LOTUS FOOTWEAR ENTERPRISES LIMITED-INDIA BRANCH,TIRUVANNAMALAI vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAX 1(2), CHENNAI

In the result all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

182 of paperbook) clearly shows they are separated by compound walls, have a separate entrance and exit, and have separate earmarked RB & IP departments, ETP, sub-station for power, warehouse, parking lots, administration building etc. 63. The AO had alleged that both the units are interdependent merely on the basis that there is transfer of machinery and employees during

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

182 of the Paper Book-I and the summary of his stay at Page 9 of Paperbook-II to show that, his stay in India for rendering such consultancy services to the assessee was actually less than 183 days during the year. Having taken note of these facts / details, according to us, the taxability of the impugned payment made

LOTUS FOOTWEAR ENTERPRISES LIMITED-INDIA BRANCH,TIRUVANNAMALAI vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAX 1(2), CHENNAI

In the result all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed

182 of paperbook) clearly\nshows they are separated by compound walls, have a separate entrance and\nexit, and have separate earmarked RB & IP departments, ETP, sub-station\nfor power, warehouse, parking lots, administration building etc.\n64. The AO had alleged that both the units are interdependent merely on\nthe basis that there is transfer of machinery and employees during

LOTUS FOOTWEAR ENTERPRISES LIMITED-INDIA BRANCH,TIRUVANNAMALAI vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAX 1(2), CHENNAI

In the result all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed

182 of paperbook) clearly\nshows they are separated by compound walls, have a separate entrance and\nexit, and have separate earmarked RB & IP departments, ETP, sub-station\nfor power, warehouse, parking lots, administration building etc.\n\n63.\nThe AO had alleged that both the units are interdependent merely on\nthe basis that there is transfer of machinery and employees during

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), CHENNAI vs. M. MAHADEVAN, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are decided as under:-\nITA Nos\nAssessment\nResult\nYear\nPartly allowed

182 days in India in accordance with the provisions of Section-\n6(1) of the Act, therefore Article-4 of the DTAA provisions of India-UAE\nwould not be applicable. We have noted that the Ld. AO has\ncomprehensively analyzed the situation to establish that Article-4 of the\nDTAA provisions of India-UAE is not applicable in this case

NETHERLANDS OPERATING COMPANY B.V.,CHENNAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INT. TAXATION 2(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1198/Chny/2023 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 V. Netherlands Operating Company B.V. The Acit, Rmz Millenia (Phase-1), International Taxation -2(1), Business Park, 4Th Floor, Campus 1C, Chennai. 11, Dr. M.G.R. Road, Kandanchavadi, Perungudi, Chennai-600 096. [Pan: Aabcl 0573 D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Transfer Pricing, as contained in sections 92 and 92F of the Act that had come into force, with effect from assessment year 2002-03 onwards. 23. The Circular reinforces the position that it is sine qua non for the Assessing Officer to assume jurisdiction prior to taking any steps in the matter of assessment, including reference of the matter

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. M. MAHADEVAN, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are decided as under:-

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1824/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2013-14 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1825/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1826/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2019-20

182 days in India in accordance with the provisions of Section- 6(1) of the Act, therefore Article-4 of the DTAA provisions of India-UAE would not be applicable. We have noted that the Ld. AO has comprehensively analyzed the situation to establish that Article-4 of the DTAA provisions of India-UAE is not applicable in this case

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INOCME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), CHENNAI vs. M. MAHADEVAN , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are decided as under:-

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1824/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2013-14 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1825/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1826/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2019-20

182 days in India in accordance with the provisions of Section- 6(1) of the Act, therefore Article-4 of the DTAA provisions of India-UAE would not be applicable. We have noted that the Ld. AO has comprehensively analyzed the situation to establish that Article-4 of the DTAA provisions of India-UAE is not applicable in this case

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, TUTICORIN vs. VVD & SONS (P) LIMITED, TUTICORIN

In the result, both the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2153, 2154 2155 & 2156/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 & C.O. Nos. 132 & 133/Chny/2018 [In Ita Nos. 2153 & 2154/Chny/2018] The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Vvd & Sons (P) Limited, Income Tax, No. 182, Palayamkottai Road, Central Circle 2, Tuticorin 628 008. Madurai. [Pan:Aaacv8438J] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit For : Shri M. Rajan, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 24.08.2023 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.09.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Four Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai, Dated 23.04.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. 2. The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Delayed By Three Days For Which, The Revenue Has Filed Affidavits For Condonation Of Delay, To Which 2

182, Palayamkottai Road, Central Circle 2, Tuticorin 628 008. Madurai. [PAN:AAACV8438J] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant by Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT for : Shri M. Rajan, CIT ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent by Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing 24.08.2023 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 13.09.2023 आदेश

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, TUTICORIN vs. VVD & SONS (P) LIMITED, TUTICORIN

In the result, both the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2153, 2154 2155 & 2156/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 & C.O. Nos. 132 & 133/Chny/2018 [In Ita Nos. 2153 & 2154/Chny/2018] The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Vvd & Sons (P) Limited, Income Tax, No. 182, Palayamkottai Road, Central Circle 2, Tuticorin 628 008. Madurai. [Pan:Aaacv8438J] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit For : Shri M. Rajan, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 24.08.2023 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.09.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Four Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai, Dated 23.04.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. 2. The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Delayed By Three Days For Which, The Revenue Has Filed Affidavits For Condonation Of Delay, To Which 2

182, Palayamkottai Road, Central Circle 2, Tuticorin 628 008. Madurai. [PAN:AAACV8438J] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant by Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT for : Shri M. Rajan, CIT ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent by Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing 24.08.2023 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 13.09.2023 आदेश

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, TUTICORIN vs. VVD & SONS (P) LIMITED, TUTICORIN

In the result, both the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2153, 2154 2155 & 2156/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 & C.O. Nos. 132 & 133/Chny/2018 [In Ita Nos. 2153 & 2154/Chny/2018] The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Vvd & Sons (P) Limited, Income Tax, No. 182, Palayamkottai Road, Central Circle 2, Tuticorin 628 008. Madurai. [Pan:Aaacv8438J] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit For : Shri M. Rajan, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 24.08.2023 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.09.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Four Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai, Dated 23.04.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. 2. The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Delayed By Three Days For Which, The Revenue Has Filed Affidavits For Condonation Of Delay, To Which 2

182, Palayamkottai Road, Central Circle 2, Tuticorin 628 008. Madurai. [PAN:AAACV8438J] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant by Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT for : Shri M. Rajan, CIT ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent by Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing 24.08.2023 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 13.09.2023 आदेश

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, TUTICORIN vs. VVD & SONS (P) LIMITED, TUTICORIN

In the result, both the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2153, 2154 2155 & 2156/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 & C.O. Nos. 132 & 133/Chny/2018 [In Ita Nos. 2153 & 2154/Chny/2018] The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Vvd & Sons (P) Limited, Income Tax, No. 182, Palayamkottai Road, Central Circle 2, Tuticorin 628 008. Madurai. [Pan:Aaacv8438J] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit For : Shri M. Rajan, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 24.08.2023 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.09.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Four Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai, Dated 23.04.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. 2. The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Delayed By Three Days For Which, The Revenue Has Filed Affidavits For Condonation Of Delay, To Which 2

182, Palayamkottai Road, Central Circle 2, Tuticorin 628 008. Madurai. [PAN:AAACV8438J] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant by Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT for : Shri M. Rajan, CIT ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent by Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing 24.08.2023 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 13.09.2023 आदेश

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

182 of the Paper Book-I and the\nsummary of his stay at Page 9 of Paperbook-II to show that, his stay in\nIndia for rendering such consultancy services to the assessee was actually\nless than 183 days during the year. Having taken note of these facts /\ndetails, according to us, the taxability of the impugned payment made

PARRY INFRASTRUCTURE CO P LTD. ,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(1) , CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

182 and held that, in an appeal filed by the assessed, the AAC has no power to enhance the assessment by discovering new sources of income not considered by the Income Tax Officer in the order appealed against. It was urged on behalf of the revenue that the words 'enhance the assessment' occurring in section 31 were not confined

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. S R BUILDERS CHENNAI LLP, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2891/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18

section 145: …. In terms of the newly introduced provision, the appellant has been following POCM with respect to all the construction contracts undertaken for recognition of revenue as mandated by ICDS-III. The percentage of completion method basically indicates that revenue from performance obligations recognized over a period of time should be based on the percentage of completion

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. MOHANLAL JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

prices, as prevailing then.\nAccordingly, the assessee would pass notional entries of the goods sent\non ‘approval-basis’ in the J-Pack Software but no corresponding entry\nwould be passed in Tally Software, as there was no financial transaction\ninvolving transfer of ownership in goods from the assessee group to the\ncustomers. This software was thus used to integrate

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. MOHANLAL JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

transfer entries are as below: -\n\nITA Nos.1178 to 1182/Chny/2025 &\nITA Nos.1393 to 1397/Chny/2025 \n(AYs: 2017-18 to 2021-22)\nM/s. Mohanlal Jewellers Pvt. Ltd\n\n::73 :: \n\nAO, both Shri Kothari and Shri Khatri had admitted that, the entries in\nthis ledger was also unaccounted for and therefore the AO quantified the\n‘Vatav’ income from this

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. MOHANLAL JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, all the all the appeals filed by the assessee is is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

transfer on 11.09.2020. The said payment received through bank bank transfer on 11.09.2020. The said payment received through bank bank transfer on 11.09.2020. The said payment received through bank on 11.09.2020 is against the making on 11.09.2020 is against the making charges payable by M/s Shree charges payable by M/s Shree Mahalakshmi Jewellery to the appellant for which the following