VODAFONE WEST LIMITED,(FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE ESSAR GUJARAT LIMITED),AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

801A of the Act on the following:\n6.1 Served from India Scheme (SFIS) income of Rs 3,31,38,860\n6.2 Rs 92,75,000 disallowed under section 14A of the Act\nGround no 7- Addition of Rs 92,75,000 disallowed under section 14A\nwhile computing book profits under section 115JB of the Act\n7. On the facts

DCIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. NAVKAR CORPORATION LIMITED, NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, we affirm the order of the Ld

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

801A, the base amount for calculating deduction got reduced from Rs 80,36,50,237 to Rs 66,37,35,347 i.e. reduction of Rs. 13,99,14,890 which is exactly the amount of deduction reduced by AO. Since, AO has not disturbed the total receipts and the basis of apportionment of expenses Le in turnover ratio

ACIT (LTU-1), MUMBAI vs. BAJAJ HOLDINGS & INVESTMENT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleacit (Ltu-1) V. Bajaj Holdings Investment Ltd 29Th, Floor, Centre-1 226, Bajaj Bhavan, 2Nd Floor World Trade Centre Jamnalal Bajaj Marg, Nariman Point Mumbai- 400021 Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400075 Pan: Aaacb3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No. 96/Mum/2002 [Arising Out Of Ita No.5030/Mum/2001 (A.Y: 1997-98)] Bhajaj Auto Limited V. Acit (Ltu-1) Bhajaj Bhavan 29Th, Floor, Centre-1 Nariman Point World Trade Centre Mumbai - 400020 Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400075 Pan: Aaacb3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Percy Pardiwala& Ms. Vasanti Patel Department Represented By : Shri Rahul Kumar & Shri Vranda U Matkarri

801A on the profits derived from respective units without deducting depreciation of respective units which is contrary to the provisions of above section. (e) Erred in direction the A.O. to grand deduction u/s 80HH & 80IAby including duty draw back. and interest which is contrary to the decision of Supreme Court in sterling Foods Ltd. (237ITR 579). (f) Erred in direction

PATEL ENGINEERING LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC-3(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, except for one ground no

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

capital gain even though such claim was not made in the return of income filed by the assessee." 3. "On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) erred in deleting the adjustments on account of addition made in computing the Book Profit u/s 115JB of the Act by ignoring the explanation 1 to section 115JB

ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS 2 1, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed,\nexcept for one ground no

capital gain\neven though such claim was not made in the return of income filed\nby the assessee.\"\n3. \"On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) erred\nin deleting the adjustments on account of addition made in\ncomputing the Book Profit u/s 115JB of the Act by ignoring the\nexplanation 1 to section 115JB

ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (TDS)2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LIMITED, MUMBAI

capital gain\neven though such claim was not made in the return of income filed\nby the assessee.\"\n3. \"On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) erred\nin deleting the adjustments on account of addition made in\ncomputing the Book Profit u/s 115JB of the Act by ignoring the\nexplanation 1 to section 115JB

DCIT CC - 3(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed,\nexcept for one ground no

capital gain\neven though such claim was not made in the return of income filed\nby the assessee.\"\n3. \"On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) erred\nin deleting the adjustments on account of addition made in\ncomputing the Book Profit u/s 115JB of the Act by ignoring the\nexplanation 1 to section 115JB

DCIT CC- 3(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LIMITED, MUMBAI

capital gain\neven though such claim was not made in the return of income filed\nby the assessee.\"\n3. \"On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) erred\nin deleting the adjustments on account of addition made in\ncomputing the Book Profit u/s 115JB of the Act by ignoring the\nexplanation 1 to section 115JB

PATEL ENGINEERING LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CC-3(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed,\nexcept for one ground no

capital gain\neven though such claim was not made in the return of income filed\nby the assessee.\"\n3. \"On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) erred\nin deleting the adjustments on account of addition made in\ncomputing the Book Profit u/s 115JB of the Act by ignoring the\nexplanation 1 to section 115JB

DCIT CEN CIR 1(4), MUMBAI vs. GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue and the assessee are partly allowed, and the additional ground of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

section 48(i) of the I.T. Act and should have been added in the cost of Unit for working out capital gain". 10) "On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in directing the AO not to reduce the claim of deduction of Rs.2,01,87,549/-u/s.801A by relying upon

GRASIM INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC-1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue and the assessee are partly allowed,\nand the additional ground of the assessee is dismissed

section 48(i) of the I.T. Act and should have been added in the cost of\nUnit for working out capital gain\".\n\n10) \"On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in\ndirecting the AO not to reduce the claim of deduction of Rs.2,01,87,549/-u/s.801A\nby relying upon

ADDL CIT 2(3), MUMBAI vs. TATA INDUSTRIES LTD, MUMBAI

Accordingly,\nGround No 2(a) & (b) of the revenue in ITA No. 4109/Mum/2012, therefore\nstands dismissed

gains of an\ninfrastructure capital fund or an infrastructure capital company from investments made\nby way of shares or long-term finance in any enterprise carrying on the business of\ndeveloping, maintaining and operating any infrastructure facility which fulfills the\nconditions specified in sub-section (4A) of section 80-IA is proposed to be exempt from\nincome tax.\n\nThe

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. VODAFONE ESSAR DIGILINK LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (Accountant Member)

capital account aggregating to INR.11.47 crores were disallowed by the Assessee while computing its business income and therefore, the said amount was also not considered for the purpose of computing deduction under Section 80-IA of the Act. Therefore, the Assessing Officer is directed not to exclude foreign exchange fluctuation (net) of INR.6.47 Crores while computing deduction under Section 80IA

DCIT CIR 6(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S. GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD., MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

gains as the shares shall be deemed to have been held for a period exceeding 12 months by the assessee.‖ 49. Thus, respectfully following the aforesaid decision, we are of the considered view that in the present case, the date of acquisition of debentures, i.e. 27/06/1997, be considered as the date of acquisition of the equity shares for the computation

GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RANGE 6(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

gains as the shares shall be deemed to have been held for a period exceeding 12 months by the assessee.‖ 49. Thus, respectfully following the aforesaid decision, we are of the considered view that in the present case, the date of acquisition of debentures, i.e. 27/06/1997, be considered as the date of acquisition of the equity shares for the computation

PROCTER & GAMGLE HYGIENE& HEALTHCARE ,LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 7(1), MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

801A which reads as under: 'Where any amount of profits and gains of an industrial undertaking or of an enterprise in the case of an assessee is claimed and allowed under this section for ITA. No. 6591 & 6549/Mum/2010 (AY 2004-05) ITA. No. 2780 & 2849/Mum/2011 (AY 2005-06) any assessment year, deduction to the extent of such profits and gains

ADDL CIT RG 7(1), MUMBAI vs. PROCTOR & GAMBLE HYGIENE & HEALTHCARE LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

801A which reads as under: 'Where any amount of profits and gains of an industrial undertaking or of an enterprise in the case of an assessee is claimed and allowed under this section for ITA. No. 6591 & 6549/Mum/2010 (AY 2004-05) ITA. No. 2780 & 2849/Mum/2011 (AY 2005-06) any assessment year, deduction to the extent of such profits and gains

DCIT-5(2)(1),MUMBAI, AAYAKAR BHAVAN vs. JSW STEEL COATED PRODUCTS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, C.O. filed by assessee is\ndismissed as infructuous

gains derived by an\nundertaking that is engaged in the eligible activity of power generation.\nb. The SDT for which ALP is required to be determined is the 'supply of power by\nthe eligible power generation unit\".\nc. The method chosen to determine the ALP as well as the choice of tested party\nshould be such as to arrive

DCIT-3(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. AMBUJA CEMENTS LTD.,, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the revenue and CO’s of assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2031/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dcit-3(4) बिधम/ M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd 29Th Floor, Center-1, World 3Rd Floor, Elegant Vs. Trade Center, Cuffe Parade, Business Park, Midc Mumbai-400005. Cross, Road B Andheri East, Mumbai-400059. Cross Objection No. 90/Mum/2023 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.2031/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd बिधम/ Dcit-3(4) 3Rd Floor, Elegant Business 29Th Floor, Center-1, Vs. Park, Midc Cross, Road B World Trade Center, Andheri East, Mumbai- Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400059. 400005. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2032/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit-3(4) बिधम/ M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd 29Th Floor, Center-1, World 3Rd Floor, Elegant Vs. Trade Center, Cuffe Parade, Business Park, Midc Mumbai-400005. Cross, Road B Andheri . East, Mumbai-400059. Cross Objection No. 91/Mum/2023 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.2032/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd बिधम/ Dcit-3(4) 3Rd Floor, Elegant Business 29Th Floor, Center-1, Vs. Park, Midc Cross, Road B World Trade Center, Andheri East, Mumbai- Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400059. 400005. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg0569P (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri Ajay Chandra (Dr) C.O. 90 & 91/Mum/2023 A.Ys. 2008-09 & 2010-11 Ambuja Cements Ltd सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 11/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Revenue & Respective Cross Objections (‘Co’) Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi [In Short ‘Ld. Cit(A)’] Dated 31-03-2023 For Ay 2008-09 & Ay 2010-11 Respectively.

gain saying that fact that the appellant has developed the rail system and is operating and maintaining the same. After perusal of the facts as well as the judicial pronouncements quoted above it is therefore held that the appellant is eligible for deduction u/s 80IA in r/o profits from rail system. In view of the same, the AO is directed