DCIT CEN CIR 4 ( 1) CR - 4 ,PR. CIT (C)- 2 , MUMBAI vs. SHRI HARSHAD S. MEHTA, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri N.K.Pradhandy.Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1),Cen.Range-4, Room Nom.1916, 19Th Floor, Air India Bldg., Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 ...... Appellant Vs. Shri Harsad S. Mehta, 32, Madhuli, Dr.A.B.Road, Worli, Mumbai – 400 018 Pan:Abapm 1848F ..... Respondent Appellant By : Dr. P.Daniel, Spl. Counsel Respondent By : Shri Dharmesh Shah Date Of Hearing : 09/10/2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 1710/2019

section 234A,234B and 234C be recomputed after excluding the income which is subject to TDS. So far as the issue

CHIMERA INDUSTRIAL AND DEVELOPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-NFAC, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed in the terms\ndiscussed above

TDS and interest under section 234B were restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "Section 32(1)", "Section

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)", "Section 142(1)", "Section 143(3)", "Section 144B", "Section 80G", "Section 36(1)(va)", "Section 40(a)(ia)", "Section 43B", "Section 234B

ASST CIT CEN CIR 38, MUMBAI vs. UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainacit, Central Circle-38 M/S. Uniphos Enterprises Ltd. (Formerly United Phosphorous Ltd.) Room No. 32(1), Gr. Floor Vs. Uniphos Hosue, 11Th Road Àayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road C.D. Marg, Khar (W), Mumbai Mumbai 400020 Pan - Aaacu3440P Appellant Respondent

234B & 234C, and no such provision is prescribed for allowed credit. 4. Ground No. 1 4.1 In this ground, the Revenue contends that the learned CIT(A) erred in allowing interest under section 244A of the Act on MAT credits, i.e. on taxes paid, under section 115JA of the Act without considering the proviso to sub- section 2 to section

SPAFI-SOCIETE DE PARTICIPATIONS FINANCIERES ET INDUSTRIELLES,FRANCE vs. ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAX, CIRCLE-4(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Am

234B of Rs. 7,95,53,804/-. The assessee’s contention has been that the liability for interest should have been consequential to non-grant of TDS Credit and since there is no tax payable after the TDS Credit, therefore, interest under section

ASHWIN S. MEHTA (LEGAL HEIR OF LATE RASILA S. MEHTA),MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CC- 4(1), MUMBAI

TDS, that the\nchangeability of the section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act should be after\nconsidering the amount

ITO 15(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. KELLOGG INDIA P.LTD, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma & Shri Vikas Awasthy

TDS in terms of provisions of Section 10(6A). CIT(A) rejected the same on the ground that Provisions of Section10(6A) were applicable only up to 31/05/2002 and the present AY being 2007-08, the benefit thereof was not available to the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us. 11 ITA NO.2314/MUM/2017(A.Y.2012-13

KELLOGG INDIA PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO 15(2)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma & Shri Vikas Awasthy

TDS in terms of provisions of Section 10(6A). CIT(A) rejected the same on the ground that Provisions of Section10(6A) were applicable only up to 31/05/2002 and the present AY being 2007-08, the benefit thereof was not available to the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us. 11 ITA NO.2314/MUM/2017(A.Y.2012-13

RINA S. MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 23, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 1992-93

234B, 234C of the Act without allowing the deduction of TDS deductible on the income assessed which is subject to the provisions of TDS. 32. After hearing both the parties and perusing the relevant provisions of the Act and also the various decisions of the co- ordinate benches of the Tribunal, we hold that interest charged under section

DCIT CEN CIR 4(1) CEN RG 4, MUMBAI vs. RINA S. MEHTA, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 1992-93

234B, 234C of the Act without allowing the deduction of TDS deductible on the income assessed which is subject to the provisions of TDS. 32. After hearing both the parties and perusing the relevant provisions of the Act and also the various decisions of the co- ordinate benches of the Tribunal, we hold that interest charged under section

RINA S. MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC 23, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act were mandatory and were applicable to the notified entities also, that the assessee was in the process of filing an appeal against thee said order before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, that the income earned in the year under consideration was subjected to provisions of TDS

JAMNADAS VIRJI SHARES AND STOCK BROKERS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 4(3)(1), MUMBAI

TDS, although appearing in Form 26AS\nand granted credit for in the intimation under section 143(1).\n13. The AO erred in levying interest under section 234A of Rs.\n11,055/- and CIT(A) erred in confirming the same.\n14. The AO erred in levying interest under section 234B

HARSH ESTATE P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 31, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby ordered to be partly allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1222/Mum/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 1992-93) बनधम/ Harsh Estate Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Central Circle-31 32, Madhuli, 3Rd Floor, (Now Dy Cit (Cc-4(3) R. Vs. No.1921, 19Th Floor, Air A.B. Road, Worli, India Building, Nariman Mumbai-400018. Point, Mumbai-400021. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaach3480L (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Dharmesh Shah (Ar) Revenue By: Shri Dr. P. Daniel सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 20/06/2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/08/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 22.01.2016 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-52, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.1992- 93. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: - “1. The Ld. C Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Has Erred In Law & In Fact In Upholding Order Passed By Ao U/S 144 Of The Act. 2. The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Has Erred In Law & In Facts Confirming The Disallowance Of Various Expenses Amounting To Rs.1,32,476/- Claimed By The Appellant As Under.:- S. Particulars Amount No. 1. Audit Fees 64,000/- 2. Repairs & Maintenance 71,476 Rs.1,00,000(-) (7,1324)

section 23A, 234B and 234C of the Act. 10. The learned Commission of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and in facts in not appreciating that the income assessed in the hands of the appellant were subjected to the provisions of TDS

GROWMORE LEASING & INVESTMENT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 31, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S Growmore Leasing & Tax Cc 4(3) Cen Rg-4 Investment Ltd. 32, Madhuli, Third Floor Vs. Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli Mumbai-400 018 Pan No. Aaacg4397D Appellant .. Respondent M/S Growmore Leasing & Investment Dy. Commissioner Of Income Ltd. Tax Cc 4(3) Cen Rg-4 32, Madhuli, Third Floor Vs. Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli Mumbai-400 018 Pan No. Aaacg4397D Appellant .. Respondent Revenue By .. Dr. P. Daniel, Dr Assessee By .. Shri Vijay Mehta & Dharmesh Shah, Ars’ .. Date Of Hearing 01-09-2017 Date Of Pronouncement .. 17-11-2017 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

section 23A, 234B and 234C of the Act. 10. The learned Commission of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and in facts in not appreciating that the income assessed in the hands of the appellant were subjected to the provisions of TDS

DCIT CC 4(3) CEN RG 4, MUMBAI vs. GROWMORE LEASING & INVESTMENT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S Growmore Leasing & Tax Cc 4(3) Cen Rg-4 Investment Ltd. 32, Madhuli, Third Floor Vs. Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli Mumbai-400 018 Pan No. Aaacg4397D Appellant .. Respondent M/S Growmore Leasing & Investment Dy. Commissioner Of Income Ltd. Tax Cc 4(3) Cen Rg-4 32, Madhuli, Third Floor Vs. Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli Mumbai-400 018 Pan No. Aaacg4397D Appellant .. Respondent Revenue By .. Dr. P. Daniel, Dr Assessee By .. Shri Vijay Mehta & Dharmesh Shah, Ars’ .. Date Of Hearing 01-09-2017 Date Of Pronouncement .. 17-11-2017 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

section 23A, 234B and 234C of the Act. 10. The learned Commission of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and in facts in not appreciating that the income assessed in the hands of the appellant were subjected to the provisions of TDS

ISHARES CORE MSCI TOTAL INTERNATIONAL STOCK ETF (AS A SUCCESSOR TO ISHARES CORE TOTAL INTERNATIONAL STOCK MAURITIUS CO ),MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

section 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act,\nwhich is consequential in nature. Therefore, the same needs no separate\nadjudication.\n18. The issue arising in ground no.8, raised in assessee's appeal, pertains\nto the short grant of TDS

ISHARES MSCI EMERGING MARKETS ETF (AS A SUCCESSOR TO ISHARES EMERGING MARKETS INDEX MAURITIUS CO ),MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

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

section 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act,\nwhich is consequential in nature. Therefore, the same needs no separate\nadjudication.\n18. The issue arising in ground no.8, raised in assessee's appeal, pertains\nto the short grant of TDS

AKTIEBOLAGET ELECTROLUX SWEDEN,MUMBAI vs. ADDL DIT (IT) RG I, MUMBAI

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & Parthasarathy Choudhuryअपील सं/.Ita No.7628/Mum/2012,िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year-2006-07 अपील सं/.Ita No.8695/Mum/2010,िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year-2007-08 Aktiebolaget Electrolux Sweden Income Tax Officer-1(3) C/O. Srbc & Associates14Th Floor, Rani Mansion, 2Nd Floor Vs The Ruby, 29 Senapati Bapat Marg, Murbad Road, Kalyan Dadar (W),Mumbai-400 028. Mumbai. Pan: Aadca 9239 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती िनधा"रती ओर ओर सेसेसेसे/Assessee By : Shri Rajan Vora िनधा"रती िनधा"रती ओर ओर राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri K. Krishna Murty सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 02-09-2015 सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 21-10-2015 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Orders Dt. 06/09/2012 & 27/09/2009 Of Drp-I, Mumbai, The Assessee, Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal For The Above Mentioned Two Orders Respectively:

TDS) on royalty received from Videocon Industries Limited, as claimed by the appellant in the return of income for the subject assessment year Levy of interest under section 234A, 234B