“MLI”

Holy Cross Church, Mumbai vs. ITO Exem.Ward 1(3), Mumbai

Bench: Smt.Beena Pillai (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am) Holy Cross Church Ito(Exem)-Ward 1(3) Senapati Bapat Marg 619, 6Th Floor Lower Parel, Mumbai Vs. Cumballa Hill Telephone 400 013. Exchange, Peddar Road Mumbai-400 026. Pan : Aaath2240R Appellant Respondent

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Mumbai “E” Bench, Mumbai. Before Smt.Beena Pillai (JM) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (AM) Holy Cross

Credit Guarantee Fund Trust for Micro and Small Enterprises, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Exemption -1(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Rahul Chaudharyassessment Year : 2018-19 Credit Guarantee Fund Trust Deputy Commissioner Of For Micro & Small Enterprises, Income Tax, Exemption-1(1), 1St Floor, Vs. Mtnl Tel. Exch. Building, Sidbi Swavalamban Bhavan, Cumballa Hills, Pedder Road, Avenue 3, Lane 2, G-Block, Mumbai-400026. Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051. Pan : Aaatc2613D (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Shailesh Shah & Shri Jay Dharod For Revenue : Shri R.A. Dhyani, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04-09-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 15-09-2025 O R D E R Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [„Ld.Cit(A)‟], Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19, Wherein The Assessee Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “(1) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Ld. Cit(A)], Nfac Has Erred In Confirming The Order Of Levying Penalty U/S 270A Of The Act Of Rs. 293,63,60,258/- On 2 Disallowances Made In The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S 144B Of The Act Without Appreciating The Fact That The Hon'Ble Itat, Mumbai Has Fully Deleted The Said Disallowances & Reasons Assigned By Him For Doing So Are Wrong & Contrary To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Provisions Of The Act & Income Tax Rules, 1962 ("The Rules") Made Thereunder. The Appellant Prays That The Penalty U/S 270A Of The Act Of Rs. 293,63,60,258/- Be Deleted. The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Amend, Alter, Modify And/Or Delete All Or Any Of The Above Grounds Of Appeal, On Or Before The Date Of Hearing.”

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “C” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAHUL

Factive Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, (International Taxation )-2(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Girish Agrawal & Factive Limited Asst. Cit(It)-2(3)(1) C/O. Price Waterhouse & Co. Llp 609, 6Th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, 252, Veer Savarkar Marg, C-41, C-43, G Block, Vs. Shivaji Park, Dadar, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400 028 Bandra (E), Mumbai Pan/Gir No. Aaccf 5745 J (Appellant) : (Respondent) : Shri Dhanesh Bafna A/W Appellant By Shri Yogesh Malpani & Ms. Kinjal Patel Respondent By : Shri Krishna Kumar (Sr. Dr) Date Of Hearing : 21.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.09.2025 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey: Captioned Appeals By The Assessee Are Against The Final Assessment Orders Passed U/S. 143(3) R.W.S 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ For Short), In Pursuance To The Directions Of Learned Dispute Resolution Panel (‘Ld. Drp' For Short) & Pertains To The Assessment Years (A.Y.) 2021-22 & 2022-23. 2. Since The Substantive Issue On Merits, Arising In The Appeals Are More Or Less Common In Both The Appeals, We Propose To Take Up Ita No. 4706/Mum/2023, Pertaining To A.Y. 2021-22, As The Lead Appeal. (A.Ys. 2021-22 & 2022-23) Factive Limited Vs. Asst. Cit(It) 3. Ground Nos. 1, 2 & 3 Are Basically On Legal Issues, Challenging The Validity Of The Final Assessment Order. At The Outset, Ld. Counsel Appearing For The Assessee Submitted That He Would Prefer To Address The Issues On Merits And, If Warranted, May Press The Legal Grounds.

facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned DRP erred in invoking the provisions of the Multilateral Instrument ('MLI') and also, holding that the exclusions under Article 5(3) of the DTAA will not apply to the Appellant. 7. Without prejudice to the above ... short) of the assessee in India in the form of DJCIPL. Of-course, the peripheral issues relating to applicability of provisions of Multilateral Instrument (‘MLI’ for short) to Article 5(3) India-UK Treaty and attribution of profit to PE are closely linked to the second issue relating to existence

U Games Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 13(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankaru Games Private Limited, V/S. Income Tax Officer, Ward – Tower 4, Central B Wing, 5 Th बनाम 13(1)(1), 225, Aaykar Floor, Nesco It Park, Nesco Bhawan, Maharishi Karve Centre, Western Express Road, Mumbai–400020, Highway, Goregaon (East), Maharashtra Mumbai –400 063, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaccu7582L Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT