InterGlobe Technology Quotient P Ltd. v. ACIT

BHARAT SERUMS AND VACCINES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CIRCLE 15(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarbharat Serums & V/S. Deputy Commissioner Of Vaccines Limited बनाम Income Tax, Circle – 15(1)(2), 3Rd Floor, Liberty Tower, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – Airoli, Navi Mumbai – 400 020, Maharashtra 400708, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacb2431M Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

…the other requirements warranted u/s.80G of the Act. Hence, ground no. 2 raised by the assessee is allowed." P a g e | 12 A.Y. 2020-21 Bharat Serums and Vaccines Limited 8.1 The Delhi Tribunal in the case of Interglobe Technology Quotient (P.) Ltd. (2024) 163 Taxmann.com 542 (Del)held that mandatory nature of CSR expenditure does not justify disallowance of same u/s. 80G, if other conditions of section 80G are fulfilled by observing as follows: "7.3 As we take notice of the fact that Parliament legislated that CSR expenses would not be eligible for deduction as business expenditure under section 37 of the Ac…

NETSCRIBES DATA & INSIGHTS PVT LTD ,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF (PCIT)-8, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am) Netscribes Data & Insights P.L. Pcit-8 Office No. 504, 5Th Floor 611, Aayakar Bhavan Lodha Supremus, Lower Parel Vs. M.K. Road Delisle Road, Mumbai-400013. Mumbai-400 020. Pan : Aaccn7742F Appellant Respondent

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Mumbai “B” Bench, Mumbai. Before Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (JM) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (AM) Netscribes Data & Insights P.L. PCIT-8 Office No. 504, 5th Floor 611, Aayakar Bhavan Lodha Supremus, Lower Parel Vs. M.K. Road Delisle Road, Mumbai-400013. Mumbai-400 020. PAN : AACCN7742F Appellant Respondent : Shri Niranjan Govindekar Assessee by : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui Revenue by : 09/07/2025 Date of Hearing Date of pronouncement : 06/10/2025 O R D E R Per Omkareshwar Chidara (AM) :- The only issue to be adjudicated in this case is whether the appellant company is el…

JCIT OSD CIRCLE 2(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. HDFC BANK LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, both the above stated appeals of the\nassessee in ITA No

…-20, 2020-21, 2021-22\nHDFC Bank Limited, Mumbai\nsatisfied the other requirements warranted u/s.80G of the Act. Hence, ground no. 2 raised by\nthe assessee is allowed.\"\n23.1 The Delhi Tribunal in the case of Interglobe Technology\nQuotient (P.) Ltd. (2024) 163 Taxmann.com 542 (Del)held that\nmandatory nature of CSR expenditure does not justify disallowance of\nsame u/s.80G, if other conditions of section 80G are fulfilled by\nobserving as follows:-\n\"7.3 As we take notice of the fact that Parliament legislated that CSR expenses\nwould not be eligible for deduction as business expenditure under section 37 of\n…

JCIT(OSD) CIRCLE 2(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. HDFC BANK LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, both the above stated appeals of the\nassessee in ITA No

…-20, 2020-21, 2021-22\nHDFC Bank Limited, Mumbai\nsatisfied the other requirements warranted u/s.80G of the Act. Hence, ground no. 2 raised by\nthe assessee is allowed.\"\n23.1 The Delhi Tribunal in the case of Interglobe Technology\nQuotient (P.) Ltd. (2024) 163 Taxmann.com 542 (Del)held that\nmandatory nature of CSR expenditure does not justify disallowance of\nsame u/s.80G, if other conditions of section 80G are fulfilled by\nobserving as follows:-\n\"7.3 As we take notice of the fact that Parliament legislated that CSR expenses\nwould not be eligible for deduction as business expenditure under section 37 of\n…

JCIT(OSD) CIRCLE 2(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. HDFC BANK LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, both the above stated appeals of the\nassessee in ITA No

…see subject to the condition that the assessee has\nsatisfied the other requirements warranted u/s.80G of the Act. Hence, ground no. 2 raised by\nthe assessee is allowed.\n23.1 The Delhi Tribunal in the case of Interglobe Technology\nQuotient (P.) Ltd. (2024) 163 Taxmann.com 542 (Del)held that\nmandatory nature of CSR expenditure does not justify disallowance of\nsame u/s.80G, if other conditions of section 80G are fulfilled by\nobserving as follows:-\n\"7.3 As we take notice of the fact that Parliament legislated that CSR expenses\nwould not be eligible for deduction as business expenditure under section 37 of\n…

HDFC BANK LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - 2 (3) (1) , MUMBAI

In the result, both the above stated appeals of the\nassessee in ITA No

…0, 2020-21, 2021-22\nHDFC Bank Limited, Mumbai\n\nsatisfied the other requirements warranted u/s.80G of the Act. Hence, ground no. 2 raised by\nthe assessee is allowed.\n\n23.1 The Delhi Tribunal in the case of Interglobe Technology\nQuotient (P.) Ltd. (2024) 163 Taxmann.com 542 (Del)held that\nmandatory nature of CSR expenditure does not justify disallowance of\nsame u/s.80G, if other conditions of section 80G are fulfilled by\nobserving as follows:-\n\n\"7.3 As we take notice of the fact that Parliament legislated that CSR expenses\nwould not be eligible for deduction as business expenditure under section 37 of…

HDFC BANK LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 2 (3) (1), MUMBAI

…-20, 2020-21, 2021-22\nHDFC Bank Limited, Mumbai\nsatisfied the other requirements warranted u/s.80G of the Act. Hence, ground no. 2 raised by\nthe assessee is allowed.\"\n23.1 The Delhi Tribunal in the case of Interglobe Technology\nQuotient (P.) Ltd. (2024) 163 Taxmann.com 542 (Del)held that\nmandatory nature of CSR expenditure does not justify disallowance of\nsame u/s.80G, if other conditions of section 80G are fulfilled by\nobserving as follows:-\n\"7.3 As we take notice of the fact that Parliament legislated that CSR expenses\nwould not be eligible for deduction as business expenditure under section 37 of\n…

CORAL INDIA FINANCE & HOUSING LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby\nallowed

…ee subject to the condition that the assessee has\nsatisfied the other requirements warranted u/s.80G of the Act. Hence, ground no. 2 raised by\nthe assessee is allowed.\"\n9.1 The Delhi Tribunal in the case of Interglobe Technology\nQuotient (P.) Ltd. (2024) 163 Taxmann.com 542 (Del)held that\nmandatory nature of CSR expenditure does not justify disallowance of\nsame u/s.80G, if other conditions of Section 80G are fulfilled by\nobserving as follows:\n\"7.3 As we take notice of the fact that Parliament legislated that CSR expenses would not be\neligible for deduction as business expenditure under section 37 of th…

MAHANSARIA ENTERPRISES PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT, MUMBAI-5, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Rahul Chaudharyassessment Year : 2020-21 Mahansaria Enterprises Private The Principal Commissioner Of Limited, Income Tax (Pcit), 301-304, 3Rd Floor, Vs. Room No. 515, 5Th Floor, Peninsula Chambers, Aayakar Bhavan, Peninsula Corporate Park, Maharshi Karve Road, G.K. Marg, Lower Parel West, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400026 Pan : Aaacy1568L (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Vipul Joshi, Adv. & Prashant Bhumare For Revenue : Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 14-05-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 11-06-2025 O R D E R Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Mumbai-5 [„Ld.Pcit‟] U/S. 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 („The Act‟), Dated 17-03-2025, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2020-21, Wherein The Assessee Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “B” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2020-21 Mahansaria Enterprises Private The Principal Commissioner of Limited, Income Tax (PCIT), 301-304, 3rd Floor, vs. Room No. 515, 5th Floor, Peninsula Chambers, Aayakar Bhavan, Peninsula Corporate Park, Maharshi Karve Road, G.K. Marg, Lower Parel West, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400026 PAN : AAACY1568L (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Vipul Joshi, Adv. & Prashant Bhumare For Revenue : Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, CIT-DR Date of Hear…

AAMIR KHAN PRODUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT-8, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is\nhereby allowed

…Α.Υ. 2020-21\nAamir Khan Production Private Limited\nsatisfied the other requirements warranted u/s.80G of the Act. Hence, ground no. 2 raised by\nthe assessee is allowed.\n8.1 The Delhi Tribunal in the case of Interglobe Technology\nQuotient (P.) Ltd. (2024) 163 Taxmann.com 542 (Del)held that\nmandatory nature of CSR expenditure does not justify disallowance of\nsame u/s.80G, if other conditions of Section 80G are fulfilled by\nobserving as follows:\n\"7.3 As we take notice of the fact that Parliament legislated that CSR expenses would not be\neligible for deduction as business expenditure under section 37 of th…

M/S. SONATA INFORMATION,MUMBAI vs. CIT CIRCLE 3(4), MUMBAI

Accordingly, disallowance of INR made by the Assessing Officer is deleted and Ground No.1 & 2 raised by the Assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "G” BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s. Sonata Information 208, T. V. Industrial Estate, 2nd Floor, S.K.Ahire Marg, Worli Colony S.O. Mumbai, Mumbai- 400 030. Maharashtra [PAN:AAECS8734J] …………. Appellant Vs Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals, National Faceless Appeal Centre [Jurisdictional Assessing Officer-Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax – Circle …………. Respondent 3(4), Mumbai 4th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400020 Maharashtra. Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri Vijay Mehta For the Respondent/Depa…