KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-3(2)(2), ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPT, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

43C(6)(c)\napply where the capital assets enters a block of asset as in case of the\nassessee. Thus, as per the section what is required to be reduced is money\npayable in respect of asset sold, discarded, demolished and\ndestroyed.There is no provisions in section 43(6) to state that if value as\nperstamp duty is higher than

ADDL CIT LTU, MUMBAI vs. THE SHIPPING CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes, while the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Capital Gains" and does not fall within the ambit of sections 28 to 43C. Thus, the receipt cannot be considered

THE SHIPPING CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ADDL.C.I.T. LTU, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes, while the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Capital Gains" and does not fall within the ambit of sections 28 to 43C. Thus, the receipt cannot be considered

ACIT - 3(4), MUMBAI vs. THE SHIPPING CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the\nappeal of the revenue is dismissed

gains of business under Chapter-XII-G. Hence, we\nare of the opinion that the argument of the assessee should succeed.\n30. With the introduction of chapter-XII-G, the entire methodology of taxing\nincome from the business of operating qualifying ships has changed and\nrecourse to the normal provisions of the Act in a peace-meal manner

KAMAL CLEARING AND FORWARDING AGENCY PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(3)(3), , MUMBAI

Bench: MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member), SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA ( (Accountant Member)

gains of business shall be computed in accordance with section 30 to section 43C. That, section 32(1) of the Act provides for depreciation in respect of building, plant and machinery owned by the assessee and used for business purposes. It further provides for deduction subject to section 34. In that matter also, a similar argument, as in the present

MAHESHWARI PRAGATI MANDAL,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blemaheshwari Pragati Mandal V. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre 2Nd Floor Maheshwari Bhavan Delhi Girgaon Road, Kalbadevi Mumbai-400002 Pan: Aaatm0226G (Appellant) (Respondent)

gains of business shall be computed in accordance with section 30 to section 43C. That section 32(1) of the Act provides for depreciation in respect of building, plant and machinery owned by the assessee and used for business purposes. It further provides for deduction subject to section 34. In that matter also, a similar argument, as in the present

THE GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 5(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm The Great Eastern Shipping Co. The Dy. Commissioner Of Ltd. Income-Tax, Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Llp Range-5(3), Esplanade House, 2 Nd Floor, Vs. Room No.525B, 5Th Floor, M.K. Marg, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaact1565C The Dy. Commissioner Of The Great Eastern Shipping Income-Tax, Co. Ltd. Range-5(3), Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Llp Vs. Esplanade House, 2 Nd Floor, Room No.525B, 5Th Floor, M.K. Marg, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Mumbai-400 020 Fort, Mumbai-400 001 (Appellant) (Respondent)

Gains of business or profession" notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in section 28 to 43C. It, therefore, follows that when the income of the assessee from the business of operating ships is computed as per the special provisions contained in Chapter XIIG, only the expenses incurred by the assessee for earning income of the said business are deemed

DCIT 5(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. THE GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm The Great Eastern Shipping Co. The Dy. Commissioner Of Ltd. Income-Tax, Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Llp Range-5(3), Esplanade House, 2 Nd Floor, Vs. Room No.525B, 5Th Floor, M.K. Marg, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaact1565C The Dy. Commissioner Of The Great Eastern Shipping Income-Tax, Co. Ltd. Range-5(3), Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Llp Vs. Esplanade House, 2 Nd Floor, Room No.525B, 5Th Floor, M.K. Marg, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Mumbai-400 020 Fort, Mumbai-400 001 (Appellant) (Respondent)

Gains of business or profession" notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in section 28 to 43C. It, therefore, follows that when the income of the assessee from the business of operating ships is computed as per the special provisions contained in Chapter XIIG, only the expenses incurred by the assessee for earning income of the said business are deemed

M/S. VAN-OORD INDIA PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 5(3) (2) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S. Van Oord India Pvt. Ltd. 201, 2Nd Floor, Central Plaza, 166 Cst Road, Kalina, Raheja Towers, Opp. Sidbi, Mumbai-400 098 Pan: Aaach5430J ..... Appellant Vs. Acit Circle 5(3) (2) Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai- 400 020 ..... Respondent & Acit Circle 5(3) (2) Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai- 400 020 ...... Appellant Vs.

gains. 4. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Hon'ble CIT(A) was not appreciating the facts that income under TTS does not take into consideration, the effect of International transactions between assessee and its AEs on its income and to mitigate this, Section 92(1) of the Act is there, which reads

THE SHIPPING CORPORATION OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DY COMM OF INCOME TAX-3(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

43C of the Act. For the\nyear under consideration, the assessee filed its return of income on\n28/11/2018 declaring a total income of Rs.161,55,42,230. The return of\nincome was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS and statutory notices\nunder section 143(2) and section 142(1) were issued and served on the\nassessee. The Assessing Officer

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE- 3(4) MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. THE SHIPPING CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singhshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

43C of the Act. For the year under consideration, the assessee filed its return of income on ITAs No.1751 & 1971/Mum/2024 (A.Ys. 2018-19) 3 28/11/2018 declaring a total income of Rs.161,55,42,230. The return of income was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS and statutory notices under section 143(2) and section 142(1) were issued and served

DCIT, CIRCLE 3 4, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. TATA CONSULTANCY SERVICES LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of both, revenue and assessee are partly\nallowed for all the three

Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act both under normal provisions of the Act\nas well as under the computation of book profits u/s.115JB of the Act. We find\nthat the Id. CIT(A) had deleted the said disallowance by observing as under:-\n\"This is a matter arising for the first time in the case of assessee

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

In the result, appeals of both, revenue and assessee are partly\nallowed for all the three

gains derived from export of articles is\ndifferent from the income derived from the profits of the business of the\nundertaking. The profits of the business of the undertaking includes the\nprofits and gains from export of the articles as well as all other\nincidental incomes derived from the business of the undertaking.\nAssessee submitted that wherever there

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