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

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 I.T.A. Nos. 3006 & 3007/Chny/18 Act on 02.03.2017. The ld. CIT(E), vide

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

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 I.T.A. Nos. 3006 & 3007/Chny/18 Act on 02.03.2017. The ld. CIT(E), vide

BOUNTEOUS DIGITAL PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1600/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Bounteous Digital Private Limited, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Block A, 8Th Floor, Global Infocity Park Income Tax, No. 40, Mgr Salai, Perungudi, Corporate Circle 4(1), Chennai 600 096. Chennai. [Pan:Aaacl6079R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri A.R. Raghunathan, Ca (Virtual) ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C. Sivakumar, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 18.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.08.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 11.02.2025 Passed By The Addl/Jcit(A) – 10, Mumbai For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The First Issue Raised By The Assessee Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Confirming The Disallowance Of Csr Expenses In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case.

5. With regard to the disallowance of donation, the ld. AR submits that donation amount was already disallowed by the assessee in its ITR and claimed as deduction under section 80G of the Act [to the extent of 50%). He submits that further addition by the Assessing Officer amounts to double disallowance which is erroneous

SAHAI & SONS (I) LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

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

80G donations, disallowance for personal usage of cars, disallowance u/s.40A(3) of the Act, addition for want of confirmation from loan creditors, disallowance for unpaid liabilities u/s.43B of the Act, disallowance for interest on TDS/Service Tax, disallowance of salary, addition for unexplained investments in properties for various years and addition for low drawings. In the hands of the assessee

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1), CHENNAI vs. SHIV SAHAI & SONS (INDIA) LTD., CHENNAI

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

80G donations, disallowance for personal usage of cars, disallowance u/s.40A(3) of the Act, addition for want of confirmation from loan creditors, disallowance for unpaid liabilities u/s.43B of the Act, disallowance for interest on TDS/Service Tax, disallowance of salary, addition for unexplained investments in properties for various years and addition for low drawings. In the hands of the assessee

NARESH PRASAD AGARWAL,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

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

80G donations, disallowance for personal usage of cars, disallowance u/s.40A(3) of the Act, addition for want of confirmation from loan creditors, disallowance for unpaid liabilities u/s.43B of the Act, disallowance for interest on TDS/Service Tax, disallowance of salary, addition for unexplained investments in properties for various years and addition for low drawings. In the hands of the assessee

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. NARESH PRASAD AGARWAL, CHENNAI

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

80G donations, disallowance for personal usage of cars, disallowance u/s.40A(3) of the Act, addition for want of confirmation from loan creditors, disallowance for unpaid liabilities u/s.43B of the Act, disallowance for interest on TDS/Service Tax, disallowance of salary, addition for unexplained investments in properties for various years and addition for low drawings. In the hands of the assessee

NILAA CHARITABLE TRUST,VILLUPURAM vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD-1, CHENNAI

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

Bench: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K (Vice President), SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA (Accountant Member)

80G, is anonymous in terms of Section 115BBC(3) r.w.s 13(7) of the Act. Sub section 13(7) read as under: “(7) Nothing contained in section 11 or section 12 shall operate so as to exclude from the total income of the previous year of the person in receipt thereof, any anonymous donation referred

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

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

LATE SHRI DASARI NARAYANA RAO REP BY L/H SHRI DASARI ARUN KUMAR,HYDERABAD vs. ITO (OSD) NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 20, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in I

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2377 & 2378/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2005-06 & 2011-12

Section 80G of the Act and also deduction in respect of remission of liability with regard to one Shri V. Venkatarao. This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that making mere claim by furnishing all particulars to the Assessing Officer cannot be construed to be concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. As held by Apex Court

LATE SHRI DASARI NARAYANA RAO REP BY L/H SHRI DASARI ARUN KUMAR,HYDERABAD vs. ITO (OSD) NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 20, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in I

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2377 & 2378/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2005-06 & 2011-12

Section 80G of the Act and also deduction in respect of remission of liability with regard to one Shri V. Venkatarao. This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that making mere claim by furnishing all particulars to the Assessing Officer cannot be construed to be concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. As held by Apex Court

SHRIRAM FINANCE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. PCIT, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1640/Chny/2024 िनधा9रण वष9 /Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shriram Finance Ltd., The Principal Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Shriram Vs. Income Tax-3, Transport Finance Company Ltd.,) Chennai. Sri Towers, Plot No.14A, South Phase, Industrial Estate, Guindy,Chennai-600 032. [Pan: Aaacs 7018R]

68,06,720/-, which was further revised to Rs.26,22,02,91,770/- on 29.03.2019. The A.O in the order passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s 144B of the Act assessed the total income of Rs.27,26,70,79,707/- after considering eight issues for which case was selected for scrutiny. The Ld. PCIT called the assessment record and found that

M/S. SUBHIKSHA HINDI VIDHYALAYA,MAYILADUTHURAI vs. CIT, EXMETIONS,, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed\nfor statistical purposes

68,975/- to various teachers shown under\nthe head honorarium out of total receipts of Rs.8,10,153/- . The Ld AR\nhas submitted that the Ld. CIT(E) has not gone through the accounts\nand activities of the trust and requested one more opportunity be\ngranted to prove its case.\n4. On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative

M/S. SUBHIKSHA HIND VIDHYALAYA,MAYILADUTHURAI vs. CIT EXEMPTIONS, , CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed\nfor statistical purposes

68,975/- to various teachers shown under\nthe head honorarium out of total receipts of Rs.8,10,153/- . The Ld AR\nhas submitted that the Ld. CIT(E) has not gone through the accounts\nand activities of the trust and requested one more opportunity be\ngranted to prove its case.\n4. On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S STERLITE INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LTD., TUTICORIN

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.318 & 319/Mds/2008 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1020/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1665/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07

80G of the Act. The Assessing Officer restricted the claim to the extent of `1,73,250/- since the donation made to Rajiv Gandhi Relief and National Welfare Trust was eligible for deduction only for 50% as against 100% claimed by the assessee. However, the CIT(Appeals) allowed the claim of the assessee under Section

M/S STERLITE INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LTD.,TUTICORIN vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.318 & 319/Mds/2008 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1020/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1665/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07

80G of the Act. The Assessing Officer restricted the claim to the extent of `1,73,250/- since the donation made to Rajiv Gandhi Relief and National Welfare Trust was eligible for deduction only for 50% as against 100% claimed by the assessee. However, the CIT(Appeals) allowed the claim of the assessee under Section

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. STERLITE INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LTD., TUTICORIN

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.318 & 319/Mds/2008 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1020/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1665/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07

80G of the Act. The Assessing Officer restricted the claim to the extent of `1,73,250/- since the donation made to Rajiv Gandhi Relief and National Welfare Trust was eligible for deduction only for 50% as against 100% claimed by the assessee. However, the CIT(Appeals) allowed the claim of the assessee under Section