M/S APEX TRANSWORLD PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CC-1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.932/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2011-12 V. M/S.Apex Transworld Pvt. Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner Of 38, 2Nd Main Road, Income Tax, R.A. Puram, Corporate Circle-1(1), Chennai-600 028. Chennai. [Pan: Aadca 7034 L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.K. Ramesh Babu, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr. Ar.V.Sreenivasan, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.01.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11.01.2023

68,00,000 - - floor Less: Indexed cost of 2,25,09,323 1,42,90,677 - acquisition Sales consideration of land 4th 3,63,45,000 - - floor Less: Indexed cost of 2,22,38,007 1,41,06,993 - acquisition Total long term capital gain - - 2,83,97,670 Sales consideration of building 3,32,98,000 - - 3rd floor Less

SAMARJIT SINGH CHABRA,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 14(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1623, 1624, 1625 & 1646/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2008-09 & W.T.A. Nos. 43 & 44/Chny/2018 Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2008-09 Shri Samarijit Singh Chabra, Vs. The Income Tax Officer/ No. K-10, Sangath Apartments, Wealth Tax Officer, Mgr Nagar, Velachery, Non Corporate Ward – 14(1), Chennai 600 042. Chennai. [Pan: Bfops1703Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N. Arjun Raj, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 08.05.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Four Income Tax Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders All Dated 26.02.2018 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 14, Chennai For The Assessment Years 2007-08, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2008-09. 2. Since, Issues Raised In All The Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of The Both The Parties, We Proceed

short term capital loss is set aside and delete the addition made by the Assessing Officer. Thus, ground Nos. 4, 5 & 6 [issue No. 2 of the assessee] raised by the assessee are allowed. 27 I.T.A. Nos.1623-1625 & 1646 & WTA 43-44/Chny/18 51. Ground Nos. 7 & 8 [issue No. 3 of the assessee] raised by the assessee in challenging

SAMARJIT SINGH CHABRA,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 14(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1623, 1624, 1625 & 1646/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2008-09 & W.T.A. Nos. 43 & 44/Chny/2018 Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2008-09 Shri Samarijit Singh Chabra, Vs. The Income Tax Officer/ No. K-10, Sangath Apartments, Wealth Tax Officer, Mgr Nagar, Velachery, Non Corporate Ward – 14(1), Chennai 600 042. Chennai. [Pan: Bfops1703Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N. Arjun Raj, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 08.05.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Four Income Tax Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders All Dated 26.02.2018 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 14, Chennai For The Assessment Years 2007-08, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2008-09. 2. Since, Issues Raised In All The Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of The Both The Parties, We Proceed

short term capital loss is set aside and delete the addition made by the Assessing Officer. Thus, ground Nos. 4, 5 & 6 [issue No. 2 of the assessee] raised by the assessee are allowed. 27 I.T.A. Nos.1623-1625 & 1646 & WTA 43-44/Chny/18 51. Ground Nos. 7 & 8 [issue No. 3 of the assessee] raised by the assessee in challenging

SAMARJIT SINGH CHABRA,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 14(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1623, 1624, 1625 & 1646/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2008-09 & W.T.A. Nos. 43 & 44/Chny/2018 Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2008-09 Shri Samarijit Singh Chabra, Vs. The Income Tax Officer/ No. K-10, Sangath Apartments, Wealth Tax Officer, Mgr Nagar, Velachery, Non Corporate Ward – 14(1), Chennai 600 042. Chennai. [Pan: Bfops1703Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N. Arjun Raj, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 08.05.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Four Income Tax Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders All Dated 26.02.2018 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 14, Chennai For The Assessment Years 2007-08, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2008-09. 2. Since, Issues Raised In All The Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of The Both The Parties, We Proceed

short term capital loss is set aside and delete the addition made by the Assessing Officer. Thus, ground Nos. 4, 5 & 6 [issue No. 2 of the assessee] raised by the assessee are allowed. 27 I.T.A. Nos.1623-1625 & 1646 & WTA 43-44/Chny/18 51. Ground Nos. 7 & 8 [issue No. 3 of the assessee] raised by the assessee in challenging

SAMARJIT SINGH CHABRA,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 14(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1623, 1624, 1625 & 1646/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2008-09 & W.T.A. Nos. 43 & 44/Chny/2018 Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2008-09 Shri Samarijit Singh Chabra, Vs. The Income Tax Officer/ No. K-10, Sangath Apartments, Wealth Tax Officer, Mgr Nagar, Velachery, Non Corporate Ward – 14(1), Chennai 600 042. Chennai. [Pan: Bfops1703Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N. Arjun Raj, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 08.05.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Four Income Tax Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders All Dated 26.02.2018 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 14, Chennai For The Assessment Years 2007-08, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2008-09. 2. Since, Issues Raised In All The Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of The Both The Parties, We Proceed

short term capital loss is set aside and delete the addition made by the Assessing Officer. Thus, ground Nos. 4, 5 & 6 [issue No. 2 of the assessee] raised by the assessee are allowed. 27 I.T.A. Nos.1623-1625 & 1646 & WTA 43-44/Chny/18 51. Ground Nos. 7 & 8 [issue No. 3 of the assessee] raised by the assessee in challenging

ANIL KUMAR GOEL,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, Ground Nos

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

short term capital gains by the Assessee himself and in respect of the shares held beyond 12 months was shown as long term capital gains. 5. The CIT (Appeals) ignored the scope and purport of the CBDT circular bearing no.6 of 2016 dated 29th February 2016, wherein the Assessee’ desire to treat the transactions as capital gains would

TAMIL NADU BRICK INDUSTRIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.744/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 M/S. Tamilnadu Brick Industries, The Income Tax Officer, No. 47, Mangali Nagar 1St Street, Vs. Non Corporate Circle 8(1), Arumbakkam, Chennai 600 106. Chennai. [Pan: Aafft3643P] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Vijay Kumar Punna, Jr. Standing Counsel सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 13.02.2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11.05.2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 9, Chennai, Dated 27.02.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: “1. The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 9, Chennai Dated 27.02.2017 In I.T.A.No.07/Cit(A)-9/2016-17 For The Above Mentioned Assessment Year Is Contrary To Law, Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case.

terms both in JDA and the GPA-2 in comparison to MOU. The MOU is mere understanding which got formalized in JDA and GPA. Therefore, the ld. CIT(A) was of the view that the date of transfer must be taken as on 17.09.2012 instead of 31.01.2012. 6.17 Further, by reproducing relevant paragraphs

ITO, CHENNAI vs. TVS SHRIRAM GROWTH FUND, CHENNAI

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the Revenue’s appeals dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

short term capital gain depending on the period of holding. 55. Under clause-2 of the contribution Agreement, the contributor/beneficiary/investor agrees to contribute a specified sum to the trust/fund. Clause-2.6 of the contribution agreement specifies that the contributor/investor/beneficiary shall not have any right to demand the return of his/her/its fund contributor, other than upon dissolution of the fund. Clause

ITO, CHENNAI vs. TVS SHRIRAM GRWOTH FUND, CHENNAI

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the Revenue’s appeals dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

short term capital gain depending on the period of holding. 55. Under clause-2 of the contribution Agreement, the contributor/beneficiary/investor agrees to contribute a specified sum to the trust/fund. Clause-2.6 of the contribution agreement specifies that the contributor/investor/beneficiary shall not have any right to demand the return of his/her/its fund contributor, other than upon dissolution of the fund. Clause

T vs. SHRIRAM GROWTH FUND,CHENNAIVS.ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the Revenue’s appeals dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

short term capital gain depending on the period of holding. 55. Under clause-2 of the contribution Agreement, the contributor/beneficiary/investor agrees to contribute a specified sum to the trust/fund. Clause-2.6 of the contribution agreement specifies that the contributor/investor/beneficiary shall not have any right to demand the return of his/her/its fund contributor, other than upon dissolution of the fund. Clause

T vs. SHRIRAM GROWTH FUND,CHENNAIVS.ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the Revenue’s appeals dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

short term capital gain depending on the period of holding. 55. Under clause-2 of the contribution Agreement, the contributor/beneficiary/investor agrees to contribute a specified sum to the trust/fund. Clause-2.6 of the contribution agreement specifies that the contributor/investor/beneficiary shall not have any right to demand the return of his/her/its fund contributor, other than upon dissolution of the fund. Clause

T vs. SHRIRAM GROWTH FUND,CHENNAIVS.ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the Revenue’s appeals dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

short term capital gain depending on the period of holding. 55. Under clause-2 of the contribution Agreement, the contributor/beneficiary/investor agrees to contribute a specified sum to the trust/fund. Clause-2.6 of the contribution agreement specifies that the contributor/investor/beneficiary shall not have any right to demand the return of his/her/its fund contributor, other than upon dissolution of the fund. Clause

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. BHAVANI DISTILLERIES AND CHEMICALS LTD., CHENNAI

In the result the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

Section 14A r.w.r. 8D(ii & iii) of the Rules and worked out the disallowance at Rs.57,99,790/-. On appeal the Ld.CIT(A) directed the Ld.AO to recompute the disallowance U/s.14A r.w.r. 8D in view of the submission of the assessee that the entire premium on debentures of Rs.17,81,64,888/- was disallowed and therefore further disallowance

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. BHAVANI DISTILLERIES AND CHEMICALS LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

Section 14A r.w.r. 8D(ii & iii) of the Rules and worked out the disallowance at Rs.57,99,790/-. On appeal the Ld.CIT(A) directed the Ld.AO to recompute the disallowance U/s.14A r.w.r. 8D in view of the submission of the assessee that the entire premium on debentures of Rs.17,81,64,888/- was disallowed and therefore further disallowance

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. BHAVANI DISTILLERIES & CHEMICALS LTD., CHENNAI

In the result the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

Section 14A r.w.r. 8D(ii & iii) of the Rules and worked out the disallowance at Rs.57,99,790/-. On appeal the Ld.CIT(A) directed the Ld.AO to recompute the disallowance U/s.14A r.w.r. 8D in view of the submission of the assessee that the entire premium on debentures of Rs.17,81,64,888/- was disallowed and therefore further disallowance

BHAVANI DISTILLERIS AND CHEMICALS LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

Section 14A r.w.r. 8D(ii & iii) of the Rules and worked out the disallowance at Rs.57,99,790/-. On appeal the Ld.CIT(A) directed the Ld.AO to recompute the disallowance U/s.14A r.w.r. 8D in view of the submission of the assessee that the entire premium on debentures of Rs.17,81,64,888/- was disallowed and therefore further disallowance

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. BHAVANI DISTILLERIES AND CHEMICALS LTD., CHENNAI

In the result the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

Section 14A r.w.r. 8D(ii & iii) of the Rules and worked out the disallowance at Rs.57,99,790/-. On appeal the Ld.CIT(A) directed the Ld.AO to recompute the disallowance U/s.14A r.w.r. 8D in view of the submission of the assessee that the entire premium on debentures of Rs.17,81,64,888/- was disallowed and therefore further disallowance

JCIT (OSD), CHENNAI vs. BHAVANI DISTILLERIES & CHEMICALS PVT LTD., CHENNAI

In the result the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

Section 14A r.w.r. 8D(ii & iii) of the Rules and worked out the disallowance at Rs.57,99,790/-. On appeal the Ld.CIT(A) directed the Ld.AO to recompute the disallowance U/s.14A r.w.r. 8D in view of the submission of the assessee that the entire premium on debentures of Rs.17,81,64,888/- was disallowed and therefore further disallowance