Jamna Auto Industries v. CIT

JCIT (OSD) 9(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Aptech Ltd, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3369/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Dy. Cit-9(1)(2), M/S. Aptech Limited बनाम/ Room No. 260A, 2Nd Floor, A-65, Aptech House, Midc, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 093 Vs. Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aadca 0602 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Ram Tiwari ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Rutuja Pawar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 04.01.2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 01.03.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 29.04.2014 & Pertains To The Assessment Year 2007- 08. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Read As Under: I) “Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit- (A) Erred In Deleting The Penalty On The Issue Of Provision For Rebate Claimed Without Appreciating The Fact That The Same Was A Mere Provision & Was 2 Dy. Cit Vs. M/S. Aptech Limited Patently Not Allowable Which Amounts To Furnishing Inaccurate Particulars In The Return Of Income, Thus Liable For Penalty?" Ii) “'Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit- (A) Erred In Deleting The Penalty On The Issue Of Provision For Leave Encashment Without Appreciating The Fact That The Same Was Not Paid Before The Due Date Of Filing Of Return Of Income As Mandated By Clause (F) Of Section 43B Of The It, Act, Thereby Making A Claim Which Is Patently Inaccurate, Hence Liable For Penalty?" '

…urred in the ordinary course of conduct of its business. For its claim of rebate, the assessee relied on the decisions in the cases of Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt Ltd v CIT 201 ITR 684 (SC);CIT v RD Sharam & Co. 137 ITR 333 (Bom) and Jamna Auto Industries v CIT 299 ITR 92 (P & H). However, the Assessing Officer held that the claim of the assessee is in the nature of contingent liability as the contractual liability crystallizes only when the assessee agrees to pay. During the course of appeal before the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the assessee submitted that it was not a provision for anticipated f…

Firdosh Noshir Anklesaria, Mumbai vs. ITO 17(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals filed by the Assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Firdosh Noshir Anklesaria Ito 17(2)(4) 5 Gr Floor, Kaka Bldg, Piramal Chambers, बनाम/ 649 Firdoshi Rd. Dadar R.No. 220 4Th Floor, Vs. Mumbai-400014 Lalbaug, Mumbai-40013 (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaapa6428N Appellant By Shri Neel Khandelwal (Ar) Revenue By Shri A.K. Dhondial (Dr)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ,F ,मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “F”, MUMBAI "ी अ"मत शु"ला, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अ"वनी तनेजा, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Amit Shukla, Judicial Member, and Shri Ashwani Taneja, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Firdosh Noshir Anklesaria ITO 17(2)(4) 5 GR Floor, Kaka Bldg, Piramal Chambers, बनाम/ 649 Firdoshi Rd. Dadar R.No. 220 4th Floor, Vs. Mumbai-400014 Lalbaug, Mumbai-40013 (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.AAAPA6428N Appellant by Shri Neel Khandelwal (AR) Revenue by Shri A.K. Dhondial (DR) सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Da…

Bayer Crop Science Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 10(3), Mumbai

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & C.N. Prasadआयकर अपील सं./Ita/7978/Mum/2010,िनधा"रण वष"/Ay.2006-07 M/S. Bayer Cropscience Limited Acit -10(3) Aayakar Bhavan, 4Th Floor, M.K. Road Bayer House, Central Avenue, Hiranandani Gardens, Powai Vs. Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 076. Pan:Aaacb 9651 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By:Shri G.M. Doss Assessee By: S/Shri Paras Savla; Harsh Shah & Viraj Mehta सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 18.04.2016 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 25.05.2016 आयकर अिधिनयम,1961 की धारा 254(1)के अ"ग"त आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद" राजे" के अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- Challenging The Order Dated 14/10/2010 Of The Assessing Officer (Ao),Passed U/S.143(3)R.W. S.144C(13)Of The Act, The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal. Assessee-Company,Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing Of Insecticides & Other Chemicals For Plant Protection,Filed Its Return Of Income On 30/11/2006, Declaring Income Of Rs. 51.18 Crores.During The Assessment Proceedings,The Ao Found That Assessee Had Entered Into International Transactions (It.S) With Its Associated Enterprises(Aes).So,He Made A Reference To The Transfer Pricing Officer (Tpo)To Determine The Arm’S Length Price(Alp) Of Such Transactions. After Receiving The Order Of The Tpo,The Ao Sent The Draft Assessment Order To The Assessee, Who Challenged It Before The Dispute Resolution Panel (Drp).The Drp Issue Directions To The Ao Wide Its Order Dated 28/09/2010.In Pursuance Of The Said Directions, The Ao Completed The Assessment, Determining The Income Of The Assessee Had Rs. 59.89 Crores. 2.First Ground Of Appeal Relates To Transfer Pricing (Tp)Adjustments Of Rs. 2.80 Crores.During The Tp Proceedings,The Tpo Found That The Assessee Had Entered Into The Following It.S With Its Aes:

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई “केकेकेके” खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“K”Bench Mumbai सव"ी राजे"",लेखा सद"य एवं सी. एन. "साद,"याियक सद"य Before S/Sh.Rajendra,Accountant Member and C.N. Prasad,Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./ITA/7978/Mum/2010,िनधा"रण वष"/AY.2006-07 M/s. Bayer CropScience Limited ACIT -10(3) Aayakar Bhavan, 4th floor, M.K. Road Bayer House, Central Avenue, Hiranandani Gardens, Powai Vs. Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 076. PAN:AAACB 9651 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue by:Shri G.M. Doss Assessee by: S/Shri Paras Savla; Harsh Shah & Viraj Mehta सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing…