Consolidated Coffee Ltd. v. State of Karnataka

TATA INTERNATIONAL LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 7(3), MUMBAI

…received bore to the total gross revenue of the\nAppellant, ought to have been adopted, having regard to the fact that such manner\nof apportionment had received the seal of approval of the Supreme Court in\nConsolidated Coffee Ltd v State of Karnataka (2001) 9 SCC 720.\n1.5 Without prejudice to the foregoing grounds, the Appellant submits that the\nlearned AO- DRP erred in applying Rule 8-D to the Appellant's case, without having\nbeen dissatisfied with the correctness of the claim of the Appellant in respect of its\nexpenditure by way of Interest in relation to income which did not form part of the\ntotal incom…

TATA INTERNATIONAL LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 14(3)1), MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Miss Padmavathy S.

…ds received bore to the total gross revenue of the Appellant, ought to have been adopted, having regard to the fact that such manner of apportionment had received the seal of approval of the Supreme Court in Consolidated Coffee Ltd v State of Karnataka (2001) 9 SCC 720. 3.5 Without prejudice to the foregoing grounds, the Appellant submits that the learned AO-DRP erred in applying Rule 8-D to the Appellant's case, without having been dissatisfied with the correctness of the claim of the Appellant in respect of its expenditure by way of Interest in relation to income which did not form part of the total income unde…

TATA INTERNATIONAL LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 7(3), MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyaltata International Ltd., Block A, Shivsagar Estates Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai- 400018, Pan: Aaact3198F ...... Appellant Vs. Acit – 7(3), R. No. 675, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Marg Mumbai- 400020 ..... Respondent

…ds received bore to the total gross revenue of the Appellant, ought to have been adopted, having regard to the fact that such manner of apportionment had received the seal of approval of the Supreme Court in Consolidated Coffee Ltd v State of Karnataka (2001) 9 SCC 720. 2.5. Without prejudice to the foregoing grounds, the Appellant submits that the learned AO-DRP erred in applying Rule 8-D to the Appellant's case, without having been dissatisfied with the correctness of the claim of the Appellant in respect of its expenditure by way of Interest in relation to income which did not form part of the total income und…

INDIAN MACHINE TOOLS MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMM. OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) -1(1), MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes while rest of the

…the basis of actual receipts a basis accepted as being reasonable in various judicial precedents. Reliance in this regard was placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Consolidated Coffee Ltd. Vs. State of Karnataka reported in ITR 248 ITR 432 (SC), and the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax- 14 Vs. Godrej Sara Lee Ltd. (Income Tax Appeal No. 613 of 2016, dated 24/10/2018. 9. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative placed reliance upon the order passed by the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A). The Ld. Departmental Representati…

GODREJ CONSUMER PRODUCTS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 14(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalegodrej Consumer Vs. Dcit, Cc-14(1)(1) Products Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Kalyaniwalla & Mistry 4Th Floor, Mk Road, Llp, Esplanade House, Mumbai-400020. 2Nd Floor, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcg3365J Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mr.Farrokh.V. Irani.Ar Respondent By : Dr.Yogesh Kamat. Cit Dr & Mr.Satya Pinisetty.Dr Date Of Hearing 27.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 05.04.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order U/S 143(3) R.W.S 144(C)(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Passed In Pursuance To Directions Of The Drp.The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal.

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Godrej Consumer Vs. DCIT, CC-14(1)(1) Products Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Kalyaniwalla & Mistry 4th Floor, MK Road, LLP, Esplanade House, Mumbai-400020. 2nd Floor, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AABCG3365J Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Mr.Farrokh.V. Irani.AR Respondent by : Dr.Yogesh Kamat. CIT DR & Mr.Satya Pinisetty.DR Date of Hearing 27.01.2022 Date of Pronouncement 05.04.2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER PAVAN KUM…

TATA INTERNATIONAL LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 7(3), MUMBAI

In the result, Ground No. 6 to 9 (additional ground) of

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmantata International Limited, Acit-7(3), Room No. 675, 6Th Floor, Block A, Shivsagar Estates, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400018 Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact3198F Appellant Respondent Acit-7(3), Tata International Limited, Room No. 675, 6Th Floor, Block A, Shivsagar Estates, Vs. Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400018 Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact3198F Appellant Respondent Cross Objection No. 223/Mum/2013 In Ita No. 4451/Mum/2010 Tata International Limited, Acit-7(3), Room No. 675, 6Th Floor, Block A, Shivsagar Estates, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400018 Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact3198F Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri P.J. Pardiwala, Shri Nitesh Joshi, Shri Milin Thakore & Ms. Astha Shah (Ar) Respondent By : Shri A. Mohan (Cit- Dr)

…ng interest apportionable to the exempt income in the same proportion that the gross investment income by way of dividend received bore to the gross revenue of the appellant as held by Hon. Supreme Court in Consolidated Coffee Ltd. v. State of Kamataka [2001] 248 ITR 432 (SC). 4. The CIT(A) erred in upholding the disallowance as made by the AO under the following heads: a. Service charge - Rs.3,16,388 b. Legal and professional charges - Rs. 43,06,375 c. Repairs & maintenance owned residential premises – Rs. 4,524 d. Repairs and maintenance others - Rs. 13,23,679 e. Commission paid on exports-foreign – Rs. 4,32,73…

GODREJ COSUMER PRODUCTS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 14(1)(2), MUMBAI

Appeal stands dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

…n AYs 2005- 06 to 2009-10 wherein the matter was decided against the assessee by CIT(A) / DRP. However, the Tribunal in AYs 2005-06 & 2006-07, after considering the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in Consolidated Coffee Ltd. V/s State of Karnataka [248 ITR 432], decided the issue in assessee’s favor. Following the same, Ld. DRO directed Ld. AO not to restrict the claim of the assessee for deduction u/s 80-IB/80-IC by reallocating common indirect expenses. 3.2 The invocation of Section 80-IA(10) was also overruled by Ld. DRP by following the directions of Ld. DRP in earlier AYs 2008-09 & 2009-10. Aggrie…