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

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SICAL LOGISTICS LTD., CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

801A and claimed correctly. However, keeping in view of the objections raised by the Assessing Officer the claim of deduction u/s 8OlA on the ground that the appellant has shown magnified profits by making some computation errors by not allocating the common expenditure while working out the profits of the undertaking. Such expenditure which was not considered

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SICAL LOGISTICS LTD., CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

801A and claimed correctly. However, keeping in view of the objections raised by the Assessing Officer the claim of deduction u/s 8OlA on the ground that the appellant has shown magnified profits by making some computation errors by not allocating the common expenditure while working out the profits of the undertaking. Such expenditure which was not considered

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SICAL LOGISTICS LTD., CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

801A and claimed correctly. However, keeping in view of the objections raised by the Assessing Officer the claim of deduction u/s 8OlA on the ground that the appellant has shown magnified profits by making some computation errors by not allocating the common expenditure while working out the profits of the undertaking. Such expenditure which was not considered

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

section 14A is applicable prospectively from with effect from 1.4.2022 and not for the year under appeal. 3.3. Without prejudice to above grounds, even if Rule 8D is held as applicable, investments from which no dividend income is earned should not be considered while applying Rule 8D as held in Appellant's own case