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

ADITYA BIRLA FINANCE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX - 2(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

80G OF THE\nACT AMOUNTING TO RS. 4,75,95,190/-:\n4.1 On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A)\nerred in confirming the action of the Ld. AO in disallowing the deduction\nclaimed by the Appellant u/s.80G in respect of the donations made by it\namounting to Rs.4

ST. JOSEPH'S EDUCATION AND MEDICAL RELIEF SOCIETY ,MUMBAI vs. ASSTT. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX -(E)-II(1), MUMBAI

In the result appeals filed by the assessee for all the years\nunder consideration stands allowed

TDS, which is placed in the paper\nbook.\n2.4. The Ld.AO noted that, for all the years under consideration the\nassessee received income by way of;\ni) royalties, ii) agency commission, iii) ground amenities, iv)\ncanteens, v) farmhouse income, vi) lunch income, vii) sale of scrap,\nviii) miscellaneous income, ix) nursing course fees, x) incentives, xi)\nrent income.\nITA No.2509/MUM/2024

TATA CONSULTANCY SERVICES LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX 3(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of both, revenue and assessee are partly allowed for all the three assessment years

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 37(1), thereby accepting the submission that the brand is not owned by the assessee. The Id AR further presented same line of arguments to submit that the TPO is not correct in making any TP adjustment towards the notional fees on the brand that is not owned by the assessee, which the TPO held as to be received

LODHA DEVELOPERS LTD(FORMERLY KNOWN AS LODHA DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED),MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 7(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon'Bledy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax V. M/S. Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle – 7(3) 412, 71-G, Vardhman Chamber Room No. 655, 6Th Floor C.P. Road, Horniman Circle Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Fort, Mumbai Mumbai – 400 020 Pan: Aabcl1117D (Appellant) (Respondent) Lodha Developers Limited Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax V. {Since Merged M/S. Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd.,} Central Circle – 7(3) 412, 4Th Floor, 17G, Vardhman Chamber Room No. 655, 6Th Floor Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Fort, Mumbai - 400 001 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan: Aabcl1117D (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS 0.1284 Crores Interest on Income Tax 0.0069 Crores Total 4.0572 Crores 19. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that the Assessing Officer ignored following deductions claimed by assessee in the revised return filed: Reduction in 14A disallowances 0.295 Crores Additional deduction claimed under 7.87 Crores section 80G of the Act Total 8.165 Crores 20. Ld. Counsel

DCIT CENT. CIR. -7(3), MUMBAI vs. PALAVA DWELLERS PVT. LTD. , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon'Bledy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax V. M/S. Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle – 7(3) 412, 71-G, Vardhman Chamber Room No. 655, 6Th Floor C.P. Road, Horniman Circle Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Fort, Mumbai Mumbai – 400 020 Pan: Aabcl1117D (Appellant) (Respondent) Lodha Developers Limited Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax V. {Since Merged M/S. Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd.,} Central Circle – 7(3) 412, 4Th Floor, 17G, Vardhman Chamber Room No. 655, 6Th Floor Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Fort, Mumbai - 400 001 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan: Aabcl1117D (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS 0.1284 Crores Interest on Income Tax 0.0069 Crores Total 4.0572 Crores 19. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that the Assessing Officer ignored following deductions claimed by assessee in the revised return filed: Reduction in 14A disallowances 0.295 Crores Additional deduction claimed under 7.87 Crores section 80G of the Act Total 8.165 Crores 20. Ld. Counsel

SULZER PUMPS INDIA LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT 15(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal for AY 2012-13 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15

80G not established 9 5,379 Employee's contribution Delay in depositing the to ESIC contribution 10 AIR Mismatch 9,70,797 Mismatch in AIR information vis-a-vis income offered to tax Sulzer Pumps 4. The 1st and 2nd grounds of appeal are general in nature and do not require any specific adjudication. The 3rd ground of appeal will

A.V. INDUSTRIES,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 24(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2005-06 M/S. A.V. Industries, Asstt. Commissioner Of Income 201, Bhagtani Krishna, Tax -24(3), “A” Wing, Mumbai Vs. Dattaray Road, Santacruz (W), Mumbai – 400 054 Pan: Aaffa 1100L (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri K. Shivaram, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Singh, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 23.07.2015 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.11.2015 O R D E R

80G was concerned, the assessee submitted that he had not given any such donation. However, the assessee had given an amount of Rs.601/- towards subscription to various persons at the time of festivals etc. and the same had rightly been claimed as business expenditure. It was also submitted before him that all the required details were submitted before

NTT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ASSTT COMM. OF INCOME TAX-14(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is accordingly partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanntt India Private Vs. Assessment Unit/Nfac/Dcit Limited Circle 15(1)(2), 1701-1704, B Wing, One Mumbai Bkc, Level 17, G-Block, Aayakar Bhavan, Plot No. C-65, Bandra Mumbai. Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai-400 051. Pan/Gir No. Aaacd2145G (Applicant) (Respondent)

ix) Regarding assessee’s claim that AE has contributed to recruitment of employees in India, the TPO has rejected on the ground that assessee has not filed any details in that regard. x) The claim of assessee that NTT India centrally provides IT support and software license was also not considered by the TPO on the ground that the exact

ASIAN PAINTS LIMITED,SANTACRUZ vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

80G of the Act 3. We will take up the cross appeal for A.Y.2016-17 and our finding given in most of the issues will apply mutatis mutandis in other two years except where issues are different, the same shall be discussed separately. 4. The assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing, selling and distribution of paints, coatings, products related

DY. CIT CIRCLE 3(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ASIAN PAINTS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and Revenue for A

Bench: IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘A‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

80G of the Act 3. We will take up the cross appeal for A.Y.2016-17 and our finding given in most of the issues will apply mutatis mutandis in other two years except where issues are different, the same shall be discussed separately. M/s. Asian Paints 4. The assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing, selling and distribution of paints

ASIAN PAINTS LIMITED,SANTACRUZ vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU CIRCLE 1, CUFFE PARADE

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and Revenue for\nA

IX and X are allowed.\n48. Ground no. XI: disallowance of trip scheme expenses;\nGround no. XII: disallowance of colour idea stores expenses;\nGround no. XIV: disallowance of discount and incentives\nwhich are target based to increase sales (i.e. by way of\ncredit notes) given to dealers (by way of enhancement by ld.\nCIT(A);\nWithout prejudice to above:\nGround

ASIAN PAINTS LIMITED,SANTACRUZ vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU CIRCLE 2, CUFFE PARADE

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and Revenue for\nA

IX and X are allowed.\n48. Ground no. XI: disallowance of trip scheme expenses;\nGround no. XII: disallowance of colour idea stores expenses;\nGround no. XIV: disallowance of discount and incentives\nwhich are target based to increase sales (i.e. by way of\ncredit notes) given to dealers (by way of enhancement by ld.\nCIT(A);\nWithout prejudice to above:\nGround

DY CIT CIRCLE -3(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ASIAN PAINTS LIMITED, MUMBAI

IX and X are allowed.\n48. Ground no. XI: disallowance of trip scheme expenses;\nGround no. XII: disallowance of colour idea stores expenses;\nGround no. XIV: disallowance of discount and incentives\nwhich are target based to increase sales (i.e. by way of\ncredit notes) given to dealers (by way of enhancement by ld.\nCIT(A);\nWithout prejudice to above:\nGround

DY CIT CIRCLE 3(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ASIAN PAINTS, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and Revenue for\nA

IX and X are allowed.\n48. Ground no. XI: disallowance of trip scheme expenses;\nGround no. XII: disallowance of colour idea stores expenses;\nGround no. XIV: disallowance of discount and incentives\nwhich are target based to increase sales (i.e. by way of\ncredit notes) given to dealers (by way of enhancement by ld.\nCIT(A);\nWithout prejudice to above:\nGround