“book profits”

Bank of Baroda, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(1)(1), Mumbai

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am) Bank Of Baroda Acit-2(1)(1) Baroda Corporate Centre Room 561, 5Th Floor Corporate Accounts & Vs. Aayakar Bhavan Taxation Department, 2Nd M.K. Road Floor, C-26, G-Block Churchgate Bandra Kurla Complex Mumbai-400 020. Bandra-E, Mumbai-400 051. Pan : Aaacb1534F Appellant Respondent

ought to have decided on the addition made of provisions obliterated by reducing the assets and disallowance u/s 14A in computing the book profits. 2 Bank of Baroda Your appellant craves leave to add, to amend and/ or vary the grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing ... Court in the case of Malabar Industrial Company (243 ITR 83)(SC) and finally concluded that Ld. AO should revise the assessment and compute book profit in accordance with provisions of Section 115JB of the Act. 3. In pursuance of the direction of Ld. PCIT, the Ld. AO passed

ACIT, CC-4(2), Mumbai vs. Trapti Trading & Investments Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

declaring total income of Rs.19,61,740/-. Assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act, was passed by the Ld.AO on 29.03.2016 by assessing the book profit u/s 115JB at Rs.2,98,32,71,490/-. 3. Subsequently, Ld.PCIT invoked provisions of section 263 of the Act by issuing notice ... Rules and to pass fresh order as per law. 3.1 The Ld.AO passed order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 263 of the Act, computing book profit u/s 115JB at Rs.3,02,24,44,723/. 3.2 Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.AO the assessee filed appeal before the Ld.CIT

Lupin Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 3, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanassessment Year : 2019-20 Lupin Limited, Principal Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Kalpataru Inspire, Income Tax-3, Off Western Express Highway, Vs. Room No. 612, 6Th Floor, Santacruz (East), Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400055. Maharshi Karve Road, Pan : Aaacl1069K Mumbai-400020. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajan Vora & Shri Pranay Gandhi Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, Cit-Dr

Section 115JB(2) of the Act. 6. erred in directing Ld. AO to add back amount of Rs. 7,45,93,183 while computing book profits under Section 115JB of the Act without appreciating the fact that the Appellant has reduced the provision from Sundry Debtor Schedule (refer Note ... academic purposes, it is considered that addition of provision for doubtful debts of Rs. 7,45,93,183 is to be made while computing book profits under section 115JB of the Act, the same would not result in additional tax liability in hands of the Appellant, since, the tax liability

JCIT (OSD) -3(4), Mumbai vs. Sterlite Technologies Limited, Aurangabad

In the result, appeals of both, the Revenue and the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17 Sterlite Technologies Limited Principle Commissioner Of E-1 Waluj, Midc Industrial Income Tax- 27, Vs. Area, Aurangabad - 431136 Navi Mumbai Maharashtra (Pan: Aaecs8719B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Principle Commissioner Of Sterlite Technologies Limited Income Tax- 27, E-1 Waluj, Midc Industrial Vs. Navi Mumbai Area, Aurangabad - 431136 Maharashtra (Pan: Aaecs8719B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Nikhil Tiwari & Ms. Palak Mehta, Cas Revenue : Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, Cit Dr & Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 30.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against The Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Pune, Vide Order No. Itba/Apl/M/250/2023-24/1058725938(1), Dated Sterlite Technologies Ltd. Ay 2016-17 13.12.2023 Passed Against The Assessment Order By Acit, Ltu, Circle- 1, Mumbai, U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 21.12.2018 For Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Grounds Taken By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under: 1.1 Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Learned Assessing Officer ('Ao') In Not Allowing The Claim Of Appellant That The Rate Of Ddt In Respect Of Dividend Distributed To Its Overseas Holding Company Ought To Be Restricted To The Rate Of Tax Of 5% Prescribed Under Article 10(2) Of Applicable India- Mauritius Dtaa & That The Appellant Is Eligible For Refund Of Ddt Paid In Excess Of Such Rate.

right in deleting the disallowance u/s 14A of the I. T. Act r.w. Rule 8D of the 1. T. Rules while computing book profits u/s 115JB of the Act and without appreciating the facts that the issue is contested before the Hon'ble High Court in assessee's own case ... right in holding that no specific adjustment stipulated for considering the disallowance u/s. 43B while computing book profit u/s 115JB of the Act?" 2.2. In these two appeals, one by the assessee and the other by the Revenue, grounds of appeal raised by both the parties are different. 3. Common

Sterlite Technologies Limited, Aurangabad vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu Circle 1, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of both, the Revenue and the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17 Sterlite Technologies Limited Principle Commissioner Of E-1 Waluj, Midc Industrial Income Tax- 27, Vs. Area, Aurangabad - 431136 Navi Mumbai Maharashtra (Pan: Aaecs8719B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Principle Commissioner Of Sterlite Technologies Limited Income Tax- 27, E-1 Waluj, Midc Industrial Vs. Navi Mumbai Area, Aurangabad - 431136 Maharashtra (Pan: Aaecs8719B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Nikhil Tiwari & Ms. Palak Mehta, Cas Revenue : Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, Cit Dr & Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 30.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against The Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Pune, Vide Order No. Itba/Apl/M/250/2023-24/1058725938(1), Dated Sterlite Technologies Ltd. Ay 2016-17 13.12.2023 Passed Against The Assessment Order By Acit, Ltu, Circle- 1, Mumbai, U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 21.12.2018 For Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Grounds Taken By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under: 1.1 Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Learned Assessing Officer ('Ao') In Not Allowing The Claim Of Appellant That The Rate Of Ddt In Respect Of Dividend Distributed To Its Overseas Holding Company Ought To Be Restricted To The Rate Of Tax Of 5% Prescribed Under Article 10(2) Of Applicable India- Mauritius Dtaa & That The Appellant Is Eligible For Refund Of Ddt Paid In Excess Of Such Rate.

right in deleting the disallowance u/s 14A of the I. T. Act r.w. Rule 8D of the 1. T. Rules while computing book profits u/s 115JB of the Act and without appreciating the facts that the issue is contested before the Hon'ble High Court in assessee's own case ... right in holding that no specific adjustment stipulated for considering the disallowance u/s. 43B while computing book profit u/s 115JB of the Act?" 2.2. In these two appeals, one by the assessee and the other by the Revenue, grounds of appeal raised by both the parties are different. 3. Common

J P Morgan Services India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Beena Pillai & Smt. Renu Jauhrij P Morgan Services India Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited (‘The Income-Tax, Circle 2(2)(1) Appellant’) Aayakar Bhawan, Tower A Blk 9, Tower B Blk Maharishi Karve Road, 10, Tower C Blk 11, Nirlon New Marine Lines, Knowledge Park, Western Churchgate, Express Highway, Goregaon Mumbai-400020. East, Mumbai Suburban, 400063. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcd0503B Appellant .. Respondent

erred in making adjustment/addition of the impugned Transfer pricing addition proposed by the Ld. TPΟ amounting to Rs.630,27,78,876 to the 'book profits' to be determined under section 115JB of the Act. 13. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id.AO ... making adjustment/addition in respect of health and education cess addition proposed by the Ld. AO amounting to Rs. 16,17,66,335 to the 'book profits' to be determined under section 115JB of the Act. 14. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld.AO has erred

Ideaforge Technology Ltd, Mahape vs. ACIT, Circle 15(2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 867/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Ideaforge Technology V/S. Assistant Commissioner Ltd. बिधम Of Income Tax, Circle El-146, Ttc Industrial 15(2)(1), Mumbai Area, Electronic Zone, Room No. 357, 3Rd Floor, Midc, Mahape, Navi Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Mumbai Karve Road, Mumbai 400020 स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aabci6495B Appellant/अपीलधथी .. Respondent/प्रनिवधदी निर्धाररिी की ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi Shri. Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui (Sr Dr) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: सुिवधई की िधरीख / Date Of Hearing 22.08.2025 घोर्णध की िधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement 26.09.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Renu Jauhri [A.M.] :- This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 11.12.2024, Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “Act”] For Assessment Year [A.Y.] 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “On The Facts & In Law, 1. The Hon. Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Id Ao In Making Addition Of Rs. 6,60,02,100/- By Relying Upon The Provisions Of Section 56(2)(Viib) Of The It Act, 1961 On The Ground That The Consideration Received By The Appellant For Issue Of P A G E | 2

excess P a g e | 8 ITA No. 867/Mm/2025 Ay 2017-18 Ideaforge Technology Ltd. over the tax payable with reference to the book profits in accordance with the law applicable thereto; (v)any amount representing provisions made for meeting liabilities, other than ascertained liabilities; (vi)any amount representing contingent ... amount of income-tax claimed as refund, if any, to the extent of the excess over the tax payable with reference to the book profits in accordance with the law applicable thereto; (v) any amount representing provisions made for meeting liabilities, other than ascertained liabilities; (vi) any amount representing contingent

Mahindra and Mahindra Limited (As Sucessor to Mahindra Two Wheelers Limited Which in Turn Is Sucessor to Mahindra Trucks and Buses Limited), Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(2)(1), Mumbai

learned CIT(A) erred in summarily rejecting/ not adjudicating the grounds with respect to adjustments made under section 143(1) for normal and book profit income and ignoring the submissions made by the Appellant. b. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned ... 44DA'. c. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO erred in considering assessed book profits at Rs.29,89,47,102 as per Intimation under section 143(1) as against the book profits as declared in the return of income of Rs.28

Bennett Coleman & Co Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 1(1)(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble

erred in upholding addition of Rs.15,18,85,891/- being the disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D, while computing, the book profit u/s 115JB of the Act. 5.2 The Appellant prays that the addition made in book profit u/s 115JB of the Act be deleted. 6. On the facts ... erred in confirming the action of the ld. AO in not allowing the deduction of Rs. 20,02,35,339/- being difference between book profits and capital gains with indexation benefit arising on transfer of STT paid securities while computing the book profit u/s 115JB