ACIT 4(2), MUMBAI vs. NETWORTH STOCK BROKING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

24-12-2009 & 12-12-2010 under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’). 2. The first issue in assessee’s appeal in ITA No. 2288/Mum/2012 for the A.Y. 2008-09 is as regards to the order of CIT(A) confirming the disallowance of performance based incentive treating as bonus. For this assessee has raised

NETWORTH STOCK BROKING LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

24-12-2009 & 12-12-2010 under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’). 2. The first issue in assessee’s appeal in ITA No. 2288/Mum/2012 for the A.Y. 2008-09 is as regards to the order of CIT(A) confirming the disallowance of performance based incentive treating as bonus. For this assessee has raised

ACIT 4(2), MUMBAI vs. NETWORTH STOCK BROKING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

24-12-2009 & 12-12-2010 under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’). 2. The first issue in assessee’s appeal in ITA No. 2288/Mum/2012 for the A.Y. 2008-09 is as regards to the order of CIT(A) confirming the disallowance of performance based incentive treating as bonus. For this assessee has raised

HSBC SECURITIES AND CAPITAL MARKETS (I) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyal

X of the Act is a separate code in itself and Section 92 of the Act is a separate charging provision. 3.1.10 on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble DRP erred in concluding that share premium is liable to be assessed to tax as income by wrongfully drawing reference from proviso

HSBC SECURITIES AND CAPITAL MARKETS (INDIA) P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyal

X of the Act is a separate code in itself and Section 92 of the Act is a separate charging provision. 3.1.10 on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble DRP erred in concluding that share premium is liable to be assessed to tax as income by wrongfully drawing reference from proviso

DCIT 4(1), MUMBAI vs. HSBC SECURITIES AND CAPITAL MARKETS (INDIA) P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyal

X of the Act is a separate code in itself and Section 92 of the Act is a separate charging provision. 3.1.10 on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble DRP erred in concluding that share premium is liable to be assessed to tax as income by wrongfully drawing reference from proviso

TATA MOTORS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.631/मुं/2013 (िन.व. 2008-09) Tata Motors Limited Bombay House, 24,Homi Mody Street, Hutama Chowk, Mumbai – 400001. Pan: Aaact-2727-Q ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. The Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle -2(3), Mumbai. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ....."ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Shri J.D.Mistry, Sr.Advocate With Shri Nikhil Tiwari,Advocate "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Ms. Vatsala Jha, Cit-Dr & Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, Sr.Ar सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 10/11/2023 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 05/02/2024 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm:

x Note: The Central Board of Direct Taxes empowers the Director General of Income-tax (International Taxation or the concerned Directors of Income-tax (Transfer Pricing) to distribute the working amongst the Transfer Pricing Officers working under then while exercising their powers and performing theirs functions.” A perusal of the above notification would show that the Board in exercise

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

x) Abhishek Jain (2018) 94 taxmann.com (Delhi) 6. Revenue in its response to the assessee’s argument furnished its reply vide letter dated 17.01.2024 same is also reproduced herein below where revenue relied upon various judicial pronouncements as under:- 10 M/s. Staark Accessories Pvt. Ltd. “During the course of ITAT proceedings in case of M/s. Staark Accessories

ADITYA BIRLA FINANCE LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 2(1), MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendraassessment Year-2008-09 M/S Aditya Birla Finance Acit-2(1), Limited (One Indiabulls R. No.575, 5Th Floor, बनाम/ Center, Tower-1, 18Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Jupiter Mill Compound, 841, M.K. Road, Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai-400020 Elphinstone Road, Mumbai-400012 Pan No.Aabcb5769M ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Assessment Year-2008-09 Acit-2(1), M/S Aditya Birla Finance R. No.575, 5Th Floor, Limited (One Indiabulls बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Center, Tower-1, 18Th Floor, Vs. M.K. Road, Jupiter Mill Compound, 841, Mumbai-400020 Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, Mumbai-400012 Pan No. Aabcb5769M (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) M/S Aditya Birla Finance Ltd.

2,24,238/- on account of administrative expenditure total amounting to Rs. 17,65,069/-.3.3 On appeal, the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) has confirmed the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer. 4 Before us, the ld AR of the assessee has submitted that the interest income of the assessee is more than the interest expenditure; therefore, no disallowance

PEOPLE INERACTIVE (I) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 7, MUMBAI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumar

24 (7) The provisions of sub-section (8) and sub-section (10) of section 80-IA shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the undertaking referred to in this section as they apply for the purposes of the undertaking referred to in section 80-IA.” 7. Section 10A was further amended by the Finance

PEOPLE INERACTIVE (I) P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 7, MUMBAI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumar

24 (7) The provisions of sub-section (8) and sub-section (10) of section 80-IA shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the undertaking referred to in this section as they apply for the purposes of the undertaking referred to in section 80-IA.” 7. Section 10A was further amended by the Finance

MAHINDRA AND MAHINDRA FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 7(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

TDS credit. The said return was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act vide intimation dated 31/12/2020 disallowing a sum of Rs.3,07,01,091/- towards PF u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act. 4. The only issue raised in the grounds of appeal is with regard the CPC's action in making a disallowance

DCIT 1(2)(2), THANE vs. M.K. RETAIL P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2009-2010 The D.C.I.T. 1(2)(2), M/S M.C. Retail Pvt. Ltd., R. No. 535, 5Th Floor, Office No. 1, Ground Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Dhan Cotage, 80, Mumbai – 400020 Vs. Bulls Royce Colony Road, Vakola Bridge, Santacruz, Mumbai Pan: Aaecm7597B (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2009-2010 The D.C.I.T. 1(2)(2), M/S M.K. Retail Pvt. Ltd., R. No. 535, 5Th Floor, 4Th Floor, Metro Dome, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Metro Theatre, M.G. Road, Mumbai – 400020 Vs. Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaecm7601C (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Chaitanya Anjaria (Dr) Assessee By : Shri Ritesh Singh (Ar) Date Of Hearing: 10/09/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 28/09/2018

x) Assessment Year: 2009-10 of the Act whereby such expenditure is allowable only if the said amounts are paid within the due date under the relevant Act and not allowable even if paid before the due date for filing of return of income?” 5. Ground No. 1 of the appeal pertains to the addition of Rs. 1,24

DCIT 1(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. M.C. RETAIL P. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2009-2010 The D.C.I.T. 1(2)(2), M/S M.C. Retail Pvt. Ltd., R. No. 535, 5Th Floor, Office No. 1, Ground Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Dhan Cotage, 80, Mumbai – 400020 Vs. Bulls Royce Colony Road, Vakola Bridge, Santacruz, Mumbai Pan: Aaecm7597B (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2009-2010 The D.C.I.T. 1(2)(2), M/S M.K. Retail Pvt. Ltd., R. No. 535, 5Th Floor, 4Th Floor, Metro Dome, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Metro Theatre, M.G. Road, Mumbai – 400020 Vs. Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaecm7601C (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Chaitanya Anjaria (Dr) Assessee By : Shri Ritesh Singh (Ar) Date Of Hearing: 10/09/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 28/09/2018

x) Assessment Year: 2009-10 of the Act whereby such expenditure is allowable only if the said amounts are paid within the due date under the relevant Act and not allowable even if paid before the due date for filing of return of income?” 5. Ground No. 1 of the appeal pertains to the addition of Rs. 1,24

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)

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(2) of the Act, selecting the Assessee’s ROI for scrutiny (see page 6 of Factual paper book-1). 5 17.10.2003 The Addl. CIT (Transfer Pricing

DHANVARSHA NAGRI SAHAKARI PATASANTHA LIMITED,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 28(1)(3), NAVI MUMBAI

Accordingly, in view of paragraph 10 to 15 above, disallowance of INR.32,63,969/- is deleted and claim of deduction under Section 80P of the Act as made by the Appellant is allowed

Bench: the Tribunal. Therefore, the delay of 22 days in filing the appeal is condoned. 4. We note that the Appellant has raised the following grounds in the

TDS u/s 194H without looking at the Jurisdictional Bombay High Court's decision in case of CIT v. Sunil Vishwambharnath Tiwari (2016), 388 ITR 630(Bom), wherein appellant is entitled to claim deduction for enhancement of gross total income because of disallowance of expenditure u/s 40(a)(ia). 5. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, modify, amend, or substitute

OCEANEERING INTERNATIONAL GMBH,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) RANGE 3(2)(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

X, G Block, BKC, Gilban Area, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai-400051. (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri A.K. Jawadwala For Revenue : Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr.DR Date of Hearing: 09-12-2025 Date of Pronouncement: 12-12-2025 ORDER PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M : This is an appeal filed by assessee against the order of the Assessing Officer (AO) passed u/s.143

VARIAN MEDICAL SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAIQQQ vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT NFAC CETNRE ITO, MINISTRY OF FINANCE DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partially allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

TDS credit Ground No. 9 (9.1 & 9.2) Incorrect calculation of interest under section 234B of Ground No. 10 (10.1 to 10.3) the Act Levy of additional interest under section 234C Ground No.11 (11.1 to 11.3) Initiation of penalty under section 270A of he Act Ground No. 12 (12.1 & 12.2) 4. Ground No.1 and 2 are general not warranting any separate