M/S. BANK OF AMERICAN , N.A,MUMBAI vs. THE JT DIT (I.T)3, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

capital and interest free loans of the\nassessee exceeded the amounts advanced has to be controverted or disproved\nby the Department.\n4.5 Thus, in view of the aforesaid factual and legal position when it is found\nthat there is no nexus proved between funds for lending to infrastructure\nprojects/ investment in tax free bonds and interest bearing funds

M/S. MASHREQ BANK PSC.,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (IT) - 3(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed, as indicated above

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C. V. Bhadangshri Saktijit Dey & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year: 2002-03

section 44C of the Act. Thus, in absence of any restriction imposed regarding the limit of expenditure to be allowed, the restriction imposed under the domestic law cannot be read into Article 7(3). 16. There is another aspect to the issue. The contextual interpretation of Article 25 of the Treaty. Article 25 of the Treaty starts with the heading

M/S. STANDARD CHARTERED BANK,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (I.T) - 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalstandard Chartered Bank Taxation Department, 23-25, M. G. Road, 3Rd Floor, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Pan: Aabcs4681D ..... Appellant Vs. Ddit (Intl. Tax)-2(1) Scindia House, Ballard Estate, N. M. Marg, Mumbai-400 038 ..... Respondent

capital asset for the company. The asset which was created belonged to somebody else and the company derived an enduring business advantage by expending the amount. In all these cases, the expense has been looked upon as having been made for the purpose of conducting the business of the assessee more profitably or more successfully. In the present case also

ACIT (IT)-4(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. STANDARD CHARTERED BANK LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

section 37(1) and should not\nbe restricted under section 44C of the Act. Respectfully following\nthe decision of coordinate bench and judicial pronouncements\nrelied upon by the assessee, we are in agreement with the\ncontentions of assessee and ground raised by the assessee is\nallowed.\"\nPage No. | 53\n54. Further, the Coordinate Bench in assessee's own case

THE HONGKONG & SHANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION LTD,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (IT) 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed wherein

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & The Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd. Srnior (Vice President)

capital expenditure. M/s. Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd. Since ITAT has allowed similar amount as revenue expenditure, therefore, consistent with the same we allow same as revenue expenditure. Accordingly, this ground is allowed in favour of the assessee. Ground No. 4: Deferred guarantee commission – Rs 1,44,37,836/- 16. Brief facts qua this issue are that, guarantee commission

DDIT (IT) 3(1), MUMBAI vs. HONGKONG & SANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed wherein

Bench: IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘H’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.7336/Mum/2010 (Assessment Year :2004-05) & ITA No.4765/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year :2005-06) The Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd. Srnior Vice President Tax, India Area Management 5th Floor, Hongkong Bank Building, 52/60, MG Road Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 (Appellant) Vs. The Joint Director of Income Tax (International Taxation)-3, Mumbai 1st Flo

capital expenditure. M/s. Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd. Since ITAT has allowed similar amount as revenue expenditure, therefore, consistent with the same we allow same as revenue expenditure. Accordingly, this ground is allowed in favour of the assessee. Ground No. 4: Deferred guarantee commission – Rs 1,44,37,836/- 16. Brief facts qua this issue are that, guarantee commission

THE HONG KONG & SHANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION LTD.,MUMBAI vs. JT. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) - RANGE -3, MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed wherein

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

capital expenditure. M/s. Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd. Since ITAT has allowed similar amount as revenue expenditure, therefore, consistent with the same we allow same as revenue expenditure. Accordingly, this ground is allowed in favour of the assessee. Ground No. 4: Deferred guarantee commission – Rs 1,44,37,836/- 16. Brief facts qua this issue are that, guarantee commission

DCIT 2(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. THE HONGKONG AND SHANGHAI BANKING CORP LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed wherein

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

capital expenditure. M/s. Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd. Since ITAT has allowed similar amount as revenue expenditure, therefore, consistent with the same we allow same as revenue expenditure. Accordingly, this ground is allowed in favour of the assessee. Ground No. 4: Deferred guarantee commission – Rs 1,44,37,836/- 16. Brief facts qua this issue are that, guarantee commission

STANDARD CHARTERED BANK,MUMBAI vs. DDIT(IT) 2 (1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

44C of the Act. It was submitted that section 44C\nof the Act deals with the allowability of the head office\nadministrative expenses. Accordingly, it was submitted\nthat the expenses incurred by the assessee are out of the\nscope of provision of section 44C as these expenses are\nnot in the nature of general administrative expenses but\nare solely

STANDARD CHARTERED BANK,MUMBAI vs. DDIT(IT) 2 (1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

section\n44C of the Act. Following the decision of his predecessor-\nin-office, learned Commissioner (Appeals) deleted the\ndisallowance by holding that the expenditure is allowable\nunder section 37(1) of the Act without imposing\nrestrictions contained under section 44C of the Act.\n19. We have considered rival submissions and perused\nmaterial on record. Learned Counsels appearing for the\nparties

ACIT (IT)-4(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. STANDARD CHARTERED BANK LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

section 44C of the Act, hence, cannot\nbe claimed as deduction separately. Being aggrieved with\nPage No. 54\nthe aforesaid decision of the Assessing Officer, assessee\npreferred appeal before the first appellate authority.\n18. Learned Commissioner (Appeals) after considering\nthe submissions of the assessee in the context of facts\nand materials on record found that identical disallowance\nmade

DCIT (IT)-2(1)(2), AIR BUILDING, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI vs. DBS BANK LIMITED, MUMBAI

Gains of business. The\nPunjab and Haryana High Court, in the case of Pr. CIT, vs. State Bank of Patiala13\nwhile adverting to the CBDT Circular, concluded correctly that shares and securities\nheld by a bank are stock in trade, and all income received on such shares and securities\nmust be considered to be business income. That is why Section

DBS BANK LTD (DBS BANK LTD., INDIA BRANCHES NOW CONVERTED INTO DBS BANK INDIA LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT (INT TXT)-2(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon’Ble

Gains of business. The Punjab and Haryana High Court, in the case of Pr. CIT, vs. State Bank of Patiala13 while adverting to the CBDT Circular, concluded correctly that shares and securities held by a bank are stock in trade, and all income received on such shares and securities must be considered to be business income. That is why Section