THE BOMBAY DYEING & MANUFACTURING COMPANY LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, C--2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S Bombay Dyeing & Income-Tax 2(1)(1), Mumbai, Manufacturing Co. Ltd Room No.561, 5Th Floor, Vs. Neville House, Jn Herdia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 M/S Bombay Dyeing & Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Manufacturing Co. Ltd Tax 2(1), Mumbai, Room Neville House, Jn Herdia No.561, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Vs Marg, Ballard Estate, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai-400 001 400 020 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent

gain on conversion of capital asset into stock in trade in accordance with conversion of capital asset into stock in trade in accordance with conversion of capital asset into stock in trade in accordance with M/s Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. Ltd. M/s Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. Ltd. ITA Nos. 4484, 4485, 4291 & 4293/M/2019 law. The ground No.1 of the appeal

ACIT CIRCLE-2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S BOMBAY DYEING & MANUFACTURING CO. LTD. , MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S Bombay Dyeing & Income-Tax 2(1)(1), Mumbai, Manufacturing Co. Ltd Room No.561, 5Th Floor, Vs. Neville House, Jn Herdia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 M/S Bombay Dyeing & Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Manufacturing Co. Ltd Tax 2(1), Mumbai, Room Neville House, Jn Herdia No.561, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Vs Marg, Ballard Estate, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai-400 001 400 020 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent

gain on conversion of capital asset into stock in trade in accordance with conversion of capital asset into stock in trade in accordance with conversion of capital asset into stock in trade in accordance with M/s Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. Ltd. M/s Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. Ltd. ITA Nos. 4484, 4485, 4291 & 4293/M/2019 law. The ground No.1 of the appeal

ACIT CIRCLE-2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S BOMBAY DYEING & MANUFACTURING CO. LTD. , MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S Bombay Dyeing & Income-Tax 2(1)(1), Mumbai, Manufacturing Co. Ltd Room No.561, 5Th Floor, Vs. Neville House, Jn Herdia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 M/S Bombay Dyeing & Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Manufacturing Co. Ltd Tax 2(1), Mumbai, Room Neville House, Jn Herdia No.561, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Vs Marg, Ballard Estate, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai-400 001 400 020 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent

gain on conversion of capital asset into stock in trade in accordance with conversion of capital asset into stock in trade in accordance with conversion of capital asset into stock in trade in accordance with M/s Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. Ltd. M/s Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. Ltd. ITA Nos. 4484, 4485, 4291 & 4293/M/2019 law. The ground No.1 of the appeal

THE BOMBAY DYEING & MANUFACTURING COMPANY LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, C--2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S Bombay Dyeing & Income-Tax 2(1)(1), Mumbai, Manufacturing Co. Ltd Room No.561, 5Th Floor, Vs. Neville House, Jn Herdia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 M/S Bombay Dyeing & Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Manufacturing Co. Ltd Tax 2(1), Mumbai, Room Neville House, Jn Herdia No.561, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Vs Marg, Ballard Estate, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai-400 001 400 020 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent

gain on conversion of capital asset into stock in trade in accordance with conversion of capital asset into stock in trade in accordance with conversion of capital asset into stock in trade in accordance with M/s Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. Ltd. M/s Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. Ltd. ITA Nos. 4484, 4485, 4291 & 4293/M/2019 law. The ground No.1 of the appeal

ASIA INVESTMENTS PVT.. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT ,CIRCLE 2 (1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeal

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

14A of the Act. 9.4 Thus, applying the principle laid down in Thus, applying the principle laid down in Maxopp Investment Maxopp Investment Ltd. (supra), even if Rule 8D were to be validly invoked, only the (supra), even if Rule 8D were to be validly invoked, only the (supra), even if Rule 8D were to be validly invoked, only

TATA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ADDL.C.I.T., RANGE-2(3), MUMBAI

capital gains income. Therefore, we reject the\ncontention of the Revenue that the theory of appropriation is not\napplicable in the facts on the present case. Further, as per the\nabove said judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court and\nHon'ble Supreme Court, Section 14A

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

capital gains, etc.) is clearly within the purview of Section 14A, which prohibits the deduction of expenses related to 14A

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

capital gains, etc.) is clearly within the purview of Section 14A, which prohibits the deduction of expenses related to 14A

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

capital gains, etc.) is clearly within the purview of Section 14A, which prohibits the deduction of expenses related to 14A

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

capital gains, etc.) is clearly within the purview of Section 14A, which prohibits the deduction of expenses related to 14A

SH KELKAR & CO. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT-4, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sh Kelkar & Company Principal Commissioner Of Limited, Income-Tax-4, Devkaran Mansion, 36, Vs. Room No. 629, 6Th Floor, Mangaldas Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400 002. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacs 9778 G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri J.D. Mistry, Sr. Advocate & Shri Harsh Kothari Revenue By : Dr. Kishor Dhule, Cit-Dr : Date Of Hearing 13/02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 20/02/2023

section 263 of the Act was bad in law was bad in law and therefore, declare the said order and therefore, declare the said order as null and void; as null and void; 2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the assessee filed Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the assessee filed Briefly stated, facts

BAJAJ CONSULTANTS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2017-18

capital gains of ₹4,73,00,987/- claimed exempt under section claimed exempt under section 10(38) of the Act. 2.3 The assessee submitted that it The assessee submitted that it had, on its own, made a had, on its own, made a disallowance under section 14A

ZODIAC VENTURES LTD ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(3)(4), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhanzodiac Ventures Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 404, Dev Plaza, 68, S.V. Road, 11(3)(4) Andheri West, Mumbai – Aayakar Bhawan, Maharshi 400058. Karve Road, Mumbai- Pan: Aafps7328J 400020. (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 14A cannot be applied through dividend received may not be taxable. On a long-term analysis of price earnings ratio of the overall share market capitalization, we find that earning by way of dividend is hereby 1.5% to 2%. There are large number of companies which do not declare any dividend. If we consider average market capitalization

J.M FINANCIAL AND INVESTMENT CONSULTANCY SERVICE PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for stati...

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2015-16

capital gains of , claimed as exempt under section 10(38) of the Act. In the computation of income, the under section 10(38) of the Act. In the computation under section 10(38) of the Act. In the computation assessee had suo-motu motu worked out disallowance under section 14A

DCIT-2(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD, MUMBAI

Capital Gains on the sale of depreciable immovable property invoking Section 50C.", "held": "The Tribunal considered the grounds raised by the assessee and the Revenue. Grounds 1, 2, and 3 of the assessee were withdrawn and dismissed. Ground 4, regarding addition under Section 41(1), was set aside to the AO for de novo consideration in the interest of natural

M/S. OCEANIC MARKETING AGENCIES INDIA LTD.,,DELHI vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (OSD), CIRCLE 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result ITA No. 4542/Mum/2025 is dismissed as\nwithdrawn and ITA No

capital gains. On section 14A it was submitted that the assessee had already disallowed most of the relevant expenditure suo motu

INDIABULLAS HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6(4), MUMBAI

Section 14A of the Act. 6.1. The facts relevant to the adjudication of the issues for consideration are that during the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted that the Assessee has shown substantial investments in shares & mutual funds for the purpose of earning dividend income, long term capital gains

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-CIRCLE 6(1)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. 360 ONE PRIME LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for t, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for t, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2016-17 Asst. Cit Circle-6(1)(2), 360 One Prime Ltd., Room No. 506, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Iifl Centre, Kamala City, Senapati Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aabcc 3347 E Appellant Respondent

Section 14A was invoked to work out the disallowance u/s 14A as per rule 8D2(ii) & (iii) of the I.T. Rules. u/s 14A as per rule 8D2(ii) & (iii) of the I.T. Rules. The appellant stated that it is a public limi The appellant stated that it is a public limited company incorporated ted company incorporated under the Companies