M.M.Aqua Technologies Limited v. CIT

ACIT, MUMBAI vs. K RAHEJA CORP PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2020-21

…on the following ectively. In this regard the assessee has relied on the following ectively. In this regard the assessee has relied on the following decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court: decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court: a) MM Aqua Technologies Vs CIT (436 ITR 582) a) MM Aqua Technologies Vs CIT (436 ITR 582) b) Sedco Forex International Drilling Inc Vs CIT (279 ITR 310) b) Sedco Forex International Drilling Inc Vs CIT (279 ITR 310) b) Sedco Forex International Drilling Inc Vs CIT (279 ITR 310) Also, appellant has relied on various other Also, appellant has relied on various other decisions of High court a…

ACIT, MUMBAI vs. K RAHEJA CORPORATE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

…planation inserted in\nSection 144 of the Act has been made effective from 01.04.2022 and therefore did not\napply in the relevant AYs under consideration. Relying on the judgements of the Hon'ble\nSupreme Court in the case of MM Aqua Technologies Ltd Vs CIT (436 ITR 582)&CIT Vs\nVatika Township Pvt Ltd (367 ITR 466), wherein it has been held that any legislation\nwhich imposes new obligation or new duties or a new levy shall have to be necessarily\ntreated as prospective in nature.\n38.\nWe have heard both the parties. Firstly, we deem it fit to deal with the CBDT\nCircular No.5/2014 relied upon by the Revenue.…

ACIT, MUMBAI vs. K RAHEJA CORPORATE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

…Explanation inserted in Section 14A of the Act has been made effective from 01.04.2022 and therefore did not apply in the relevant AYs under consideration. Relying on the judgements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of MM Aqua Technologies Ltd Vs CIT (436 ITR 582)&CIT Vs Vatika Township Pvt Ltd (367 ITR 466), wherein it has been held that any legislation which imposes new obligation or new duties or a new levy shall have to be necessarily treated as prospective in nature. 38. We have heard both the parties. Firstly, we deem it fit to deal with the CBDT Circular No.5/2014 relied upon by the Revenue. It is…

ZODIAC VENTURES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER- 11 (3) (1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

…e fact that the phrases used are "it is declared" or "for the removal of doubts".' (emphasis supplied) 7. The aforesaid proposition of law has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. v. CIT [2021] 129 taxmann.com 145/282 Taxman 281/436 ITR 582. The relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:— "22. Second, a retrospective provision in a tax act which is "for the removal of doubts" cannot be presumed to be retrospective, even where such language 8 ITA 4135/Mum/2025 Zodiac Ventures Ltd. is used, if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. This was stated in…

GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD ( CORPORATE FINANCE DIVISION),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 6(3), MUMBAI

Bench: the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal preferred by the Assessee vide order, dated 18/05/2009. 4. Not being satisfied with the relief granted by the Id. CIT(A), the Assessee has preferred appeal before this Tribunal. The Revenue has also filed cross-appeal challenging the relief granted by the Id. CIT(A).

…hem in the relevant previous year. It was to stop this mischief that section 43B was inserted." xx xx 42. The rationale for introduction of section 43B was explained by this court in M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. v. CIT [2021] 129 taxmann.com 145/282 Taxman 281/436 ITR 582 (SC)/2021 SCC Online SC 575 "19. The object of section 43B, as originally enacted, is to allow certain deductions only on actual payment. This is made clear by the non-obstante clause contained in the beginning of the provision, coupled with the deduction being allowed irrespective of the previous years in which the liability to pay such sum was…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. WELSPUN STEEL LIMITED, GUJARAT

Accordingly, Ground No.1 raised by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (Accountant Member)

…nguishable on facts and 4 Assessment Year 2016-2017 could not be applied to interpret the amendments introduced in Section 14A by the Finance Act 2022. Relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M.M. Aqua Technologies Vs CIT, Delhi-III: 436 ITR 582 (SC) and CIT(Central), New Delhi Vs Vatika Township (P.) Ltd: 367 ITR 466 (SC), the Ld. Authorised Representative for the Assessee submitted that merely the use of expression ‘for the removal of doubts’ or ‘shall be deemed never to have applied’ does not lead to a conclusion that the amendments are to applied to be applied retrospectively. He sub…

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

In the result, the ground no

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Miss Padmavathy S.

…rastructure India Ltd (2022) 141 taxmann.com 289 (Delhi). The relevant paragraphs are reproduced as below: - ―7. The aforesaid proposition of law has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in MM. Aqua Technologies v.CIT [2021] 129 taxmann.com 145/282 Taxman 281/436 ITR 582. The relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced hereinbelow: - "22. Second, a retrospective provision in a tax act which is "for the removal of doubts" cannot be presumed to be retrospective, even where such language is used, if it alters or changes the law as earlier stood. This was stated in Sedco Forex International Drill Inc. v. CIT…