5 SOT 616); Arvind Murjani Brands (P.) Ltd. vs. I SOT 616); Arvind Murjani Brands (P.) Ltd. v. ITO

EASTERN SHIPPING PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

Accordingly grounds raised by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosaineastern Shipping Pvt Ltd Vs. Ito – 6(2)(1) Godrej Coliseum, Office No. Aayakar Bhavan 801, 8Th Floor, C Wing, Of Mumbai Somaiya Hospital Road, Sion East, Mumbai – 400022. Pan/Gir No. Aahce1084E (Applicant) (Respondent)

…the income was reflected in the hands of its sister concern (see the relevant facts in para 2. the extract from the CIT(A)'s order in para 4 and the Court's conclusion in paras 7 to 9 thereof). ii. In the case of Arvind Murjani Brands (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2012) 137 ITD 173 (Mum), wherein it was held as under: where the property was let out by the Landlords for the benefit of a Franchisee. The lease agreement was entered into with Arvind Brands Limited. The assessee would receive the rent amount from the Franchisee who would pay such amount after deduction of tax at source. It. in turn would pay such amount to Arvin…

SHARANGPANI DINKAR PANT,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 3(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopalassessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Sharangpani Dinkar Ito It 3(3)(1), Pant, International Tax Ward- 402, Bhoomi Oscar, 3(3)(1), Plot No.16/17, Vs. Air India Building, Sector-9, Mumbai – 400 021 Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai - 400 701 Pan: Aippp0288E (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Balaji V, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Anil Sant, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 13 . 02 . 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 26 . 02 . 2024 O R D E R Per : Amarjit Singh: Both These Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee For The Same Assessment Year I.E. 2018-19 Against The Two Different Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A) Passed Under Section 250 Of The Act On The Common Issue Of Allowability Of Tds Credit Of Rs.17,59,258/- Which Was Not Allowed By The Ao Vide Order Passed Under Section 154 Of The Act & Under Section 143(1) Of The Act. The Assessee Vide Ita

…of PILCOM v. CIT 425 ITR 312 (SC) as well as the following Orders of the Hon'ble ITAT: Ernst & Young Merchant Banking Services LLP v. ADIT, CPC (ITA No. 2333/Mum/2022) DCIT v. Escorts Ltd. [2007] 15 SOT 368 (Del.) Arvind Murjani Brands (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [2012] 137 ITD 173 (Mum.) It is, therefore, prayed that the Ld. JAO be directed to allow credit of TDS of Rs. 17,59,258 as claimed in the ROI and reflected in Form 26AS as against TDS credit of Rs. 1,28,924 allowed in the intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act. 3 ITA No.3352/M/2023 & ors. Shri Sharangpani Dinkar Pant The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, a…

SHARANGPANI DINKAR PANT,MUMBAI vs. INTERNATIONAL TAX WARD 3(3)(1) , MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopalassessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Sharangpani Dinkar Ito It 3(3)(1), Pant, International Tax Ward- 402, Bhoomi Oscar, 3(3)(1), Plot No.16/17, Vs. Air India Building, Sector-9, Mumbai – 400 021 Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai - 400 701 Pan: Aippp0288E (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Balaji V, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Anil Sant, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 13 . 02 . 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 26 . 02 . 2024 O R D E R Per : Amarjit Singh: Both These Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee For The Same Assessment Year I.E. 2018-19 Against The Two Different Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A) Passed Under Section 250 Of The Act On The Common Issue Of Allowability Of Tds Credit Of Rs.17,59,258/- Which Was Not Allowed By The Ao Vide Order Passed Under Section 154 Of The Act & Under Section 143(1) Of The Act. The Assessee Vide Ita

…of PILCOM v. CIT 425 ITR 312 (SC) as well as the following Orders of the Hon'ble ITAT: Ernst & Young Merchant Banking Services LLP v. ADIT, CPC (ITA No. 2333/Mum/2022) DCIT v. Escorts Ltd. [2007] 15 SOT 368 (Del.) Arvind Murjani Brands (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [2012] 137 ITD 173 (Mum.) It is, therefore, prayed that the Ld. JAO be directed to allow credit of TDS of Rs. 17,59,258 as claimed in the ROI and reflected in Form 26AS as against TDS credit of Rs. 1,28,924 allowed in the intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act. 3 ITA No.3352/M/2023 & ors. Shri Sharangpani Dinkar Pant The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, a…

DY CIT-1(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. MAHARASHTRA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed partly assessee is allowed partly whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2013-14

…rToyo Engg. India Ltd. vs. JCIT, SR 27 (ITAT Mumbai) (5 (ReferToyo Engg. India Ltd. vs. JCIT, SR 27 (ITAT Mumbai) (5 SOT 616); Arvind Murjani Brands (P.) Ltd. vs. I SOT 616); Arvind Murjani Brands (P.) Ltd. vs. ITO, ward 5(1) TO, ward 5(1) (2012 ITAT Mumbai) [137 ITD 173; Escorts Ltd. vs. DCIT, (2012 ITAT Mumbai) [137 ITD 173; Escorts Ltd. vs. DCIT, (2012 ITAT Mumbai) [137 ITD 173; Escorts Ltd. vs. DCIT, Circle 11(1) (2007 ITAT Delhi) (15 SOT 368); Sunita Devi vs. Circle 11(1) (2007 ITAT Delhi) (15 SOT 368); Sunita Devi vs. Circle 11(1) (2007 ITAT Delhi) (15 SOT 368); Sunita Devi vs. ACIT, Circle 36(1) (2015 /TAT…

M/S THE MAHARASHTRA STATE CO. OP BANK LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO-1(3)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed partly assessee is allowed partly whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2013-14

…rToyo Engg. India Ltd. vs. JCIT, SR 27 (ITAT Mumbai) (5 (ReferToyo Engg. India Ltd. vs. JCIT, SR 27 (ITAT Mumbai) (5 SOT 616); Arvind Murjani Brands (P.) Ltd. vs. I SOT 616); Arvind Murjani Brands (P.) Ltd. vs. ITO, ward 5(1) TO, ward 5(1) (2012 ITAT Mumbai) [137 ITD 173; Escorts Ltd. vs. DCIT, (2012 ITAT Mumbai) [137 ITD 173; Escorts Ltd. vs. DCIT, (2012 ITAT Mumbai) [137 ITD 173; Escorts Ltd. vs. DCIT, Circle 11(1) (2007 ITAT Delhi) (15 SOT 368); Sunita Devi vs. Circle 11(1) (2007 ITAT Delhi) (15 SOT 368); Sunita Devi vs. Circle 11(1) (2007 ITAT Delhi) (15 SOT 368); Sunita Devi vs. ACIT, Circle 36(1) (2015 /TAT…

TATA REALTY AND INFRASTRUCTURE LTD,MUMBAI vs. AST CIT 2(3)(1), MUMBAI

…ITA Nos. 763 &730/Mum/2020 A.Y. 2015-16 1 Tata Realty & Infrastructure Limited Vs. ACIT 2(3)(1) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORESHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Tata Realty And Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Infrastructure Limited “E” Income tax 2(3)(1) Block Voltas Premises, Room No. 552, Aayakar T.B. Kadam Marg, Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Chinchpokli, Road, Mumbai- 400 020 Mumbai 400 033 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AACCT6242L Appellant .. Respondent Jt. CIT (OSD)-2(3)(1) Vs. M/s Tata Realty and Room No. 552, 5th Floor, Infrastru…

JT CIT(OSD) 2(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S TATA REALTY AND INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., MUMBAI

…ITA Nos. 763 &730/Mum/2020 A.Y. 2015-16 1 Tata Realty & Infrastructure Limited Vs. ACIT 2(3)(1) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORESHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Tata Realty And Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Infrastructure Limited “E” Income tax 2(3)(1) Block Voltas Premises, Room No. 552, Aayakar T.B. Kadam Marg, Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Chinchpokli, Road, Mumbai- 400 020 Mumbai 400 033 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AACCT6242L Appellant .. Respondent Jt. CIT (OSD)-2(3)(1) Vs. M/s Tata Realty and Room No. 552, 5th Floor, Infrastru…

IMPERIAL PROCUREMENT SERVICES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 5(1)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Cn Prasad: (A.Y : 2010-11) M/S Imperial Procurement Services Ltd. Vs. Ito 5(1)(4) (Formerly Essar Procurement Services Aayakar Bhavan Ltd) Mk Road Mumbai – 400 034 New Marine Lines Pan : Aaace0892R Mumbai – 400 020 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)

…liable to be refunded, 6 M/s Imperial Procurement Service Ltd. TDS credit claimed by the assessee should be refunded. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee placing reliance on the decision of the Mumbai Bench in the case of Arvind Murjani Brands (P.) Ltd. Vs ITO [137 ITD 173] submits that when an amount on which tax was deducted at source is not chargeable to tax, the credit for the tax deducted at source should be allowed even if the amount is not offered to tax. He also relied on the decision of Chennai Bench in the case of Supreme Renewable Energy Ltd. Vs. ITO [124 ITD 394] in support of his contentions. 7. The L…

ACIT 11(1), MUMBAI vs. DIGI JPR NETWORK P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, Department’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Nabin Kumar Pradhan

…on the assessment order. The Ld A.R, besides supporting the order passed by Ld CIT(A), also placed reliance on the decision rendered by the 4 M/s. Digi JPR Network Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai bench of Tribunal in the case of Arvind Murjani Brands (P) Ltd Vs. ITO (2012)(137 ITD 173), wherein the Tribunal held as under:- “The position is, therefore, crystal clear that the amount of tax deducted at source has to be necessarily allowed credit somewhere. It cannot be a case that the amount of such tax deducted and paid to the exchequer is not to be refunded, if the tax due on the amount of income received is either lower than t…