ITR 20(Bom); I.TA. No. 330 of 2013 DIT v. Citibank N. A

M/S. STANDARD CHARTERED BANK,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT (IT)1(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blestandard Chartered Bank V. Acit – Range-1(3) Taxation Department, 23-25 Scindia House, Ballard Estate M.G. Road, 3Rd Floor N.M. Marg, Mumbai - 400038 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aabcs4681D (Appellant) (Respondent) Adit (It)– 2(3) V. Standard Chartered Bank Room No. 120, 1St Floor Taxation Department, 23-25 Scindia House, Ballard Estate M.G. Road, 3Rd Floor N.M. Marg, Mumbai - 400038 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aabcs4681D (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri P.J. Pardiwala & Assessee Represented By : Shri Fenil Bhatt Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash Department Represented By :

…mitted that discriminatory provisions have to be ignored for foreign/non-resident assessee in view of Tax Treaty (e.g., Article 26 of India- UK Tax Treaty). In support of the above contentions, he relied on the following case laws:- (i). DIT v. Citibank N.A. (377 ITR 69) (Bom HC) - Sec 40(a)(i) (ii). CIT v. Herbalife International India (P) Ltd - 384 ITR 276 (Del HC) - Sec 40(a)(i) 20 ITA NO. 803 & 850/MUM/2009 (A.Y. 1999-2000) Standard Chartered Bank (iii). Rajeev Sureshbhai Gajwani v. ACIT - 129 ITD 145 (at Paras 7 & 8.5) (SB - Ahd) - Sec 80HHE (iv). Standard Chartered Bank v. IAC - 39 ITD 57 (Mum) - Sec 36(1)…

A.C.I.T. CIRCLE - 2(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. TRUST CAPITAL SERVICES (INDIA) PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result the ground No

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharacit, Circle-2(3)(1), M/S Trust Capital Services R.No. 552, 5Th Floor, (India) Pvt. Ltd., 105, Aayakar Bhavan, Vikas, 11 Bank Street, M.K. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400023. Vs. Mumbai-400020. Pan: Aabct3654P Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri V.K. Chaturvedi (Sr.Dr) Respondent By : Shri Sanjay Parikh (Ar) Date Of Hearing : 10.04.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2019 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh; 1. This Appeal By Revenue Under Section 253 Of Income-Tax Act (‘Act’) Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-

…see submits that this ground of appeal is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court and the decision of Tribunal in support of his submission, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in DIT(IT) vs. Citybank [377 ITR 69], CIT vs. D. Chatan & Company [390 ITR 36 (Bom)], DCIT vs. Bank of Bahrain and Kuwit [2010] 5 ITR (Trib.) 301 (Mum) (SB), IDBI vs. Capital market Services Ltd. vs. DCIT [2015] 42 ITR (Trib.) 379 (Mum). 11. We have considered the rival submission of the parties and have gone through the orders of lower authorities. We have observed that the asses…

M/S. CENTRAL BK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. THE DY CIT RG 2(1), MUMBAI

…70) 2. Disallowance of GOA.II(2) for AY.s. i) ITA No.4157/M/2003 Para-3 to 3.4(of payment of Master 2000-01 & 2001-02 for AY 1999-00 ITAT order) Card/Visa on the dtd.24/09/2010 ground that TDS had not been deducted u/s. ii) Citibank N.A. Para-6-9 ( High 195 (377 ITR 69) Court order) 3. Disallowance of Gr.No.II(3) for AY.s. i) ITA No.4449/M/2003 Para-5, 7, 10 (of expenses u/s. 14A 2000-01 & 2001-02; for AY 1998-99 & ITA ITAT order) Gr.No.2 (not No.4450/M/2003 for AY pressed)(2002-03); 1999-2000 dated Gr.No.1(b)(not 23/09/2015 pressed);(2003-04); Ground No.2 for A.Y.s 2005-06 & 2006-07; Ground No.2(a) for A.Y. 20…

SETH PROPERTIES,MUMBAI vs. ITO 12(1)(3), MUMBAI

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

…No.37 of 2013 CIT v. Proctor and Gamble Home Products Ltd., dated January 19,2015 [2015J 377 ITR 66 (Bom); I.TA. No.269 of 2013 CIT v. SBI dated February 4, 2015 [2015]375 ITR 20(Bom); I.TA. No. 330 of 2013 DIT v. Citibank N. A. dated March 11, 2015 - [2015] 377 ITR 69 (Bom).) Filing of appeal under Section 260A of the Act is serious issue. The parties who seek to file such appeals (which are normally after two tiers of appeal before the authorities under the Act) must do so after due application of mind and not raise frivolous / concluded issues. This is certainly expected of the State .. " 8 Thus, on the abov…