M/S. GUJARAT AMBUJA CEMENTS LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG. 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Pradhan

condonation petition. The Department having failed to satisfactorily explain such inordinate delay, we are inclined to dismiss the cross–objection on the ground of delay. In any case of the matter, while deciding assessee’s appeal in ITA no.7092/Mum./ 2005, herein 36 Ambuja Cement Ltd. (Earlier known as Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd.) before, we have decided to admit the additional

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 6(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S EPL LTD, MUMABI

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं. 2646/मुं/ 2022 ("न.व. 2007-08) Asstt.Commissioner Of Income Tax 6(1)(1), Room No.504, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Mk Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. M/S. Epl Ltd., Top Floor Times Tower, Kamala City, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai 400 013 Pan: Aaace-1568-L ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Jay Bhansali ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Ms. Richa Gulati सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 10/01/2023 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 13/01/2023 आदेश/ Order

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing on merits. 3. The brief facts of the case as emanating from records are: This is the third round of appeal in assessee’s case for Assessment Year 2007-08. In assessment order u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ in short ‘theAct’] the Assessing Officer vide order

DCIT 4(2), MUMBAI vs. GOPALDAS VISRAM & CO. LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are disposed off accordingly

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

condoned it would be against the principle of natural justice which is not the intent of legislation. We also find that the reasons for delay advanced by the ld. DR are good, genuine and reasonable and hence we accept the same by admitting these appeals for adjudication. 5. Since the issues agitated in all these appeals filed by the assessee

GOPALDAS VISRAM & CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 4(2), MUMBAI

Appeals are disposed off accordingly

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

condoned it would be against the principle of natural justice which is not the intent of legislation. We also find that the reasons for delay advanced by the ld. DR are good, genuine and reasonable and hence we accept the same by admitting these appeals for adjudication. 5. Since the issues agitated in all these appeals filed by the assessee

ACIT 4(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. GOPALDAS VISRAM & CO. LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are disposed off accordingly

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

condoned it would be against the principle of natural justice which is not the intent of legislation. We also find that the reasons for delay advanced by the ld. DR are good, genuine and reasonable and hence we accept the same by admitting these appeals for adjudication. 5. Since the issues agitated in all these appeals filed by the assessee

ACIT 4(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. GOPALDAS VISRAM & CO. LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are disposed off accordingly

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

condoned it would be against the principle of natural justice which is not the intent of legislation. We also find that the reasons for delay advanced by the ld. DR are good, genuine and reasonable and hence we accept the same by admitting these appeals for adjudication. 5. Since the issues agitated in all these appeals filed by the assessee

ACIT 4(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. GOPALDAS VISRAM & CO. LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are disposed off accordingly

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

condoned it would be against the principle of natural justice which is not the intent of legislation. We also find that the reasons for delay advanced by the ld. DR are good, genuine and reasonable and hence we accept the same by admitting these appeals for adjudication. 5. Since the issues agitated in all these appeals filed by the assessee

ACIT 4(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. GOPALDAS VISRAM & CO. LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are disposed off accordingly

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

condoned it would be against the principle of natural justice which is not the intent of legislation. We also find that the reasons for delay advanced by the ld. DR are good, genuine and reasonable and hence we accept the same by admitting these appeals for adjudication. 5. Since the issues agitated in all these appeals filed by the assessee

GOPALDAS VISRAM & CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 4(2), MUMBAI

Appeals are disposed off accordingly

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

condoned it would be against the principle of natural justice which is not the intent of legislation. We also find that the reasons for delay advanced by the ld. DR are good, genuine and reasonable and hence we accept the same by admitting these appeals for adjudication. 5. Since the issues agitated in all these appeals filed by the assessee

GOPALDAS VISRAM & CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 4(2)(2), MUMBAI

Appeals are disposed off accordingly

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

condoned it would be against the principle of natural justice which is not the intent of legislation. We also find that the reasons for delay advanced by the ld. DR are good, genuine and reasonable and hence we accept the same by admitting these appeals for adjudication. 5. Since the issues agitated in all these appeals filed by the assessee

GOPALDAS VISRAM & CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 4(2)(2), MUMBAI

Appeals are disposed off accordingly

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

condoned it would be against the principle of natural justice which is not the intent of legislation. We also find that the reasons for delay advanced by the ld. DR are good, genuine and reasonable and hence we accept the same by admitting these appeals for adjudication. 5. Since the issues agitated in all these appeals filed by the assessee

GOPALDAS VISRAM & CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 4(2), MUMBAI

Appeals are disposed off accordingly

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

condoned it would be against the principle of natural justice which is not the intent of legislation. We also find that the reasons for delay advanced by the ld. DR are good, genuine and reasonable and hence we accept the same by admitting these appeals for adjudication. 5. Since the issues agitated in all these appeals filed by the assessee

M/S. BLOOMDALE FINVEST P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO -12(1)(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

145A B/208, Shantivan II, Raheja Aayakar Bhavan Township, Malad East M.K. Road Mumbai-400 097. Mumbai-400 020. PAN : AAACB3459R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Neelam C. Jadhav Department by Shri K.C. Selvamani Date of Hearing 24.08.2021 Date of Pronouncement 25.08.2021 O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya (AM) :- This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order

DCIT CIT 6(3), MUMBAI vs. MAHINDRA UGINE STEEL CO. LTD, MUMBAI

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.6659/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Mahindra Cie Automotive Limited Circle-7(2)(1) (The Merged Entity Of Mahindra Ugine Steel Co.Ltd) 74,Ganesh Apartment Room No.338,3Rd Floor बनाम/ Opp.Sitladevi Temple Aaykar Bhavan,M.K.Road Vs. Lady Jamshedji Road, Mahim Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 016 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.Aaacm-4998-G/Aabcm-6632-J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & Cross Objection No.96/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Mahindra Cie Automotive Limited Assistant Commissioner Of (The Merged Entity Of Mahindra Ugine Steel Co.Ltd) Income Tax Range-6(3) बनाम/ Mahindra Towers,1St Floor Room No.573,5Th Floor Vs. Dr.G.M.Bhosale Marg, Worli Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Mumbai-400 018 Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.Aabcm-6632-J/Aaacm-4998-G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

condone the delay and proceed to dispose-off the same. 1.4 The effective grounds raised in revenue’s appeal reads as under:- 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in directing the A.O to verify and to take remedial action, as regards interest component attributable to capital

THE DCIT CIR 3(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. GUJARAT AMBUJA CEMENTS LTD, MUMBAI

Appeal stand partly allowed to the extent indicated in the order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.7486/Mum/2007 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2004-05) Acit-(Ltu)-1 Ambuja Cements Limited बनाम/ World Trade Centre [Earlier Known As Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd.] Elegant Business Park Centre-1, 29Th Floor, Vs. Midc Cross Road “B”, Off Andheri-Kurla Road Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-05. Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 059. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacg-0569-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.7494/Mum/2007 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2004-05) Ambuja Cements Limited Dcit–Range-3(1) [Earlier Known As Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd] बनाम/ Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Elegant Business Park Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Midc Cross Road “B”, Off Andheri-Kurla Road Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 059. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacg 0569 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & C.O. No.222/Mum/2017 [Arising Out Of Ita No. 7494/Mum/2007] (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2004-05) Acit-(Ltu)-1 Ambuja Cements Limited बनाम/ [Earlier Known As Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd.] World Trade Centre Elegant Business Park Centre-1, 29Th Floor, Vs. Midc Cross Road “B”, Off Andheri-Kurla Road Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-05. Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 059. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacg-0569-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

delay was to be condoned and the matter was to be proceeded on merits. 1.2 The name of erstwhile entity namely Gujarat Ambuja Cement Ltd. has undergone change to M/s Ambuja Cements Ltd. and accordingly, AMBUJA CEMENTS LIMITED Assessment Year: 2004-05 revised appeal memo has been filed by the revenue. Finding the same in order, we proceed to adjudicate

THE WEST COAST PAPER MILLS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 1(3), MUMBAI

Appeal stands allowed for Statistical Purposes

Delay condoned. Leave granted. Pending hearing and final disposal of the Civil Appeal, Department is restrained from recovering penalty and interest which has accrued till date. It is made clear ITA No.5457/M/2013 M/s. Birla Sun Life Asset Management Company Limited 5 that as far as the outstanding interest demand as of date is concerned, it would be open

ADDL CIT R G 7(1), MUMBAI vs. NOVARTIS INDIA LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS HINDUSTAN CIBA GIEGY LTD. ), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Novartis India Limited V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income –Tax - 7(2)(2) {Earlier Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} 6Th& 7Th Floor 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Inspire Bkc M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 “G” Block, Bkc Main Road Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400051 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1) V. M/S. Novartis India Limited Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No.190/Mum/2011 [Arising Out Of Ita No.6772/Mum/2010 (A.Y. 2002-03)] M/S. Novartis India Limited V. Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 143(2) proceeding and was treated as such by the assessee preclude it from urging lack of jurisdiction." (emphasis supplied) (3) There is no interplay of section 127 as held in para 8, in the following words- "8. As far as the section 127 goes, we are of the opinion that having regard to the findings rendered, that question