Jal Hotels Co. Ltd. v. ADIT: 184 Taxman (Del)

DCIT Ltu, Mumbai vs. The Tata Finance Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharincome Tax Appeal No.2961/Mum/2014 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2003-04) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Tata Finance Ltd Large Tax Payer Unit (Now Merged With Tata Motors Centre -1, 29Th Floor Ltd.) World Trade Centre Bombay House 24 Cuffe Parade Homi Mody Street Mumbai – 400 005 Mumbai – 400 001 Pan : Aaact1629F (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Income Tax Appeal No.2962/Mum/2014 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2005-06) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax M/S Tata Motors Ltd. Large Tax Payer Unit Bombay House, 24 Centre -1, 29Th Floor Homi Mody Street World Trade Centre Mumbai – 400 001 Cuffe Parade Pan : Aaact2T27Q Mumbai – 400 005 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Appellant By : Smt S Padmaja & Smt Mahva Sarkar प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Dinesh Vyas & Shri Manish Haria सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 30/12/2016 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 22/03/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per C.N.Prasad (J.M.) : These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (Appeals)-6, Mumbai Dated 27.01.2014 For The Assessment Years

…)(FB) affirmed in CIT v Kelvinator of India Ltd. (320 ITR 561)(SC) ii) CIT v Usha International (348 ITR 485)(Del)(FB) iii) Idea Cellular Ltd. v DCIT (301 ITR 407) (Bom.) iv) Cartini India Limited v ACIT (314 ITR 275) (Bom.) v) CIT v Prima Paper & Engg. Ltd. (364 ITR 222) (Bom.) vi) Siemens Information Systems Ltd. v. ACIT (295 ITR 333) (Bom.) vii) CIT v ICICI Bank Ltd. (349 ITR 482) (Bom.) viii) NYK Line (India) Ltd. v DCIT (346 ITR 361)(Bom.) ix) Aroni Commercials Ltd. v ACIT (377 ITR 405)(Bom.) x) GKN Sinter Metals Ltd. v ACIT (371 ITR 225) (Bom.) xi) Rabo India Finance Ltd. v DCIT (346 ITR 528)(Bom.) 9 Tata…

Yes Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 7(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the AO is dismissed

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई “ “ “ “ जी जी जी” खंडपीठ जी Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“G”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं, राम लाल नेगी एवं राम लाल नेगी राम लाल नेगी, "याियक राम लाल नेगी "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ITA/1991/Mum/2015,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Yes Bank Limited DCIT, -8(3)(2) 9th Floor, Nehru Centre, discovery Room No.615, 6th Floor, A…

The Dy CIT Cir 8(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Afcons Infrastructure Ltd, Mumbai

…terial,that it had given break up of lease rent,that there was no escapement of income,that interest component and depreciation would be more than the principal component of the lease transaction.He relied upon the case of Prima Paper and Engineering Industry(364 ITR 222).For the AY. 2001-02, he advanced the similar arguments.He further stated that total lease rent(Rs.12.71 Crores)was less than Depreciation (Rs.12.89 Crores)and Interest(Rs.3.55 Crores) amount,that there was no escapement of income for that year also. 7.We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material before us.We find that while fili…

ACIT Cir. - 8(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Afcons Infrastructure Ltd., Mumbai

…terial,that it had given break up of lease rent,that there was no escapement of income,that interest component and depreciation would be more than the principal component of the lease transaction.He relied upon the case of Prima Paper and Engineering Industry(364 ITR 222).For the AY. 2001-02, he advanced the similar arguments.He further stated that total lease rent(Rs.12.71 Crores)was less than Depreciation (Rs.12.89 Crores)and Interest(Rs.3.55 Crores) amount,that there was no escapement of income for that year also. 7.We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material before us.We find that while fili…

M/S. Afcons Infrastructure Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT - 8(1), Mumbai

…terial,that it had given break up of lease rent,that there was no escapement of income,that interest component and depreciation would be more than the principal component of the lease transaction.He relied upon the case of Prima Paper and Engineering Industry(364 ITR 222).For the AY. 2001-02, he advanced the similar arguments.He further stated that total lease rent(Rs.12.71 Crores)was less than Depreciation (Rs.12.89 Crores)and Interest(Rs.3.55 Crores) amount,that there was no escapement of income for that year also. 7.We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material before us.We find that while fili…

Gas & Power Investment Company Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 1(1)(4), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta No.1118/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S. Gas & Power The Ito, Ward 1(1)(4), बनाम/ Investment Co. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Asian Building, Mumbai-40 020 Ground Floor, 17, R. Kamani Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai -400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaccg 3843J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By: Shri Ishwer Rathi Shri Mahendra Mehta ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Miss Bharti Singh

…of CIT Vs Sukhjit Starch & Chemicals Ltd. (326 ITR 29) the Ld. Counsel submits that expenditure on issue of debentures is deductible. Placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs Prima Paper and Engineering Industry (364 ITR 222) he submits that this is a case of reopening of assessment within a period of four years where in the course of assessment proceedings, the issue of deduction u/s. 80-IA was raised 5 by the AO to which the assessee has responded by filing its submissions and which was accepted originally. It was held by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court that reopeni…

DCIT 7(3), Mumbai vs. Zodiac Clothing Co. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ashwani Taneja

…order will not lead to the conclusion that the Assessing Officer has not examined the issue and formed an opinion. In this context, she relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in CIT v/s Prima Paper and Engineering Industries, [2014] 364 ITR 222 (Bom.). She submitted, even where the re-opening is done within four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, there must be reason to believe that income has escaped assessment and such reason to believe should not M/s. Zodiac Clothing Co. Ltd. 15 be on account of mere change of opinion. In this context she relied upon the following ca…