DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ADITYA BIRLA HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED, MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act. Similarly, in Ground No. 2 raised by the Revenue has challenged the action of CIT(A) granting relief to the Assessee without calling for a remand report. Ground No. 3 & 4 are directed against the grant of TDS

UTILITY SUPPLY PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(4) MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

143(3) or 147 / 263\netc. is seen and a copy of the relevant order is placed on file and\nensure that the total income assessed under section 153A of the\nI.T. Act is not less than the total income determined in\nproceedings prior to the order under section 153A of the Act.\nThe office note should also give finding

ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE AMC LIMITED,MAHARASHTRA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CIRCLE 6(1)(1), MAHARASHTRA

TDS credit. Some grounds were dismissed, some allowed, and some restored to the Assessing Officer for verification.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": ["Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961", "Section 143(1)", "Section 143(2

ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE AMC LIMITED,MAHARASHTRA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CIRCLE 6(1)(1), MAHARASHTRA

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar1. Ita No. 6663/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) 2. Ita No. 6701/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) 3. Ita No. 6702/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 4. Ita No. 6703/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2023-24) Aditya Birla Sun Life Dcitcircle-6(1)(1), Amc Limited, Room No. 502, 5Th 17Th Floor, One World Vs. Floor, Aayakar Centre Tower-1, Jupiter Bhavan, M. K. Mill Compount, 841, Road, Churchgate, Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai-400 020 Delisle Road, S.O. Mumbai-400 013 Pan/Gir No. Aaacb6134D (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ronak Doshi, Shri Shrey Agrawal & Shri Aadish Jain, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 27.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 06.02.2026

TDS credit, while treating interest grounds as consequential. 8. In A.Y. 2022–23, no independent addition or disallowance was made in the regular assessment order passed under section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act. The CIT(A) recorded that only the income as processed under section 143(1) had been adopted in the assessment order and, accordingly

JAN SEVA MANDAL ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD -1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statisti...

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2023-24 Jan Seva Mandal, Central Processing Centre Income Vinayalaya, Mahakali Caves Tax Deparment, Bengaluru, Vs. Road, Andheri (East), Income Tax Officer Exemption Mumbai-400093. Ward 1(4), Mumbai. 6Th Floor, Mtnl Te Building, Pedder Road, Mumbai-400026. Pan No. Aaatj 4868 K Appellant Respondent

TDS refund of Rs. 1,05,613/- against the Appellant: against the Appellant: 1. A sum of Rs. 17,61,379/ A sum of Rs. 17,61,379/- under section 11(1 )(a) of the under section 11(1 )(a) of the Act Act Act being being being amount amount amount accumulated accumulated accumulated

ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE AMC LIMITED,MAHARASHTRA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 6(1)(1), MAHARASHTRA

TDS credit, DDT, and interest levies.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": [ "Sec 250", "Sec 143(1)", "Sec 143(2)", "Sec 142(1)", "Sec 143

ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE AMC LIMITED,MAHARASHTRA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CIRCLE 6 (1)(1), MAHARASHTRA

sections": [ "250", "143(1)", "143(2)", "142(1)", "143(3)", "144B", "80G", "36(1)(va)", "40(a)(ia)", "43B", "234B", "234C", "270A", "115P", "111A", "112A", "234D", "244A", "199", "37(1)", "40(a)", "43B(f)" ], "issues": "The primary issues revolved around the allowability of various deductions, disallowances, credit for taxes, and levy of interest. Specific disputes concerned employee provident fund contributions

TML DRIVELINES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (OSD) 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri G. Manjunatha

2, assessee has raised legal and jurisdictional issues challenging the validity of the assessment order passed under section 143(3) r/w section 148 Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”). 3. Brief facts relating to the issues in dispute are, the assessee an Indian company is engaged in manufacture of automobile parts. For the assessment year under dispute, assessee

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

143(3) of the Act elaborate discussion was made. Assessing Officer has also referred the relevant case law i.e. Bombay High Court in the case of Madhav Prasad Nathuran Pandit v. Mohilal Ramchand Mahesee 30 Bom LR 186 AIR 1928 Bom 97, 108 I.C. 482 and Madras High Court in the case of R.Venugopala Reddiar v. Krishna Swamy Reddiar

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

143(3) of the Act elaborate discussion was made. Assessing Officer has also referred the relevant case law i.e. Bombay High Court in the case of Madhav Prasad Nathuran Pandit v. Mohilal Ramchand Mahesee 30 Bom LR 186 AIR 1928 Bom 97, 108 I.C. 482 and Madras High Court in the case of R.Venugopala Reddiar v. Krishna Swamy Reddiar

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

143(3) of the Act elaborate discussion was made. Assessing Officer has also referred the relevant case law i.e. Bombay High Court in the case of Madhav Prasad Nathuran Pandit v. Mohilal Ramchand Mahesee 30 Bom LR 186 AIR 1928 Bom 97, 108 I.C. 482 and Madras High Court in the case of R.Venugopala Reddiar v. Krishna Swamy Reddiar

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

143(3) of the Act elaborate discussion was made. Assessing Officer has also referred the relevant case law i.e. Bombay High Court in the case of Madhav Prasad Nathuran Pandit v. Mohilal Ramchand Mahesee 30 Bom LR 186 AIR 1928 Bom 97, 108 I.C. 482 and Madras High Court in the case of R.Venugopala Reddiar v. Krishna Swamy Reddiar

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

143(3) of the Act elaborate discussion was made. Assessing Officer has also referred the relevant case law i.e. Bombay High Court in the case of Madhav Prasad Nathuran Pandit v. Mohilal Ramchand Mahesee 30 Bom LR 186 AIR 1928 Bom 97, 108 I.C. 482 and Madras High Court in the case of R.Venugopala Reddiar v. Krishna Swamy Reddiar

ADDL CIT R G 7(1), MUMBAI vs. NOVARTIS INDIA LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS HINDUSTAN CIBA GIEGY LTD. ), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Novartis India Limited V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income –Tax - 7(2)(2) {Earlier Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} 6Th& 7Th Floor 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Inspire Bkc M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 “G” Block, Bkc Main Road Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400051 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1) V. M/S. Novartis India Limited Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No.190/Mum/2011 [Arising Out Of Ita No.6772/Mum/2010 (A.Y. 2002-03)] M/S. Novartis India Limited V. Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent)

2 of Factual paper book-1). 3 12.03.2003 In response to a rectification application dated 06.03.2003 filed by the Assessee for short grant of credit of TDS, the Dy. CIT had passed an order under section 154 of the Act (see pages 3-5 of Factual paper book-1). 4 25.08.2003 The Dy. CIT issued a notice under section 143

STAARK ACCESSORIES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 13(2)(2)

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S. Staark Accessories Pvt. Ltd., A-20, Virwani Industrial Estate Goregaon East, Mumbai- 400063, Pan: Aatcs1816J ...... Appellant Vs. Acit-13(2) (2), Aayakar Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai- 400020 ..... Respondent

143(2) of the Act is concerned, they haven’t allowed assessee’s appeal fully and rather allowed the department to issue a fresh notice by the concerned jurisdictional AO, although even this preposition has been reversed by the Hon’ble Apex Court relying on the provisions of section 124(3)(a) of the Act. Which is quite logical also

BNP PARIBAS,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(INTERNATIONA TAXATION)-CIRCLE 1(3)(1), MUMBAI

section 143(2) of the Act, initiating scrutiny assessment\nproceedings in case of the Appellant for the subject AY.\n2.\nThe learned AO has erred in not accepting the claim that the rate of tax\napplicable to domestic companies and/or co-operative banks for AY\n2020-21 is also applicable to the Appellant, in accordance with the\nprovisions of Article

SCHWAB EMERGING MARKETS EQUITY ETF ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -4(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

143(3) read with section\n144C(13) of the Act dated 15 January 2025, issued by the Deputy\nCommissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) - 2(2)(2), Mumbai [the\nlearned AO"] in pursuance of the directions under section 144C(5) of the Act\nissued by the Hon'ble DRP - I, Mumbai dated 2 December 2024 on the following\ngrounds, each

INCOME TAX OFFICER 8(3)(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S.VIBGYOR TEXOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, whereas appeal of the Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer-8(3)(3), M/S Vibgyor Texotech Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 616, 6Th Floor, Aayakar 309, Navyug, T.J. Road, Sewree, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400015. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaccv 0752 D Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Vibgyor Texotech Pvt. Ltd., The Asst. Commissioner Of 309, Navyug, T.J. Road, Sewree, Income Tax-8(3)(2), Mumbai-400015. Vs. Mumbai. Pan No. Aaccv 0752 D Appellant Respondent

TDS) also the Assessing Officer disallowed expenditure amounting to Rs.3,97,90,291/-in terms of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Additions for unexplained cash credit in terms of section 68 of the Act amounting to Rs.1,46,24,270/- and difference in valuation of fixed asset of Rs.2,50,19,760/- being written off were also made