“Section 41(1)”

Business India Publications Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarbusiness India Publications Vs Income Tax Officer Limited. Income Tax Office-3(1)(2) Room 21 Framroz Court, 4Th Floor, No.666 Aayakarbhavan, M.K. Road, Marine Drive, Next To Sea Mumbai-400020 Green Hotel, Maharashtra- 400020 Pan:Aaacb4739Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ravikant S. Pathak, Respondent By : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui (Sr.Ar)

assessee has claimed the expenditure of interest which was waived or has shown the same as income has not been verified. 3. Section 41(1), the first requisite condition to be satisfied is that the assessee should have got deduction or benefit of allowance in respect of loss, expenditure ... expenditure or trading 5 ITA 5734/Mum/2024 Business India Publications Ltd. liability. The said waiver have the character of income within the meaning of Section 41(1) of the Act. In the case of assessee no assessment is done to verify the treatment given to the interest waiver. 4. In view

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax 5(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Jsw Steel Coated Products Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

deleting the addition of Rs.3,31.18.164/- made on account of Capitul Creditors Written Back which is Income as per the provisions of section 41(1) as they were related to the liabilities which pertained to the assets capitalized by the assessee and the assessee had claimed allowance/deduction in the form ... liability are no longer payable and thus written back during the year. Such written back amount of Rs. 3.31 Crore is covered by section 41(1) and liable to be treated as income of the year. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition by taking view that

DCIT-5(2)(1), Mumbai, Aayakar Bhavan vs. Jsw Steel Coated Products Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

deleting the addition of Rs.3,31.18.164/- made on account of Capitul Creditors Written Back which is Income as per the provisions of section 41(1) as they were related to the liabilities which pertained to the assets capitalized by the assessee and the assessee had claimed allowance/deduction in the form ... liability are no longer payable and thus written back during the year. Such written back amount of Rs. 3.31 Crore is covered by section 41(1) and liable to be treated as income of the year. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition by taking view that

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 1(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Hindustan Unilever Limited, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL

Hindustan Unilever Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy.CIT-1(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue and cross-objection by the

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant

such loan is waived off in the form of a discount, then it amounts to cessation of liability, which is taxable under section 41(1) of the Act. Accordingly, the AO held that the assessee, in its return of income, has correctly treated the discount on prepayment of Sales ... else the subsections and particularly section 43B(1) would have been worded accordingly. Therefore Section 43B has no application. Insofar as applicability of section 41(1)(a), there also the applicability is to be considered in the light of the liability. It is a loss, expenditure or trading liability

Income Tax Officer Ward 22.1.1, Mumbai vs. Antara Tushar Motiwala, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

3662/Mum/2025 Antara Tushar Motiwala enforcement. The Revenue has not brought any material on record to demonstrate that the conditions of section 41(1) or section 28(iv) are satisfied in the facts of the present case. The Assessing Officer himself has made the addition under section 68, and not under ... section 41(1). Therefore, the attempt of the Revenue to justify the addition on an alternative footing is misplaced. 26. In view of the above discussion and the undisputed factual position emerging from the record, we find no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) in deleting the addition

9X Media Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT 16(1) Mumbai, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain9X Media Private Limited Vs. Acit 16(1), Mumbai Ground Floor, Gala No. 1, Room No. 439, Aayakar Abel Estate, Saki Vihar Bhavan, Mk Road, Road, Saki Naka, Mumbai- Mumbai- 400020 400072 Pan/Gir No. Aabc15594D (Applicant) (Respondent)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER 9X Media Private