JCIT(OSD) CIRCLE 2(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. HDFC BANK LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, both the above stated appeals of the\nassessee in ITA No

80G of the Act.\n12. On the above observation, we deem it fit to hold that the assessee is entitled to deduction\nclaimed u/s.80G of the Act towards the CSR expenditure incurred by it. We, therefore, direct\nthe ld. A.O, to allow the claim of the assessee subject to the condition that the assessee has\nsatisfied the other requirements warranted

ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE AMC LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE (NFAC), DELHI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed

TDS within the due date. On the other hand, the assessee is claiming\nthe amount in this year. Accordingly, the AO held that the amount of ₹\n65,03,040/- is not allowable as a deduction in the year under consideration.\n8. The learned CIT(A), vide impugned order, dismissed the ground raised\nby the assessee on this issue and held

JCIT(OSD) CIRCLE 2(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. HDFC BANK LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, both the above stated appeals of the\nassessee in ITA No

2 to Section 37(1) of the Act\nby Finance Act, 2014 w.e.fo1.04.2015. However, there is no such Ericsson India Global\nServices Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT corresponding amendment to section 80G of the Act. Only\ncondition for claiming deduction under section 80G of the Act as per the existing\nprovision is the institute to which donation is made must have

HDFC BANK LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - 2 (3) (1) , MUMBAI

In the result, both the above stated appeals of the\nassessee in ITA No

2 to Section 37(1) of the Act\nby Finance Act, 2014 w.e.fo1.04.2015. However, there is no such Ericsson India Global\nServices Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT corresponding amendment to section 80G of the Act. Only\ncondition for claiming deduction under section 80G of the Act as per the existing\nprovision is the institute to which donation is made must have

JCIT OSD CIRCLE 2(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. HDFC BANK LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, both the above stated appeals of the\nassessee in ITA No

2 to Section 37(1) of the Act\nby Finance Act, 2014 w.e.fo1.04.2015. However, there is no such Ericsson India Global\nServices Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT corresponding amendment to section 80G of the Act. Only\ncondition for claiming deduction under section 80G of the Act as per the existing\nprovision is the institute to which donation is made must have

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

TDS credit by directing verification. Interest under sections 234B and 234C was treated as consequential. 7. In A.Y. 2018-19, the Assessing Officer disallowed deduction claimed under section 80G in respect of CSR expenditure amounting to Rs. 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 by directing verification. Interest under sections 234B and 234C was treated as consequential. 7. In A.Y. 2018–19, the Assessing Officer disallowed deduction claimed under section 80G in respect of CSR expenditure amounting to Rs. 2

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

Accordingly, this ground is allowed

TDS credit by directing verification. Interest under sections 234B and 234C was treated as consequential. 7. In A.Y. 2018–19, the Assessing Officer disallowed deduction claimed under section 80G in respect of CSR expenditure amounting to Rs. 2

PASHUPATI CAPITAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI - 4, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in above\nterms

2 of section 263 alongwith provision\nof section 263(1) of the Act, the twin conditions required to be fulfilled are\n(i) the assessment order is not in accordance with law or (ii) the same\nsuffers from lack of enquiry. Ld. PCIT has concluded in para no. 4.7 and 4.8\nof its order

LIVLONG INSURANCE BROKERS LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. PCIT -4 , MUMBAI

80G of the Act is\nheld allowable consistently by the courts. Hence, both on legal ground as\nalso on merits, appeal of the assessee has sufficient force. Therefore,\nrespectfully following the above judicial precedents, the Revision order\non the impugned issue is held to be unsustainable, thus grounds no. 1\nand 2 of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

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

Accordingly, this ground is allowed

TDS credit by directing verification. Interest under sections 234B and 234C was treated as consequential. 7. In A.Y. 2018–19, the Assessing Officer disallowed deduction claimed under section 80G in respect of CSR expenditure amounting to Rs. 2

ACIT CC 4 3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MAERSK LINE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

80G." 3. Grounds no. 1 to 5, raised in Revenue's appeal, pertain to the deletion of disallowance made under section 40(a)(i) and section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 4. We have considered the submissions for both sides and perused the material available on record. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee's primary

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

CHEMICAL PROCESS PIPING PVT LTD ,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -6, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shriom Prakash Kant & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanm/S. Chemical Process Piping Pcit, Mumbai-6, Pvt. Ltd. Vs. R. No. 501, Aayakar Bhavan, Ground Floor, Cpe Plot, B.S.D. Marg, Churchgate, Mumbai-400 Govandi, Mumbai-400 088 020 Pan: Aaccc6212D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Nishit Gandhi & Shri Harshad Shah, Ld. Ars Department Represented By : Shri R. A. Dhyani, Ld. Dr Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing : 12.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.09.2025

TDS credit carried forward as large deduction is claimed u/s 80G and the donee entity was not approved u/s 80G of the Act. However, in response to the notice, assessee submitted the relevant documents to substantiate the 80G certification which were found in order and the assessment was completed on the return income

AUGMONT ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT - CIRCLE 6(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shriom Prakash Kant & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanaugmont Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Acit Circle-6(1)(2), 201, A/B & 202, 2Nd Floor, Trade Vs. R. No. 506, 5Th Floor, Aayakar World, D-Wing, Kamala Mills Bhavan, Mumbai-400 020 Compound, S. B. Marg, Lower Parel (West), Mumbai-400 003. Pan: Aagcr3007D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Ms. Ridhisha Jain, Ld. Ar Department Represented By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, Ld. Dr Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing : 05.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.09.2025

2. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble PCIT erred in upholding that the assessment order dated 26/09/2022 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue on the alleged ground that claim for deduction under section 80G in respect of CSR expenses

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:

80G of the Act. Consequently, ground No.7 of the appeal is dismissed as infructuous. Ground No.8 : Adjustment u/s. 92CA (3) of the Act in respect of export of vehicles – Rs.1,72,98,698/- : 32. The ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that during the period relevant to the assessment year under appeal the assessee sold completely built units (CBU) and vehicle

M/S PIRAMAL ENTERPRISES LIMIITED ,MUMBSI vs. DY CIT(APPEAL)-RANGE-8(2)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S Piramal Enterprises Ltd., Dy. Cit, Mumbai-8(1)(2), Or Piramal Tower, Agastya National Facelss Assessment Vs. Corporate Park, Lbs Marg, Centre, Delhi, Kamani Junction, Kurla Room No. 624, 6Th Floor, (West), Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400070. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacn 4538 P Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Ronak Doshi : Revenue By Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Cit-Dr & Mr. Samuel Pitta, Dr : Date Of Hearing 17/11/2022 : Date Of Pronouncement 28/12/2022

TDS as claimed by the appellant in its return of income. return of income. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUND I, II, III AND VI AS WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUND I, II, III AND VI AS WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUND I, II, III AND VI AS MENTIONED ABOVE: MENTIONED ABOVE: GROUND NO. VI: DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 10AA OF GROUND NO. VI: DEDUCTION

STRIDES PHARMA SCIENCE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, 15(3)(2),, MUMBAI

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

2 to section 37(1) of\nthe Act, they are specifically excluded in clarification issued. There is no restriction\non an expenditure being claimed under above sections to be exempt, as long as it\nsatisfies necessary conditions under section 30 to 36 of the Act, for computing income\nunder the head, \"Income from Business and Profession\".\n16. For claiming benefit