Vodafone India Services (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India

DCIT 1(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Finproject India P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.4860/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-13)

…by the assessee during the previous year relevant to impugned assessment year (see table above). The learned CIT(A) has rightly relied upon decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of Vodafone India Services Private Limited v. UOI reported in (2014) 368 ITR 1(Bombay) which was further reiterated by Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in Vodafone India Services Private Limited v. UOI reported in (2014) 369 ITR 511(Bombay) to hold that issue of shares at share premium by the taxpayer to non resident holding companies is on account of capital transactions and does not give rise to an income chargeable to tax. Sectio…

Brics Gilt Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 1(1)(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5320/Mum/2015 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2008-09) Brics Gilt Finance Ltd. Dcit Cir 1(1)(1), Now Known As M/S Brics Aayakar Bhavan, बिधम/ Gilt Finance Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai, 1St Floor, Sadhna House, 570, Pin- Vs. P.H. Marg, Worli, Mumbai-400018. & आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5685/Mum/2015 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dcit Cir 1(1)(1), Brics Gilt Finance Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, Now Known As M/S Mumbai, Brics Gilt Finance Pvt. बिधम/ Pin- Ltd. Vs. 1St Floor, Sadhna House, 570, P.H. Marg, Worli, Mumbai-400018. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacj8885B अपीऱाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Vijay Mehta, Ar प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Sh. T. Kepgen, Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 01/03/2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 02/05/2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Sandeep Gosain:

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G. S. PANNU, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5320/Mum/2015 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2008-09) Brics Gilt Finance Ltd. DCIT Cir 1(1)(1), Now known as M/s Brics Aayakar Bhavan, बिधम/ Gilt Finance Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai, 1st floor, Sadhna House, 570, Pin- Vs. P.H. Marg, Worli, Mumbai-400018. & आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5685/Mum/2015 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) DCIT Cir 1(1)(1), Brics Gilt Finance Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, Now known as M/s Mumbai, Brics Gilt Finance Pvt. बिधम/ Pin- Ltd. Vs. 1st floor, Sadhna House, 570, P.H…

Jay Ma Durga Buildtech P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 7(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am Jay Maa Durga Buildtech The Deputy Commissioner Private Limited (Merged With Of Income Tax, Cc-7(3), Lodha Construction Private Room No. 655, Aayakar Limited) Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. 412, Floor-4, 17G Vardhaman Mumbai-400 020 Chamber, Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aabcj7826P

…the assessee more particularly when the receipt itself is on capital account In support of our above submission, Ld Counsel for the assessee strongly rely upon the Bombay High Court Judgment in the case of Vodafone India Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Additional CIT 368 ITR 1 (Bom). He narrated that the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment i.e. the assessee has received premium of Rs.28,61,86,858/- on issue of preference shams is nothing but the reiteration of facts. The AO has not given any reason or brought any material on record to show that how the premium of Rs. 28,61,86,856/- on issue of shares becomes th…

ITO 4(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Robinsons Cargo & Logistics P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.117/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Asst. Cit-1(3)(1), M/S. Robinsons Cargo & Logistics Room No. 564, 5Th Floor, Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Canara Bank Building, Mumbai-400 020 Vs. 15/17, Adi Marzan Path, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aagcs 9709 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Ram Tiwari ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Rajeev Wagle सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 22.01.2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 28.03.2018 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 30.10.2015 & Pertains To The Assessment Year 2012- 13. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Read As Under: “Whether On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Cit(A) Was Justified In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.5,65,31,290/- Made U/S. 68 Of The Act On The Account Of Share Premium Charged By The Appellant Assessee Without

…ng Officer to the tune of Rs.5,65,31,290/- u/s 68 needs to be deleted in Toto on this count itself. In support of the above submissions, the appellant relied on various case laws including the judgments in – 1. Vodafone India Services (P) Ltd. Vs UOI - 2014] 368 ITR 1 (Bom) 2. Shell India Markets P, Ltd. Vs. ACIT - 2014] 369 ITR 516 (Bom) 5 M/s. Robinsons Cargo & Logistics Pvt. Ltd. 4.8 Without prejudice, the Assessing Officer himself had arrived at the fair share premium amount of Rs.27.92 per share of Rs. 10 each. And hence, what could have been added, if at all, u/s. 56(2)(viib) of the I T Act, 1961 was the…

Bristlecone India Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Cir- 2(1)(1), Mumbai

Bench: S/Sh. Rajendra & Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./1670/Mum/2015, िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2010-11 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/S.Bristlecone India Limited, A.C.I.T, 2Nd Floor, Techniplex I, Circle-2(1)(1), Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Techniplex Complex, Vs. Mumbai- 400 020. Off Ceer Savarkar Flyover, Goregaon West, Mumbai – 400 062. Pan: Aaacm5186E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri V.Jenardhanan Assessee By: Shri H.P.Mahajani सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 10/11/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 24/01/2018 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद"य सद"य, राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार/ Per Rajendra, Am- लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Order Of The Assessing Officer (Ao), Dated 20.01.2015, Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S 144C(13)Of The Act,The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal.Assessee-Company,Engaged In Rendering Software Services,Filed Its Original Return On 29.09.2010, Declaring Total Income Of Rs. 72.92 Lakhs.Later On,A Revised Return Was Filed On 17.03.2011.The Ao Completed The Assessment, Determining Its Income At Rs.5.84 Crores.

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “केकेकेके” ” ” ” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal “K”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"", लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं अमरजीत "सह अमरजीत "सह, "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं अमरजीत "सह अमरजीत "सह "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य Before S/Sh. Rajendra,Accountant Member & Amarjit Singh, Judicial Member आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./1670/Mum/2015, िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2010-11 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/…

ITO 4(2)(4), Mumbai vs. Khushboo Exports P.Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) I.T.A. No. 3647/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year 2007-08) ITO 4(2)(4) M/s. Khshboo Exports Pvt. Room No. 647 Vs. Ltd. 6th Floor Room No. 30 Aayakar Bhavan 3rd Floor, Badamwadi M.K. Road 343-A, Kalbadevi Road Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 002. PAN : AACCK0444P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Sailesh Parmar Department by Shri Ram Tiwari Date of Hearing 21.9.2017 Date of Pronouncement 21.9.2017 O R D E R The appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 10.2.2017 passed by the learned CIT(A)-9, Mumbai and i…

Ajay J Doshi (HUF), Mumbai vs. ITO 12(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2005-06 Shri Ajay J. Doshi-Huf, Income Tax Officer-12(2)(4), 21, Marker Tower ‘L’ Aayakar Bhavan, बनाम/ G.D. Somani Marg, M.K. Road, Vs. Cuff Parade, Mumbai Mumbai-400005 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No.Aacha8912M

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, सी, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “C”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एन. के. "धान, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri N.K. Pradhan, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2005-06 Shri Ajay J. Doshi-HUF, Income Tax Officer-12(2)(4), 21, Marker Tower ‘L’ Aayakar Bhavan, बनाम/ G.D. Somani Marg, M.K. Road, Vs. Cuff Parade, Mumbai Mumbai-400005 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No.AACHA8912M "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by Shri Sashi Tulsiyan राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by Shri Rajat Mittal -DR 04/05…

Bnt Global P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 9(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Ram Lal Negim/S. Bnt Global Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer-9(1)(2) A/601-607, Mangal Arambh Room No. 226, 2Nd Floor Bldg., Off. S.V. Road, Kora Vs. Aayakar Bhavan Kendra, Near Mc Donald M.K. Road, Mumbai 400020 Borivili (W), Mumbai 400092 Pan – Aaccb52181E Appellant Respondent

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "L" Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Jason P. Boaz, Accountant Member and Shri Ram Lal Negi, Judicial Member M/s. BNT Global Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer-9(1)(2) A/601-607, Mangal Arambh Room No. 226, 2nd Floor Bldg., Off. S.V. Road, Kora Vs. Aayakar Bhavan Kendra, Near Mc Donald M.K. Road, Mumbai 400020 Borivili (W), Mumbai 400092 PAN – AACCB52181E Appellant Respondent Appellant by: Shri Ajay R. Singh Respondent by: Shri M.V. Raj Guru Date of Hearing: 25.04.2017 Date of Pronouncement: 26.04.2017 O R D E R Per Jason P. Boaz, A.M. This appeal by the Revenue is directed against…

Solar Turbines India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 15(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Saktijit Deyआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 1075/Mum./2016 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011–12) Solar Turbines India Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known As Turbomach India P. Ltd.), 401, 402, 403, 4Th Floor ……………. Appellant Powai Plaza, Hiranandani Business Park Powai, Mumbai 400 076 Pan – Aabct7422R V/S Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle–15(3)(2), Aayakar Bhawan ……………. Respondent 101, M.K. Road, Mumbai 400 020 निर्धाररती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Arvind Sonde A/W Shri Ketan Ved रधजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By : Shri N.K. Chand सुिवधई की तधरीख / आदेश घोषणध की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing – 05.10.2016 Date Of Order – 02.01.2017 आदेश / Order शक्तिजीि दे, न्याययक सदस्य के द्वारा / Per Saktijit Dey, J.M.

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ ‘के’ म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री राजेंद्र, ऱेखा सदस्य एवुं श्री शक्तिजीि दे, न्याययक सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI RAJENDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपीऱ सं. / ITA no. 1075/Mum./2016 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011–12) Solar Turbines India Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly known as Turbomach India P. Ltd.), 401, 402, 403, 4th Floor ……………. Appellant Powai Plaza, Hiranandani Business Park Powai, Mumbai 400 076 PAN – AABCT7422R v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle–15(3)(2), Aayakar Bhawan ……………. Respondent 101…

Syngenta India Ltd, Pune vs. Asst CIT RG 1(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma & Shri Amit Shuklait(Tp)A No.: 1373/Mum/2014 (Assessment Year 2009-10) ससिंगएनता इिंडिमा प्राइवेट सरसभटेि Vs Dy. Cit- 1(3), Room No.564, Syngenta India Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, S No. 110/11/3, Amar Paradigm M K Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Baner Road, Pune -411 045 स्थमी रेखा सिं. Pan: Aaecs 9424 P अऩीराथी (Appellant) प्रत्मथी (Respondent)

…r section 92B of the Act has been held to be an essential requirement: 30 ससिंगएनता इिंडिमा प्राइवेट सरसभटेि Syngenta India Ltd IT(TP)A 1373/Mum/2014 ITA 1926/Mum/2014 ITA 560/Mum/2015 ITA 147/Mum/2016 Vodafone India Services Private Limited vs UOI  and Ors 368 ITR 1 (Bom); Maruti Suzuki India Limited vs CIT [2016] 381  ITR 117 (Del); CIT vs Whirlpool of India Limited [2016] 281 ITR  154 (Del); Bausch & Lomb Eyecare (India) Private Limited  vs Addl CIT [2016] 381 ITR 227 (Del); and Patni Computers Systems Limited vs DCIT 60  DTR 113 (Pune). He submitted that the above judgments make it amply clear that exi…

Syngenta India Ltd, Pune vs. Addl CIT RG 1(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma & Shri Amit Shuklait(Tp)A No.: 1373/Mum/2014 (Assessment Year 2009-10) ससिंगएनता इिंडिमा प्राइवेट सरसभटेि Vs Dy. Cit- 1(3), Room No.564, Syngenta India Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, S No. 110/11/3, Amar Paradigm M K Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Baner Road, Pune -411 045 स्थमी रेखा सिं. Pan: Aaecs 9424 P अऩीराथी (Appellant) प्रत्मथी (Respondent)

…r section 92B of the Act has been held to be an essential requirement: 30 ससिंगएनता इिंडिमा प्राइवेट सरसभटेि Syngenta India Ltd IT(TP)A 1373/Mum/2014 ITA 1926/Mum/2014 ITA 560/Mum/2015 ITA 147/Mum/2016 Vodafone India Services Private Limited vs UOI  and Ors 368 ITR 1 (Bom); Maruti Suzuki India Limited vs CIT [2016] 381  ITR 117 (Del); CIT vs Whirlpool of India Limited [2016] 281 ITR  154 (Del); Bausch & Lomb Eyecare (India) Private Limited  vs Addl CIT [2016] 381 ITR 227 (Del); and Patni Computers Systems Limited vs DCIT 60  DTR 113 (Pune). He submitted that the above judgments make it amply clear that exi…

DCIT 1(3), Mumbai vs. Syngenta India Ltd, Pune

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma & Shri Amit Shuklait(Tp)A No.: 1373/Mum/2014 (Assessment Year 2009-10) ससिंगएनता इिंडिमा प्राइवेट सरसभटेि Vs Dy. Cit- 1(3), Room No.564, Syngenta India Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, S No. 110/11/3, Amar Paradigm M K Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Baner Road, Pune -411 045 स्थमी रेखा सिं. Pan: Aaecs 9424 P अऩीराथी (Appellant) प्रत्मथी (Respondent)

…r section 92B of the Act has been held to be an essential requirement: 30 ससिंगएनता इिंडिमा प्राइवेट सरसभटेि Syngenta India Ltd IT(TP)A 1373/Mum/2014 ITA 1926/Mum/2014 ITA 560/Mum/2015 ITA 147/Mum/2016 Vodafone India Services Private Limited vs UOI  and Ors 368 ITR 1 (Bom); Maruti Suzuki India Limited vs CIT [2016] 381  ITR 117 (Del); CIT vs Whirlpool of India Limited [2016] 281 ITR  154 (Del); Bausch & Lomb Eyecare (India) Private Limited  vs Addl CIT [2016] 381 ITR 227 (Del); and Patni Computers Systems Limited vs DCIT 60  DTR 113 (Pune). He submitted that the above judgments make it amply clear that exi…

DCIT 8(3), Mumbai vs. Zinser Textiles Systems P.Ltd, Mumbai

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “ केकेकेके” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“K”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, , , , शि"जीत डे एवं शि"जीत डे शि"जीत डे, "याियक शि"जीत डे "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and Saktijit Dey,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/ ITA No.4851/Mum/2013 : िनधा"रण अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-2008-09 वष" DCI…