SUDARSHAN SILKS & SAREES v. CIT

300 ITR 205Supreme Court of India2008#1175 most cited
97

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sudarshan Silks & Sarees v. CIT · Sudarshan Silks SC · Section 153A · Section 132(1)(a) · Section 132(2) · search and seizure assessment · illegal payment · STPI unit · Section 10A · enduring benefit test · business transfer agreement

Also reported as

169 Taxmann 321

Sections most often in play

Section 250Section 153ASection 143(3)Section 10ASection 147Section 148Section 139(1)Section 234A
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

stpi unittest of enduring benefitsection 132(2)section 203section 132(1)(a)convertible foreign exchangesoftware technology parkillegal paymentsection 153(a)section 10(2)section 39business transfer agreement

Judgments citing SUDARSHAN SILKS & SAREES v. CIT

M/S Jai Maa Sharda Service Station, Allahabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Allahabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

ITA 24/ALLD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Oct 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Sh. Praveen Godbole, C.A. & Sh. SuyashFor Respondent: Sh. Amalendu Nath Mishra, CIT DR & Sh
Section 132(1)Section 153Section 153ASection 153DSection 250

…rovisions to arrive at the conclusion that the payments were covered by exception under Rule 6DD(j). The order of the CIT(A) therefore suffers from perversity in view of the ratio of decision in case of Vijay Kumar Talwar 330 ITR 1 (SC). Sudarshan Silk sarees 300 ITR 205(SC). ITA Nos.24 & 25/ALLD/2019 M/s Jai Maa Sharda Service Station ITA Nos. 105,106,107,108/ALLD/2019 M/s Subhash Stone Product (P.) Ltd. ITA Nos. 30,31,32,33/ALLD/2019 Vijay Stone Product ITA Nos. 64 & 65/ALLD/2019 Vijay Stone Product (Dept.) CO Nos. 5 & 6/ALLD/2020 Vijay Stone Product 9. On facts & circumstances of the case and law, the CIT(A) w…

M/S Subhash Stone Product Private Limited, Sonebhadra vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle, Allahabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

ITA 108/ALLD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Oct 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Sh. Praveen Godbole, C.A. & Sh. SuyashFor Respondent: Sh. Amalendu Nath Mishra, CIT DR & Sh
Section 132(1)Section 153Section 153ASection 153DSection 250

…rovisions to arrive at the conclusion that the payments were covered by exception under Rule 6DD(j). The order of the CIT(A) therefore suffers from perversity in view of the ratio of decision in case of Vijay Kumar Talwar 330 ITR 1 (SC). Sudarshan Silk sarees 300 ITR 205(SC). ITA Nos.24 & 25/ALLD/2019 M/s Jai Maa Sharda Service Station ITA Nos. 105,106,107,108/ALLD/2019 M/s Subhash Stone Product (P.) Ltd. ITA Nos. 30,31,32,33/ALLD/2019 Vijay Stone Product ITA Nos. 64 & 65/ALLD/2019 Vijay Stone Product (Dept.) CO Nos. 5 & 6/ALLD/2020 Vijay Stone Product 9. On facts & circumstances of the case and law, the CIT(A) w…

Subhash Stone Product (P) Ltd., Sonebhadra vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle, Allahabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are held to be partly allowed as above, while the Departmental appeals in the matter of Vijay Stone

ITA 107/ALLD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Oct 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Sh. Praveen Godbole, C.A. & Sh. SuyashFor Respondent: Sh. Amalendu Nath Mishra, CIT DR & Sh
Section 132(1)Section 153Section 153ASection 153DSection 250

…rovisions to arrive at the conclusion that the payments were covered by exception under Rule 6DD(j). The order of the CIT(A) therefore suffers from perversity in view of the ratio of decision in case of Vijay Kumar Talwar 330 ITR 1 (SC). Sudarshan Silk sarees 300 ITR 205(SC). ITA Nos.24 & 25/ALLD/2019 M/s Jai Maa Sharda Service Station ITA Nos. 105,106,107,108/ALLD/2019 M/s Subhash Stone Product (P.) Ltd. ITA Nos. 30,31,32,33/ALLD/2019 Vijay Stone Product ITA Nos. 64 & 65/ALLD/2019 Vijay Stone Product (Dept.) CO Nos. 5 & 6/ALLD/2020 Vijay Stone Product 9. On facts & circumstances of the case and law, the CIT(A) w…

M/S. Barbeque Nation Hospitality Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

ITA 26/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. A. Shankar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. M. Mahesh, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 153ASection 234ASection 250

…empting to re-write the agreement entered between the parties by varying the consideration paid which is impermissible in law. The appellant places reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mangalore Ganesh Beedi Works v. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 640 (SC). CC. The appellant submits that the payment of amounts in excess of the value of the tangible assets has to be either revenue expenditure or a capital expenditure, on which depreciation is to be granted. The appellant submits that, if the appellant had claimed the entire sum as revenue expenditure, the same would have been allowed as expend…

M/S. Barbeque Nation Hospitality Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

ITA 25/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Respondent: Shri. A. Shankar, Sr. Advocate
Section 132Section 153ASection 234ASection 250

…empting to re-write the agreement entered between the parties by varying the consideration paid which is impermissible in law. The appellant places reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mangalore Ganesh Beedi Works v. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 640 (SC). cc. The appellant submits that the payment of amounts in excess of the value of the tangible assets has to be either revenue expenditure or a capital expenditure, on which depreciation is to be granted. The appellant submits that, if the appellant had claimed the entire sum as revenue expenditure, the same would have been allowed as expendi…

M/S. Barbeque Nation Hospitality Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 24/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. A. Shankar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. M. Mahesh, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 153ASection 234ASection 250

…empting to re-write the agreement entered between the parties by varying the consideration paid which is impermissible in law. The appellant places reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mangalore Ganesh Beedi Works v. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 640 (SC). cc. The appellant submits that the payment of amounts in excess of the value of the tangible assets has to be either revenue expenditure or a capital expenditure, on which depreciation is to be granted. The appellant submits that, if the appellant had claimed the entire sum as revenue expenditure, the same would have been allowed as expend…

M/S. Barbeque Nation Hospitality Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax Officer, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

ITA 23/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

Section 153ASection 234ASection 250

…empting to re-write the agreement entered between the parties by varying the consideration paid which is impermissible in law. The appellant places reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mangalore Ganesh Beedi Works v. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 640 (SC). CC. The appellant submits that the payment of amounts in excess of the value of the tangible assets has to be either revenue expenditure or a capital expenditure, on which depreciation is to be granted. The appellant submits that, if the appellant had claimed the entire sum as revenue expenditure, the same would have been allowed as expend…

M/S. Barbeque Nation Hospitality Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 22/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. A. Shankar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. M. Mahesh, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 153ASection 234ASection 250

…empting to re-write the agreement entered between the parties by varying the consideration paid which is impermissible in law. The appellant places reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mangalore Ganesh Beedi Works v. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 640 (SC). cc. The appellant submits that the payment of amounts in excess of the value of the tangible assets has to be either revenue expenditure or a capital expenditure, on which depreciation is to be granted. The appellant submits that, if the appellant had claimed the entire sum as revenue expenditure, the same would have been allowed as expend…

M/S. Barbeque Nation Hospitality Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 21/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. A. Shankar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. M. Mahesh, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 153ASection 234ASection 250

…empting to re-write the agreement entered between the parties by varying the consideration paid which is impermissible in law. The appellant places reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mangalore Ganesh Beedi Works v. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 640 (SC). cc. The appellant submits that the payment of amounts in excess of the value of the tangible assets has to be either revenue expenditure or a capital expenditure, on which depreciation is to be granted. The appellant submits that, if the appellant had claimed the entire sum as revenue expenditure, the same would have been allowed as expend…

Rsd Containers Private Limited, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward 7(1), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1320/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Aug 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Khandelwal, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr.-DR
Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 151ASection 153CSection 68

…including unabsorbed depreciation or MAT credit) is permissible against income deemed under Sections 68 to 69D. The argument that unabsorbed depreciation is not a "loss" is already settled against assessee. Relied on: Sudarshan Silks & Sarees v. CIT (2008) 300 ITR 205 (Kar) CIT v. Chimanlal S. Patel (2015) 371 ITR 357 (Guj) PRAYER In view of the above submissions, the Hon'ble Tribunal is most humbly requested to: Dismiss all grounds raised by the assessee as devoid of merit. Uphold the validity of reassessment proceedings under Section 147/148. Confirm the addition of ₹1,37,00,000/- under Section 68 r.w.s…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur vs. C. G. Ispat Private Limited, Raipur

ITA 95/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur30 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 95/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri S. L. Anuragi, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 92BSection 92C

…to relevant facts on record, misread the evidence and its probative value thereby giving rise to perversity in the order of Ld. CIT(A), which itself gives rise to Question of Law as held in several case laws including in the case of Sudarshan Silk and Sarees 300 ITR 205 (SC)?” 3. Brief facts of the case, as described by the Ld. CIT(A) in his order are extracted as under: 3 DCIT-1(1), Raipur vs. C. G. Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Sr. Nature of Addition Amount (Rs.) No. 1. Transfer pricing upward adjustment as per 6,16,68,732/- order 92CA(3) of the Act 2. Disallowance of TCS 43,120/- 3. Disallowance of Employees Contributi…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur vs. Shanta Techno Private Limited, Raipur

ITA 155/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 155/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2018-19)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69C

…to relevant facts on record, misread the evidence and its probative value thereby giving rise to perversity in the order of Ld. CIT(A), which itself gives rise to Question of Law as held in several case laws including in the case of Sudarshan Silk and Sarees 300 ITR 205 (SC)?. (3) The order of the CIT(A) is erroneous both in law and on facts. Any other ground which may be adduced at the time of hearing. (4) 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a corporate entity, had filed its Return of Income (ROI) for AY 2018-19, declaring total income of Rs. 93,46,676/-. In the matter, the Ld. AO had posse…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur vs. Shri Vinay Agrawal, Mahasamund

The appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 30/RPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 29 & 30/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2014-15, 2015-16)

Section 147Section 148Section 250

…ude to relevant facts on record, misread the evidence and its probative value thereby giving rise to perversity in the order of Id. CIT(A), which itself gives rise to Question of Law as held in several case laws including the case of Sudarshan Silk and Sarees 300 ITR 205 (SC)?" 4. The order of the CIT(A) is erroneous both in law and on facts. 5. Any other ground which may be adduced at the-time of hearing. 3 ITA No. 29 & 30/RPR/2025 and CO No. 2 & 3/RPR/2025 Dy. CIT-1(1), Raipur Vs. Shri Vinay Agrawal, Mahasamund Grounds of Cross Objection in ITA No. 02/RPR/2025 (Arising out of ITA No. 29/RPR/2025): 1. Ld. C…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur vs. Shri Vinay Agrawal, Mahasamund

The appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 29/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 29 & 30/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2014-15, 2015-16)

Section 147Section 148Section 250

…ude to relevant facts on record, misread the evidence and its probative value thereby giving rise to perversity in the order of Id. CIT(A), which itself gives rise to Question of Law as held in several case laws including the case of Sudarshan Silk and Sarees 300 ITR 205 (SC)?" 4. The order of the CIT(A) is erroneous both in law and on facts. 5. Any other ground which may be adduced at the-time of hearing. 3 ITA No. 29 & 30/RPR/2025 and CO No. 2 & 3/RPR/2025 Dy. CIT-1(1), Raipur Vs. Shri Vinay Agrawal, Mahasamund Grounds of Cross Objection in ITA No. 02/RPR/2025 (Arising out of ITA No. 29/RPR/2025): 1. Ld. C…

L & T Technologies Services Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the additional grounds of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4255/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjeel&T Technologies Services Ltd Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income L&T House, N.M. Marg, Tax, Circle 2(2)(1), Mumbai Room No.545, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Mumbai Pan: Aaccl4310P Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400 020 Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Dr. K.R. Subhash (CIT- DR)
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 170Section 2Section 250Section 37Section 90

…rk, copyright, technical know-how and not goodwill. ii. In the year under appeal (AY 1995-96), Section 32 did not include intangible assets as a class of depreciable assets. iii. The decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court has been reversed by Supreme Court [378 ITR 640] 14.5. We note that Goodwill is a depreciable asset as upheld by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Smifs Securities Ltd(supra). It is also clarified therein that;the goodwill shall be represented by excess of consideration paid over the net value of the assets and shall be treated as goodwill which shall quality as an intangible asset…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur vs. Virendra Kumar Agrawal, Raipur

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 485/RPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur03 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 485/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Raipur (C.G.)

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.L Anuragi, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 57Section 68Section 69C

…Agrawal 5. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Id. CIT(A) was justified in deciding the appeal in favour of the appellant ignoring the ratio of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Sudarshan Silk and Sarees 300 ITR 205 (SC) wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court, has laid down the attributes of perversity by holding that an order or finding is perverse on facts, if the finding is without any evidence and when an authority draws a conclusion which can't be drawn by any reasonable person or authority on the material and facts placed before it?" 6. The order of the CIT…

Mange Ram Mittal vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/51/2007HC Punjab & Haryana14 Nov 2024

Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

Section 132(1)Section 143Section 144Section 147Section 158

…2008 has been Hisar, against the order of the IT We find that the appeal filed b ave already noticed that specia amined the case on facts and th manates from the order passed b mune from challenge in appea Act as has been held by H Ganesh Beedi Works vs C 15) 378 ITR 640. Therefore, the ed. Accordingly, both appeals are di No costs. (SANJ aking/reasoned Yes/N ortable Yes/N -8- the properties taken on rent by ve been correctly re-assessed by ents, learned counsel for the the issue relating to constitution dent of ITAT. the appeal filed by the assesse…

DCIT Central Circle 5 4, Mumbai vs. L and T Valdel Engineering Limited, Bangaluru

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed and appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed for all assessment years under consideration

ITA 4767/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Am

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JM & SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, AM I.T.A. No.4551/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) I.T.A. No.4552/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) I.T.A. No.4553/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) I.T.A. No.4554/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) I.T.A. No.4555/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) Larsen & Toubro Ltd. (successor to ACIT, CC-5(4) (earlier AO L&T Valdel Engineering Ltd.) DCIT, Circle-11(5), Bangalore), L&T House, N.M. Marg, Vs. Room No. 1927, 19th Floor, Mumbai-400001. Air India Building, PAN : AAACL0140P Nariman Point, Mumbai-…

DCIT Central Circle 5(4), Mumbai vs. L and T Valdel Engineering Limited, Bangaluru

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed and appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed for all assessment years under consideration

ITA 4715/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Am

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JM & SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, AM I.T.A. No.4551/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) I.T.A. No.4552/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) I.T.A. No.4553/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) I.T.A. No.4554/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) I.T.A. No.4555/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) Larsen & Toubro Ltd. (successor to ACIT, CC-5(4) (earlier AO L&T Valdel Engineering Ltd.) DCIT, Circle-11(5), Bangalore), L&T House, N.M. Marg, Vs. Room No. 1927, 19th Floor, Mumbai-400001. Air India Building, PAN : AAACL0140P Nariman Point, Mumbai-…

DCIT CC -5 (4), Mumbai vs. L and T Valdel Engineering Limited, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed and appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed for all assessment years under consideration

ITA 4684/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Am

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JM & SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, AM I.T.A. No.4551/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) I.T.A. No.4552/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) I.T.A. No.4553/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) I.T.A. No.4554/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) I.T.A. No.4555/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) Larsen & Toubro Ltd. (successor to ACIT, CC-5(4) (earlier AO L&T Valdel Engineering Ltd.) DCIT, Circle-11(5), Bangalore), L&T House, N.M. Marg, Vs. Room No. 1927, 19th Floor, Mumbai-400001. Air India Building, PAN : AAACL0140P Nariman Point, Mumbai-…