ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2018-

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No.1452/Mum/2023 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Assessment Year : 2018-19

section 143(3) of the Act, disagreed with the submissions of the assessee and held that perpetual bonds are in the nature of debt instruments with no maturity date. Only the issuing company can buy back the bonds from the investors. Therefore, it was held these bonds are perpetual in nature. Since in the case of perpetual bonds, the investor

BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-2(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2018-

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No.1452/Mum/2023 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Assessment Year : 2018-19

section 143(3) of the Act, disagreed with the submissions of the assessee and held that perpetual bonds are in the nature of debt instruments with no maturity date. Only the issuing company can buy back the bonds from the investors. Therefore, it was held these bonds are perpetual in nature. Since in the case of perpetual bonds, the investor

DY..C.I.T., BANGALORE vs. M/S STATE BANK OF MYSORE, BANGALORE

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

iii. Whether on facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in allowing a loss of Rs. 16,84,481/-on revaluation of on account of loss permanent category investments, even though the same is a notional loss and inadmissible in law? iv. on Whether the facts and in the circumstances of the case

STATE BANK OF MYSORE,BANGALORE vs. JCIT, BANGALORE

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

iii. Whether on facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in allowing a loss of Rs. 16,84,481/-on revaluation of on account of loss permanent category investments, even though the same is a notional loss and inadmissible in law? iv. on Whether the facts and in the circumstances of the case

WIND WORLD INDIA LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Section 37 (1) of the act. The learned assessing officer further disallowed ₹ 60 crores u/s 37 (1) which the assessee voluntarily disallowed in the proceedings before the settlement commission. The AO further made a disallowance of ₹ 121,013,188/– u/s 14 A and disallowance of interest of Rs 243,86,238/– u/s 36(1)(iii) on account of diversion

WIND WORLD INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3 (1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Section 37 (1) of the act. The learned assessing officer further disallowed ₹ 60 crores u/s 37 (1) which the assessee voluntarily disallowed in the proceedings before the settlement commission. The AO further made a disallowance of ₹ 121,013,188/– u/s 14 A and disallowance of interest of Rs 243,86,238/– u/s 36(1)(iii) on account of diversion

DCIT - CC 3(1), MUMBAI vs. WIND WORLD INDIA LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Section 37 (1) of the act. The learned assessing officer further disallowed ₹ 60 crores u/s 37 (1) which the assessee voluntarily disallowed in the proceedings before the settlement commission. The AO further made a disallowance of ₹ 121,013,188/– u/s 14 A and disallowance of interest of Rs 243,86,238/– u/s 36(1)(iii) on account of diversion

DCIT - CC 3 (1), MUMBAI vs. WIND WORLD INDIA LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Section 37 (1) of the act. The learned assessing officer further disallowed ₹ 60 crores u/s 37 (1) which the assessee voluntarily disallowed in the proceedings before the settlement commission. The AO further made a disallowance of ₹ 121,013,188/– u/s 14 A and disallowance of interest of Rs 243,86,238/– u/s 36(1)(iii) on account of diversion

WIND WORLD INDIA LIMITEAD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Section 37 (1) of the act. The learned assessing officer further disallowed ₹ 60 crores u/s 37 (1) which the assessee voluntarily disallowed in the proceedings before the settlement commission. The AO further made a disallowance of ₹ 121,013,188/– u/s 14 A and disallowance of interest of Rs 243,86,238/– u/s 36(1)(iii) on account of diversion

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), MUMBAI vs. WIND WORLD INDIA LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Section 37 (1) of the act. The learned assessing officer further disallowed ₹ 60 crores u/s 37 (1) which the assessee voluntarily disallowed in the proceedings before the settlement commission. The AO further made a disallowance of ₹ 121,013,188/– u/s 14 A and disallowance of interest of Rs 243,86,238/– u/s 36(1)(iii) on account of diversion

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), MUMBAI vs. WIND WORLD INDIA LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Section 37 (1) of the act. The learned assessing officer further disallowed ₹ 60 crores u/s 37 (1) which the assessee voluntarily disallowed in the proceedings before the settlement commission. The AO further made a disallowance of ₹ 121,013,188/– u/s 14 A and disallowance of interest of Rs 243,86,238/– u/s 36(1)(iii) on account of diversion

WIND WORLD INDIA LIMITEAD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Section 37 (1) of the act. The learned assessing officer further disallowed ₹ 60 crores u/s 37 (1) which the assessee voluntarily disallowed in the proceedings before the settlement commission. The AO further made a disallowance of ₹ 121,013,188/– u/s 14 A and disallowance of interest of Rs 243,86,238/– u/s 36(1)(iii) on account of diversion

WIND WORLD INDIA LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Section 37 (1) of the act. The learned assessing officer further disallowed ₹ 60 crores u/s 37 (1) which the assessee voluntarily disallowed in the proceedings before the settlement commission. The AO further made a disallowance of ₹ 121,013,188/– u/s 14 A and disallowance of interest of Rs 243,86,238/– u/s 36(1)(iii) on account of diversion

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3 (1), MUMBAI vs. WIND WORLD INDIA LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Section 37 (1) of the act. The learned assessing officer further disallowed ₹ 60 crores u/s 37 (1) which the assessee voluntarily disallowed in the proceedings before the settlement commission. The AO further made a disallowance of ₹ 121,013,188/– u/s 14 A and disallowance of interest of Rs 243,86,238/– u/s 36(1)(iii) on account of diversion

WIND WORLD INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3 (1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Section 37 (1) of the act. The learned assessing officer further disallowed ₹ 60 crores u/s 37 (1) which the assessee voluntarily disallowed in the proceedings before the settlement commission. The AO further made a disallowance of ₹ 121,013,188/– u/s 14 A and disallowance of interest of Rs 243,86,238/– u/s 36(1)(iii) on account of diversion

DENA BANK,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assesse is allowed

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Sooddena Bank Vs. Pcit-2 Room No.344, 3Rd Floor Accounts Department Dena Bank Building Aaykar Bhawan 2Nd Floor M.K.Road 17/B, Horniman Circle Mumbai-400 020 Fort, Mumbai-400 023 Pan/Gir No.Aaacd4249B Appellant) .. Respondent)

36 Dena Bank "The submission of the revenue was that while passing the assessment order, the Assessing Officer did not consider the aspect specifically whether the expenditure in question was revenue or capital expenditure. That argument predicated on the assessment order, which apparently did not give any reason while allowing the entire expenditure as revenue expenditure. However, that, by itself

INCOME TAX OFFICER-19(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. MUKESH HIRACHAND SANGHVI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands\ndismissed

bogus purchases to 5% was reasonable given the nature of the business, and that the deletion of interest disallowance was justified as the advances were made for commercial expediency. The revenue's appeal was dismissed.", "result": "Dismissed", "sections": ["Section 147", "Section 148", "Section 145(3)", "Section 271(1)(C)", "Section 36(1)(iii

DCIT-3(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S UNION OF BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

iii) of sub-section (3) of section\n194A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Government\nhereby notify with effect from the 19th July, 1969, the following banks for\nthe purposes of the said sub-clause:-\n1. Indian Overseas Bank, 151, Mount Road, Madras-\n2. Indian Bank, Indian Chamber Building, Madras-1.\n3. Allahabad Bank