MONSANTO INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 8(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, that of the Revenue is dismissed

gain as ‘business income’. Accordingly, Ground of appeal No.6 is dismissed. 13. The next issue in the Cross-appeals is in relation to disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act. In this context, brief facts are that the assessee- company had earned dividend income of Rs. 9,29,39,466/-, which was claimed exempt

DCIT 8(2), MUMBAI vs. MONSANTO INDIA LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, that of the Revenue is dismissed

gain as ‘business income’. Accordingly, Ground of appeal No.6 is dismissed. 13. The next issue in the Cross-appeals is in relation to disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act. In this context, brief facts are that the assessee- company had earned dividend income of Rs. 9,29,39,466/-, which was claimed exempt

GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD ( CORPORATE FINANCE DIVISION),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 6(3), MUMBAI

Bench: the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal preferred by the Assessee vide order, dated 18/05/2009. 4. Not being satisfied with the relief granted by the Id. CIT(A), the Assessee has preferred appeal before this Tribunal. The Revenue has also filed cross-appeal challenging the relief granted by the Id. CIT(A).

Section 43B of the Act was inserted by the Finance Act, 1987 with effect from 01/04/1988. The First Proviso made it clear that Section 43B shall not apply in relation to any sum which is actually paid by the assessee in the next accounting year if it is paid on or before the due date for furnishing the return

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

section 43B, computation of capital gains, grant of credit for tax deducted at source, and levy of interest under sections

ACIT 6(3), MUMBAI vs. GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD, MUMBAI

43B\nof the Act has been allowed, Ground No. 1 raised by the Assessee\nhas been rendered infructuous. In view of the aforesaid submission,\nGround No. 1 to 1.2 raised by the Assessee is dismissed as\ninfructuous.\n7.\nGround No. 2\n\"2.\nDepreciation on let out property\n2.1.\nOn the facts and circumstances of the case

DCIT 8(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. VOLTAS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, these appeals are partly allowed

Section 92C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Transfer pricing - Computation of arm's length price (Comparables and adjustments/Adjustment - Corporate guarantee fee) -Assessment year 2012-13 - During relevant year, assesses furnished corporate guarantee in respect of loan availed by its foreign AE - Assessee did not charge any corporate guarantee fee - In transfer pricing proceedings, TPO opined that assesses should have

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

43B, computation of\ncapital gains, grant of credit for tax deducted at source, and levy\nof interest under sections 234B and 234C. Additions and\ndisallowances were made year-wise, and penalty proceedings\nunder section 270A were initiated wherever applicable.\n4. Aggrieved by the respective assessment orders, the assessee\ncarried the matters in appeal before the CIT(A).Before

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

section 43B, computation of capital gains, grant of credit for tax deducted at source, and levy of interest under sections

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” or “Income from other sources”, or in from other sources”, or in section 199 or in sections or in sections 28 to [43B

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” or “Income from other sources”, or in from other sources”, or in section 199 or in sections or in sections 28 to [43B

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” or “Income from other sources”, or in from other sources”, or in section 199 or in sections or in sections 28 to [43B

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” or “Income from other sources”, or in from other sources”, or in section 199 or in sections or in sections 28 to [43B

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

43B, computation of\ncapital gains, grant of credit for tax deducted at source, and levy\nof interest under sections 234B and 234C. Additions and\ndisallowances were made year-wise, and penalty proceedings\nunder section 270A were initiated wherever applicable.\n4. Aggrieved by the respective assessment orders, the assessee\ncarried the matters in appeal before the CIT(A).Before

NETWORTH STOCK BROKING LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

43B of the Act, although it has not been mentioned. The CIT(A) also not consider the issue whether the performance linked incentive is in the nature of bonus or commission or it is a separate deduction claimed by the assessee. Aggrieved, now assessee is in appeal before Tribunal. 4. Before us, it was argued that the assessee is engaged

ACIT 4(2), MUMBAI vs. NETWORTH STOCK BROKING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

43B of the Act, although it has not been mentioned. The CIT(A) also not consider the issue whether the performance linked incentive is in the nature of bonus or commission or it is a separate deduction claimed by the assessee. Aggrieved, now assessee is in appeal before Tribunal. 4. Before us, it was argued that the assessee is engaged

ACIT 4(2), MUMBAI vs. NETWORTH STOCK BROKING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

43B of the Act, although it has not been mentioned. The CIT(A) also not consider the issue whether the performance linked incentive is in the nature of bonus or commission or it is a separate deduction claimed by the assessee. Aggrieved, now assessee is in appeal before Tribunal. 4. Before us, it was argued that the assessee is engaged

NETWORTH STOCK BROKING LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

43B of the Act, although it has not been mentioned. The CIT(A) also not consider the issue whether the performance linked incentive is in the nature of bonus or commission or it is a separate deduction claimed by the assessee. Aggrieved, now assessee is in appeal before Tribunal. 4. Before us, it was argued that the assessee is engaged

JSW STEEL LTD vs. ASST CIT CIR 11(5),

In the result assessee’s appeal is partly allowed whereas revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2004-05

43B and hence the amount waived has not been offered to tax as per section 41(1). However a vital fact to be noted in the present case is that, the assessee while computing the book profit under section 115JB in the revised computation of income has included the amount of Rs.314.14 crores (i.e. Rs.228.46 + Rs.86.01) which represented the exceptional

ASST CIT CIR 11(5) vs. JSW STEEL LTD,

In the result assessee’s appeal is partly allowed whereas revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2004-05

43B and hence the amount waived has not been offered to tax as per section 41(1). However a vital fact to be noted in the present case is that, the assessee while computing the book profit under section 115JB in the revised computation of income has included the amount of Rs.314.14 crores (i.e. Rs.228.46 + Rs.86.01) which represented the exceptional