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

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical\npurposes

80G.\"\n3.\nGrounds no. 1 to 5, raised in Revenue's appeal, pertain to the deletion\nof disallowance made under section 40(a)(i) and section 40(a)(ia) of the\nAct.\n4.\nWe have considered the submissions for both sides and perused the\nmaterial available on record. The brief facts of the case are that the\nassessee's primary

GOLDMAN SACHS (INDIA) SECURITEIS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ADD/JT/DY/ASST/CIT/ITO/NFAC, DELHI

5% of\nreferred business expenditure. AO has nothing to do with the e-TDS returns\nof the assessee as it covers entire TDS deductions of the assessee for the full\nyear. As discussed above on the issue of TDS and expenses, it was\ncategorically asked to give a detailed note on the TDS deductions as made for\neach head

ACIT-6(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE AMC LTD., MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhailaditya Birla Sun Life Amc Ltd., Tower 1, Jupiter Mill Compound, 17Th Floor, One World Center, 841, Senapati Bapat Marg, ............... Appellant Mumbai - 400013 Pan : Aaacb6134D V/S

TDS within the due date. On the other hand, the assessee is claiming the amount in this year. Accordingly, the AO held that the amount of ₹ 65,03,040/- is not allowable as a deduction in the year under consideration. 8. The learned CIT(A), vide impugned order, dismissed the ground raised by the assessee on this issue and held

FIRMENICH AROMATICS PRODUCTION (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

80G of the Act. Owing to commonality of the issue and facts\nremaining the same, we take up both the appeals together for\nadjudication by passing this consolidated order. We take appeal for\n Assessment Year 2020-21 as the lead year to draw the facts and our\nobservations and findings for this year shall apply mutatis mutandis to\nthe

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

5) of the Companies Act are also\neligible for deduction/s 80G of Ericsson India Global Services Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT the\nAct subject to satisfying the requisite conditions prescribed for deduction u/s 80G of\nthe Act. For this purpose, the issue is remanded to the file ofAO to examine the same\nwhether the payments satisfy the claim of donation

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

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

5) of the Companies Act are also\neligible for deduction/s 80G of Ericsson India Global Services Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT the\nAct subject to satisfying the requisite conditions prescribed for deduction u/s 80G of\nthe Act. For this purpose, the issue is remanded to the file ofAO to examine the same\nwhether the payments satisfy the claim of donation

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

5 crores of more have to mandatorily comply with the CSR provisions\nspecified us.135(1) of the Companies Act, 2011. The above mentioned companies are liable to\nspend atleast 25% of its average net profit for the immediately preceding three financial years\non CSR activities. In the present case, the assessee has contributed Rs 30 lacs to various\neducational

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

5) of the Companies Act are also\neligible for deduction/s 80G of Ericsson India Global Services Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT the\nAct subject to satisfying the requisite conditions prescribed for deduction u/s 80G of\nthe Act. For this purpose, the issue is remanded to the file ofAO to examine the same\nwhether the payments satisfy the claim of donation

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

5) ITA No. 6663, 6701, 6702 & 6703 /Mum/2025 Aditya Birla Sun Life AMC Limited limited relief only in respect of short grant of 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

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

5,00,000 units had\nalready been offered to tax as long-term capital gains, no further\naddition could have been made by treating the same amount\nagain as short-term capital gains under section 111A of the Act.\nThe impugned addition, therefore, lacks factual foundation.\n100. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order of the ld.\nCIT

FIRMENICH AROMATICS PRODUCTION (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

80G of the Act. Owing to commonality of the issue and facts\nremaining the same, we take up both the appeals together for\nadjudication by passing this consolidated order. We take appeal for\n Assessment Year 2020-21 as the lead year to draw the facts and our\nobservations and findings for this year shall apply mutatis mutandis to\nthe

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

5,00,000 units had\nalready been offered to tax as long-term capital gains, no further\naddition could have been made by treating the same amount\nagain as short-term capital gains under section 111A of the Act.\nThe impugned addition, therefore, lacks factual foundation.\n100. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order of the ld.\nCIT

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

TDS. It is\nrequired to be verified whether the taxable income has been disclosed\ncorrectly\"\n17. It is a settled law that any issue decided by ITAT or the Hon'ble High\nCourt, is binding upon the assessing authorities and in that regard, we are\nsupported bythe decision of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in K. N.\nAgarwal

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

section 80G in respect of CSR expenses of Rs. 10,27,000/- was incorrectly allowed by the Ld. AO and the reasons assigned for doing so are wrong and contrary to the provisions of Income Tax Act and Rules made there under. 3. Your Appellant crave, leave to add, alter, amend or modify any or all grounds of appeal

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

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

5,00,000 units had\nalready been offered to tax as long-term capital gains, no further\naddition could have been made by treating the same amount\nagain as short-term capital gains under section 111A of the Act.\nThe impugned addition, therefore, lacks factual foundation.\n100. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order of the ld.\nCIT

OVERSEAS INFRASTRUCTURE ALLIANCE(INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -6 , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

5. All the six grounds raised by the Revenue in this appeal are identical to those already dealt by us in the appeal for Assessment Year 2015-16 in the above paragraphs except for variation in the quantum Overseas Infrastructure Alliance (India) Pvt. Ltd. AYs 2011-12, 2015-16 to 2017-18 and 2019-20 to 2022-23 of disallowance/addition

OVERSEAS INFRASTRUCTURE ALLIANCE (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMTIED ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 6(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

5. All the six grounds raised by the Revenue in this appeal are identical to those already dealt by us in the appeal for Assessment Year 2015-16 in the above paragraphs except for variation in the quantum Overseas Infrastructure Alliance (India) Pvt. Ltd. AYs 2011-12, 2015-16 to 2017-18 and 2019-20 to 2022-23 of disallowance/addition