. ASHOK LEYLAND LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2825, 2826 & 2827/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-2008. The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Ashok Leyland Ltd, Income Tax, Vs. No.1, Sardar Patel Road, Large Taxpayer Unit -Ii, Guindy, Chennai 600 101. Chennai 600 032. [Pan Aaaca 4651L] (Department) (Assessee )

32,297/-/ 32.1 As discussed in ITA No.2836/Mds/2014 in assessment year 2005-2006 in para 9.3, this ground of the assessee is allowed. 33. The eighth ground raised by the assessee is with regard to restriction to 100% of the weighted deduction on R & D expenditure of "2,73,24,500/-. ITA Nos.2825 to 2827, 2834 :- 56 -: to 2839/Mds/2014

SUNDARAM FASTENERS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(2), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3236/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 V. M/S.Sundram Fasteners Ltd., The Dcit, 98-A, 7Th Floor, Corporate Circle-6(2), Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Chennai. Mylapore, Chennai-600 004. [Pan: Aaacs 8779 D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

iia) of sub-section (1) in respect of the expenditure referred to in clause (1) which is incurred after the 31st day of March, 2008. 9. The operative phrase here is "on in-house research and development facility as approved by the prescribed authority .......", the word "facility" has been hereby show us to emphasis the point that

ASHOK AMRITRAJ,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1244/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2014-15 Shri Ashok Amritraj, The Income Tax Officer, Flat No. 10, Chesney Lane, Vs. International Taxation 1(1), Ethiraj Salai, Egmore, Chennai 34. Chennai 600 008. [Pan: Aabpa2975R] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri K. Balasubramanian, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Mohd. Mustafa, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 29.01.2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 20.02.2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

32,56,282. Against this, the assessee has claimed an amount of ₹.43,25,232/- under section 57 of the Act as expenses incurred in recovering the fixed deposit and interest, resulting a loss of ₹.10,68,950/-. After examining the break-up of expenses furnished by the assessee, the Assessing Officer held that the expenditure is attributable primarily

DCIT , CHENNAI vs. M/S SINDHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY ( MADRAS ), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for all the assessment

Bench: Shri. V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri. Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

iia). 2.7 The CIT(A) erred in holding that the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Queens Elizabeth Society Vs CIT 372 ITR 699 is squarely applicable to the facts of the case and theory of capitation fee referred cannot be equated with the "Corpus donations" in the case of assessee. Since the corpus donations