SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(3)(1),MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

4. Aggrieved assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) gave relief to the assessee with respect to disallowance made towards bad-debts under section 36(1)(vii) and towards restricting the deduction under section 36(1)(viii). With regard to the disallowance made under section 14A, the CIT(A) gave partial relief to the assessee

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 3(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

4. Aggrieved assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) gave relief to the assessee with respect to disallowance made towards bad-debts under section 36(1)(vii) and towards restricting the deduction under section 36(1)(viii). With regard to the disallowance made under section 14A, the CIT(A) gave partial relief to the assessee

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 3(3)(1), MUMBAI , MUMBAI vs. SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

4. Aggrieved assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) gave relief to the assessee with respect to disallowance made towards bad-debts under section 36(1)(vii) and towards restricting the deduction under section 36(1)(viii). With regard to the disallowance made under section 14A, the CIT(A) gave partial relief to the assessee

STATE BANK OF MYSORE,BANGALORE vs. JCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue Ground-3 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Account Member & Shri Anikesh Banerjeestate Bank Of India Vs Joint Commissioner Of Income-Tax, (Erstwhile State Bank Of Large Tax Payers Unit, Bangalore Mysore Prior To Merger) Local Head Office Compliance Department, 4Th Floor, 65, St. Marks Road, Bangalore-560 001 Pan: Aaccs0155P Appellant Respondent Deputy Commissioner Of Vs State Bank Of Mysore Income-Tax, Ltu, Circle-1, Head Office, Finance & Accounts Bangalore Department, Kg Road, Bangalore- 560 009 Pan: Aaccs0155P Appellant Respondent

4 of the assessee is allowed. Ground 5: Disallowance of deduction u/s 36(1)(viii) – Rs.55,14,65,399/- 22. The Ld.AR submitted that deduction under section 36(1)(viii) of the Act is allowed in respect of the profits derived from the eligible business computed under the head Profits and Gains from Business and Profession. During the year under

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

TDS under law, such disallowance would ultimately increase assessee's profits from business of developing housing project. The ultimate profits of assessee after adjusting disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act would qualify for deduction under section 80-IB of the Act. This view was taken by the courts in the following cases: • Income-tax Officer - Ward

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

TDS under law, such disallowance would ultimately increase assessee's profits from business of developing housing project. The ultimate profits of assessee after adjusting disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act would qualify for deduction under section 80-IB of the Act. This view was taken by the courts in the following cases: • Income-tax Officer - Ward

ITO 3(3)2, MUMBAI vs. SHAMROCK PHARMACHEMI P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.1774/Mum/2013 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) बिाम/ Ito 3(3)2, M/S. Shamrock R.No. 602, Pharmachemi Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, 83E,Hansraj Pragi Bldg., V. M.K Road, Opp. Dr. E Moses Road, Mumbai 400020 Worli, Mumbai-400018 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaacs6290H (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Shri. Ashim Kumar Modi (Cit- Dr), Shri V. Justin & Ms. Chaitna Ajaria Shri. Bharat L. Gandhi Assessee By: सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 01.03.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.05.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Revenue, Being Ita No. 1774/Mum/2013, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 29.10.2012, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called ―The Cit(A)‖) In Appeal Number Cit(A)-7/Ito-3(3)(2)/It-166/11-12, For Assessment Year 2009-10, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From The Assessment Order Dated 29.12.2011 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called ―The Ao‖) U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ―The Act‖) For Ay 2009-10. I.T.A. No.1774/Mum/2013

section 9(1)(i) of the Act. 3. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the appeal on the ground that no part of the income had arisen or accrued in India. The payee was not liable to pay tax at such income. Requirement of TDS therefore would not arise. I.T.A. No.1774/Mum/2013 4

DCIT (OSD)(TDS)-2(3) , MUMBAI vs. TOTAL ENERGIES MARKETING INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

TDS default under default under 31/12/2019 default section 201 section 201 (1) thereon under (1) is of ₹ 34,723,358 section 201 determined at and interest (1) of ₹ ₹ under section 6,741,499 20,340,000/– 201 (1A of ₹ and interest and interest 7,291,905 under section under section 201 (1A) of ₹ 201 (1A) of ₹ 4

DCIT (OSD)(TDS)-2(3), MUMBAI vs. TOTAL ENERGIES MARKETINGS INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

TDS default under default under 31/12/2019 default section 201 section 201 (1) thereon under (1) is of ₹ 34,723,358 section 201 determined at and interest (1) of ₹ ₹ under section 6,741,499 20,340,000/– 201 (1A of ₹ and interest and interest 7,291,905 under section under section 201 (1A) of ₹ 201 (1A) of ₹ 4

DCIT (OSD)(TDS)-2(3), MUMBAI vs. TOTAL ENERGIES MARKETING INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

TDS default under default under 31/12/2019 default section 201 section 201 (1) thereon under (1) is of ₹ 34,723,358 section 201 determined at and interest (1) of ₹ ₹ under section 6,741,499 20,340,000/– 201 (1A of ₹ and interest and interest 7,291,905 under section under section 201 (1A) of ₹ 201 (1A) of ₹ 4

DCIT (OSD)(TDS)-2(3), MUMBAI vs. TOTAL ENERGIES MARKETING INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

TDS default under default under 31/12/2019 default section 201 section 201 (1) thereon under (1) is of ₹ 34,723,358 section 201 determined at and interest (1) of ₹ ₹ under section 6,741,499 20,340,000/– 201 (1A of ₹ and interest and interest 7,291,905 under section under section 201 (1A) of ₹ 201 (1A) of ₹ 4

DCIT (OSD)(TDS)-2(3), MUMBAI vs. TOTAL ENERGIES MARKETING INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

TDS default under default under 31/12/2019 default section 201 section 201 (1) thereon under (1) is of ₹ 34,723,358 section 201 determined at and interest (1) of ₹ ₹ under section 6,741,499 20,340,000/– 201 (1A of ₹ and interest and interest 7,291,905 under section under section 201 (1A) of ₹ 201 (1A) of ₹ 4

DCIT (OSD)(TDS)-2(3), MUMBAI vs. TOTAL ENERGIES MARKETING INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

TDS default under default under 31/12/2019 default section 201 section 201 (1) thereon under (1) is of ₹ 34,723,358 section 201 determined at and interest (1) of ₹ ₹ under section 6,741,499 20,340,000/– 201 (1A of ₹ and interest and interest 7,291,905 under section under section 201 (1A) of ₹ 201 (1A) of ₹ 4

DCIT (OSD)(TDS)-2(3) , MUMBAI vs. TOTAL ENERGIES MARKETING INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

TDS default under default under 31/12/2019 default section 201 section 201 (1) thereon under (1) is of ₹ 34,723,358 section 201 determined at and interest (1) of ₹ ₹ under section 6,741,499 20,340,000/– 201 (1A of ₹ and interest and interest 7,291,905 under section under section 201 (1A) of ₹ 201 (1A) of ₹ 4

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

4,20,47,33,978/-.\nGROUND NO. VI: SHORT GRANT OF TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE\n(“TDS”) CREDIT AMOUNTING TO RS. 3,09,621/-\n1. On the facts and circumstances of case and in law, CIT(A) erred in\nconfirming the action of the AO in granting a total credit of TDS\namounting to Rs. 1

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)

1) of the Act in appeal filed against order passed under 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

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)

1) of the Act in appeal filed against order passed under 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

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)

1) of the Act in appeal filed against order passed under 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