GIA INDIA LABORATORY PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-14(1)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 4395/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 November 2025AY 2020-21Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary (Judicial Member), Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ( (Accountant Member)9 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer (AO) to give effect to the Unilateral Advance Pricing Agreement (APA) and the modified return of income filed by the appellant. The disallowance of the Section 80G deduction was deleted, following High Court and Tribunal decisions. Other issues related to TDS, tax credit, and interest were remanded to the AO for verification and necessary action.

What were the facts?

The appellant company challenged an upward adjustment of INR 66,96,52,179/- to its total income for royalty payments to an Associate Enterprise (AE), as confirmed by the DRP. Additionally, the company disputed the disallowance of a deduction claimed under Section 80G for CSR expenses and raised issues regarding short grants of TDS, tax credit, and interest.

What were the issues?

Whether the upward adjustment for royalty payment is justified in light of the APA, and if the Section 80G deduction for CSR expenses is allowable. Also, issues concerning short grants of TDS, tax credit, and interest.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G,Section 244A,Section 144C(1),Section 92CD,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai “K” Bench, Mumbai.

Before: Shri Rahul Chaudhary (JM) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (AM)

For Appellant: Ms. Neena Jeph
Pronounced: 21/11/2025

Per Omkareshwar Chidara (AM) :-

The appellant company in this appeal raised the following main grounds of appeal : 1:2 On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO and the learned TPO, under the directions of the Hon'ble DRP, erred in proposing an upward adjustment of INR 66,96,52,179/- to the total income on account of payment of royalty to its Associate Enterprise ['AE'].

2.

1 The Assessing Officer has erred in not allowing the deduction claimed under section 80G while computing the appellant’s total income for the year under consideration.

2.

Then, the appellant company has also raised the issues like short grant of TDS, credit for tax paid on regular assessment was n

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 80G

All 6,482 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →