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

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

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

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

36(1)(va), disallowance under section 40(a)(ia), disallowance under section 43B, computation of capital gains, grant of credit for tax deducted at source, and levy of interest under sections 234B and 234C. Additions and disallowances were made year-wise, and penalty proceedings under section 270A were initiated wherever applicable. 4. Aggrieved by the respective assessment orders, the assessee

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(3)", "Sec 144B", "Sec 80G", "Sec 36(1)(va

THYSSENKRUPP UHDE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -15(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Thyssenkrupp Uhde Deputy Commissioner Of India Private Limited Income Tax- 15(3)(1) Uhde House, Room No.460, Vs. 4Th Floor, L.B.S. Marg, Vikhroli (W.), Aayakar Bhawan, Mumbai- 400083. M. K. Road, Pan: Aaacu1416H Mumbai- 400020. (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri M. M. Golvala A/W. Shri Hormuzd Jamshedji, A.R. Revenue By : Shri P. D. Chougule (Addl. Cit), Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 13 . 06 . 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 26 . 06 . 2024 O R D E R Per : Ratnesh Nandan Sahay: 1. This Appeal Has Been Filed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (Appeals) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act [The ‘Act’ In Short] Vide Its Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2023-24/1059614356(1) Dated 11/01/2024 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2 M/S. Thyssenkrupp Uhde India Private Limited

section 143(1) dated 16th March, 2018.” 3. The Grounds No. 1 to 7 pertain to disallowance of employee’s contribution to Provident Fund amounting to Rs.1,08,48,643/- u/s.36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act while processing u/s.143(1) of the Income Tax Act by the Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) (Bangalore). Grounds

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

M/S. ALMECH FACADES PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. NFAC`, DELHI

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Om Prakash Kantassessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. Almech Facades Pvt. National Faceless Appeal Ltd., Centre (Nfac), 113B, Hub Town Solaris Delhi Building, Vs. N.S. Phadke Marg, Andheri (East), Mumbai – 400 069 Pan: Aanca3788P (Appellant) (Respondent)

va) Act without appreciating that the amendment made via Finance Act, 2021 [2021] 432 ITR (Stat) 52 vis-à-vis section 36 of the Act, is effective from Assessment Year 2021-22 and applicable to subsequent assessment years. 4. Without prejudice to the above, the payments made within the grace period of the making payment under the Employees' Provident Fund

RISHABH METALS AND CHEMICALS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. CPC, DCIT -CIR 1(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singhrishabh Metals & Vs. Dcit, Circle- 1(3)(1) Chemicals Pvt Ltd, Aayakar Bhavan, 4Th Floor, Eros Theater Mk Road, Bldg, J.T.Road, Mumbai-400020. Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacr2214E Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Pankaj Kumar.Dr Date Of Hearing 23.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 27.06.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Cit(A)- National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), New Delhi Passed U/S 143(1) & 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal.

section 36(1)(va) of the Act will not be applicable to assessment year 2018-19. The assessee has deposited the employee’s contribution of Provident fund before the due date of return of income u/sec 139(1) of the Act. Accordingly, we set- Rishabh Metals and Chemicals Pvt Ltd, Mumbai aside the order of the CIT(A) on this

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)

36 5. Total Income determined as per Rs. 149,11,76,360/- the above proposal The assessment is made u/s 143(3) read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act. The assessment of income is done as per computation sheet and the sum payable is determined as per the demand notice u/s 156 of the IT Act.” (Emphasis Supplied

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)

36 5. Total Income determined as per Rs. 149,11,76,360/- the above proposal The assessment is made u/s 143(3) read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act. The assessment of income is done as per computation sheet and the sum payable is determined as per the demand notice u/s 156 of the IT Act.” (Emphasis Supplied

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)

36 5. Total Income determined as per Rs. 149,11,76,360/- the above proposal The assessment is made u/s 143(3) read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act. The assessment of income is done as per computation sheet and the sum payable is determined as per the demand notice u/s 156 of the IT Act.” (Emphasis Supplied

QUICK BUILDERS,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 22(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhquick Builders Vs. Dcit, Circle 22(1) Plot No. 142, 3Rd Floor, Room No. 08, Piramal Shah House, S.V.Road, Chambers, Lalbaug, Khar, West, Parel, Mumbai - 400012 Mumbai – 400052 स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaafq0227F Appellant .. Respondent

36(1)(va) and section 43B under Finance Act, 2021 as clarificatory in nature and the law to be applied prospectively. 4. In the circumstances and facts of our case, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC has erred in confirming the TDS

M/S. CENTRUM MICROCREDIT LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ADIT CENTRALIZED PROCESSSING CENTER , BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Centrum Microcredit Ltd., Asstt. Director Of Income Tax, 801, Centrum House, Cpc, Bengaluru-560500. Vs. Vidyanangari, Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400098. Pan No. Aafcn 3506 L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Ravikant S. Pathak Revenue By : Smt. Mahita Nair, Dr : Date Of Hearing 28/04/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 08/05/2023 Order

sections 36(1) (va) and 43 B of the Act vide Finance Act, 2021 is prospective in nature. However, Act vide Finance Act, 2021 is prospective in nature. However, Act vide Finance Act, 2021 is prospective in nature. However, the submission of the Appellant has not b the submission of the Appellant has not been considered by een considered

GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD ( CORPORATE FINANCE DIVISION),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 6(3), MUMBAI

Bench: the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal preferred by the Assessee vide order, dated 18/05/2009. 4. Not being satisfied with the relief granted by the Id. CIT(A), the Assessee has preferred appeal before this Tribunal. The Revenue has also filed cross-appeal challenging the relief granted by the Id. CIT(A).

TDS & TCS in respect of income and expenses included in the previous year's income for which the appellant could not file the claim due to non receipt of the requisite certificates from the issuer.” 11.1. During the course of hearing it was pointed out that vide order dated 15/04/2010 passed under Section 154 of the Act, the grievance

B.K.KHARE & CO.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 16(2) , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhb.K. Khare & Co. Vs. Acit 16(2), 706/708 Sharda 4Th Floor, Chambers, New Marine Aaykar Bhavan, Line, Churchgate, M.K. Road, 400020 Mumbai - 400020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaafb0265E Appellant .. Respondent

Section 36(1)(va) of the Act, there is ambiguity regarding due date of payment of employees’ contribution on account of provident fund and ESI, whether the due date is as per the respective acts or up to the due date of filing of return of income of the assessee. As noted by Hon’ble Supreme Court an amendment made

B.K.KHARE & CO. ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 16(2), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhb.K. Khare & Co. Vs. Acit 16(2), 706/708 Sharda 4Th Floor, Chambers, New Marine Aaykar Bhavan, Line, Churchgate, M.K. Road, 400020 Mumbai - 400020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaafb0265E Appellant .. Respondent

Section 36(1)(va) of the Act, there is ambiguity regarding due date of payment of employees’ contribution on account of provident fund and ESI, whether the due date is as per the respective acts or up to the due date of filing of return of income of the assessee. As noted by Hon’ble Supreme Court an amendment made

ACIT 6(3), MUMBAI vs. GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD, MUMBAI

TDS & TCS in respect of\nincome and expenses included in the previous year's income for\nwhich the appellant could not file the claim due to non receipt of the\nrequisite certificates from the issuer.”\n11. 1. During the course of hearing it was pointed out that vide order\ndated 15/04/2010 passed under Section 154 of the Act, the\ngrievance