Subramanian and Anr. v. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr.

Jai Hind Co-Op Hsg. Soc Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT-25, Mumbai

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.1763/Mum/2020 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.1762/Mum/2020 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Jai Hind Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. Acit-25(2) 2Nd Floor, Room No.241 Plot No.51, N.S.Road No.11 बनाम Jvpd Scheme, Vile Parle(W) Kautilya Bhavan, G-Block / Vs. Mumbai-400 049 Bkc, Bandra(E) Mumbai-400 051 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaaj-2782-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Rajesh R. Shah-Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Pratap Singh-Ld.Cit Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 10/02/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 12/02/2021 Date Of Pronouncement

…Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Kaliandas Udyog Bhavan Premises Co-op Society Ltd. V/s ITO (ITA No.547/Mum/2017 dated 25/04/2018) relying upon the order of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian V/s Siemens India Ltd. (1983 15 Taxman 594 / 156 ITR 11) held that where there are conflicting decisions of non- jurisdictional High Courts then a view which is in favor of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Hence, the coordinate bench chose to took a view that interest income earned by a co-operative society on its investments held with a co-operative bank would be elig…

ACIT 16(1), Mumbai vs. Utv Entertainment Television Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleacit – 16(1) V. M/S. Utv Entertainment Television Ltd., 1St Floor, Building No. 14 Room No. 439, Aayakar Bhavan Solitaire Corporate Park M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Guru Hargovind Marg, Chakala Andheri(E), Mumbai – 400 053 Pan: Aaccv4782D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajit Kumar Jain Department By : M. Samatha

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACIT – 16(1) v. M/s. UTV Entertainment Television Ltd., 1st Floor, Building No. 14 Room No. 439, Aayakar Bhavan Solitaire Corporate Park M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Guru Hargovind Marg, Chakala Andheri(E), Mumbai – 400 053 PAN: AACCV4782D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ajit Kumar Jain Department by : M. Samatha Date of Hearing : 22.10.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 11.12.2020 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. This appeal is filed by the r…

M/S Raheja Excelsior Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 19(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 3337/मुं/2019 ("न.व.2015-16) M/S. Raheja Excelsior Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd., C.S. No.1/404, Raheja Raheja Excelsior, Tardeo Div., 63, Tardeo Road, Tardeo, Mumbai 400 034. : अपीलाथ"/ Appellant Pan: Aabar9580J बनाम/ Vs.

…h Court had concluded that a cooperative society would not be entitled to claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d). We however find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian v. Siemens India Ltd. [1983] 15 Taxman 594/[1985] 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Court's, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Thus, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the Hon'bl…

Danda Co- Op Credit Society Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward - 22(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 3240/मुं/2019 ("न.व.2012-13) Danda Co-Op Credit Society Ltd. 239, Valmiki, Khar Danda, Khar(West), Mumbai 400 052 : अपीलाथ"/ Appellant Pan: Aaaad3039M बनाम/ Vs. The Income Tax Officer – 22(1)(2) Mumbai 400 007 : ""थ"/ Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Ms Kavita P. Kaushik

…h Court had concluded that a cooperative society would not be entitled to claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d). We however find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian v. Siemens India Ltd. [1983] 15 Taxman 594/[1985] 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Court's, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Thus, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the Hon'bl…

M/S Osho Developers, Mumbai vs. ACIT-32, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ravish Soodita Nos.2372 & 1860/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16) M/S Osho Developers Acit-32, Mumbai Bldg. No. C-11, 3Rd Floor, Osho, Plot No. 1534A, New Link Road, Vs. Room No. 306, Devki Nagar, Borivali (W), Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai – 400 092 Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 051 Pan – Aabfo2984J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Dr. K. Shivram, Senior Advocate & Ms.Neelam Jadhav, A.R Respondent By: Shri Uodal Raj Singh, D.R Date Of Hearing: 06.10.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.11.2020 O R D E R Per Ravish Sood, Jm The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Cit(A)-44, Mumbai, Dated 08.02.2019, Which In Turn Arises From The Assessment Orders Passed Under Sec.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short „Act‟), Dated 02.12.2016 & 30.11.2017 For A.Y. 2014-15 & A.Y. 2015-16, Respectively. As The Issues Involved In The Captioned Appeals Are Inextricably Interlinked Or In Fact Interwoven, The Same Are Therefore Being Taken Up & Disposed Off By Way Of A Consolidated Order. We Shall First Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee For A.Y. 2014-15 Wherein The Impugned Order Has Been Assailed Before Us On The Following Effective Grounds Of Appeal:

…d not income from the property. In the backdrop of the conflict between the decisions of the aforesaid non-jurisdictional High Courts, as observed by the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), the view which is in favour of the assessee has to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, following the judgment of the Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), we respectfully follow the view taken by the Hon‟ble High Court of Guja…

Om Sudarshan Chs Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 17(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1950/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण िर्ा / Assessment Year 2014-15) Om Sudarshan Co-Operative The Income Tax Officer Housing Society Ltd. Ward 17(2)(5), Ground Floor, Om Sudarshan Chs बिाम/ Mumbai Ltd, L.D. Ruparel Marg, Malabar Vs. Hill, Mumbai-400 006 (अपीलाथी / Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Aao0489L अपीलाथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : None प्रत्यथी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri Vodal Raj Singh, Dr सुििाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15.10.2020 घोर्णा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 29.10.2020

…Court had concluded that a co- operative society would not be entitled to claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d). We however find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian v. Siemens India Ltd. [1983] 15 Taxman 594/[1985] 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Court's, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Thus, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the Hon'bl…

Sapiens Technologies (1982) India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT- 6(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 170 & 171/MUM/2019 (A.Ys. 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/s. Sapiens Technologies v. Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax – 6(3)(1) Room No. 506, Aayakar Bhavan (1982) India Pvt. Ltd., Churchgate, Mumbai – 400 020 22 New Pushpa Milan 67, Worli Hills, Mumbai – 400018 PAN: AAACI8674H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ajit Jain Department by : Shri V. Vinod Kumar Date of Hearing : 17.09.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 17.09.2020 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (J…

Sapiens Technologies(1982) India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT - 6(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 170 & 171/MUM/2019 (A.Ys. 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/s. Sapiens Technologies v. Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax – 6(3)(1) Room No. 506, Aayakar Bhavan (1982) India Pvt. Ltd., Churchgate, Mumbai – 400 020 22 New Pushpa Milan 67, Worli Hills, Mumbai – 400018 PAN: AAACI8674H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ajit Jain Department by : Shri V. Vinod Kumar Date of Hearing : 17.09.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 17.09.2020 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (J…

ITO 24 (3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Oberoi Spring Co-Operative Housing Society Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby ordered to be dismissed

…gh Court had concluded that a co- operative society would not be entitled to claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d). We however find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Courts, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Thus, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon’ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the Hon'ble…

Las Palmas Co-Operative Housing Soc. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 19(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2015-16

…y would not be entitled to claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d). We however find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. 6 M/s. Las Palmas Co-Operative Housing Soc. Ltd. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Court‟s, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Thus, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the Hon'bl…

ACIT-16(1), Mumbai vs. Tv 18 Home Shopping Network Limited, Mumbai

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 4725 & 4726/MUM/2018 (A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2013-14) Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax v. M/s. TV18 Home Shopping Network Ltd., Circle – 16(1) 414, Empire Complex Room No. 439, Aayakar Bhavan Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 013 PAN: AACCT4674N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Jitendra Jain Department by : Shri Amit Pratap Singh Date of Hearing : 12.12.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 19.02.2020 O…

ACIT-16(1), Mumbai vs. Tv18 Home Shopping Network Ltd., Mumbai

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 4725 & 4726/MUM/2018 (A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2013-14) Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax v. M/s. TV18 Home Shopping Network Ltd., Circle – 16(1) 414, Empire Complex Room No. 439, Aayakar Bhavan Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 013 PAN: AACCT4674N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Jitendra Jain Department by : Shri Amit Pratap Singh Date of Hearing : 12.12.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 19.02.2020 O…

Solitaire Chs Ltd., Mumbai vs. C-10, 4Th Floor, Pratykshakar Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra(E), Mumbai

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rehman & Shri Ravish Soodm/S Solitaire Chs Ltd. Principal Commissioner Of Society Office, Solitaire Chs Ltd. Income-Tax -26 Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, C-10, 4Th Floor, Vs. Mumbai – 400 076 Pratyaksha Kar Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400 051 Pan – Aagfs7920R (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ety on its investments held with a co-operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Court‟s, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Shree Malgangadevi Sahakari Patpedhi Maryadit, Mumbai vs. Principle Commissioner of Income Tax 29, Mumbai

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1074/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15)

…igh Court had concluded that a co-operative society would not be entitled to claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d). We however find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non- jurisdictional High Court‟s, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Thus, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the Hon'b…

Ansa Ab Industrial Premises Co-Operative Society Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 26(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result assessee's appeal stands allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am)

…Karn), the High Court had concluded that a co-operative society would not be entitled to claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d). However, as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), that where there is a conflict between decisions of non- jurisdictional High Court’s, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as 5 Ansa AB Industrial Premises Co-operative Society Ltd. against that taken against him. Thus, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon’ble High Court of jurisdi…

Jiwan Satya Co-Op Housing Society Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 23(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble

…igh Court had concluded that a co-operative society would not be entitled to claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d). We however find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Court’s, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Thus, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon’ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the Hon'bl…