AUTO FINANCE ENTERPRISES,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 12(3), MUMBAI

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.259/Mum/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Auto Finance Enterprises Acit-Circle 12(3) 1St Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, बनाम/ 41, Nariman Bhavan, 221, Nariman Point, M. K. Road Vs. Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 020 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafa-2325-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) :

depreciation under section 32 by making application for rectification under section 154 of the Act on 11 M/s Auto Finance

ASST. CIT-1(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. TILAKNAGAR INDUSTRIES LTD., MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Baskaran B.R & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 1355/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2009-10) Acit-1(3)(1), Room No.540, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. M/S. Tilaknagar Industries Limited. 3Rd Floor, Indl.Assurance Bldg. Jd Tata Marg, Churchgate, Mumbai 400 020 Pan:Aaact-6047-R ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Rajesh Damor ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Dr. K.Shivram, Sr. Advocate With Ms. Neelam Jadhav सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 04/07/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 29/09/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-47, Mumbai [In Short ‘The Cit(A)] Dated 04/01/2021 For The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case As Emanating From Records Are: The Assessee Is Engaged In Manufacturing & Selling Of Indian Made Foreign Liquor. The 2 Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For A.Y 2009-10 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.29,19,12,503/- On 30/09/2009. The Assessment Order U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) Was Passed On 07/12/2011. Thereafter, The Assessing Officer Issued Notice U/S. 154 Of The Act Dated 18/03/2013 To Rectify The Alleged Mistake In Assessment Order On Two Counts:

154 of the Act dated 18/03/2013 to rectify the alleged mistake in assessment order on two counts: (i) Excess depreciation has been allowed to the assessee in respect of Multiple Effect Evaporator Plant(MEEP) (ii)Short deduction of TDS on payment of rent, hence, payment of rent is to be disallowed under section

THEIS PRECISION STEEL INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 7(3)(3), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negi

Section 154 of the Act vide letter dated 11.01.2012 requesting the Assessing Officer to treat the professional fees of `7,50,000/- as capital expenditure and allow depreciation

THEIS PRECISION STEEL INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 7(3)(3), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negi

Section 154 of the Act vide letter dated 11.01.2012 requesting the Assessing Officer to treat the professional fees of `7,50,000/- as capital expenditure and allow depreciation

M/S. PIK STUDIOS P. LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS PIK PEN PRIVATE LIMITED),MUMBAI vs. ITO 8(2)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, these appeals by the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Amarjit Singh.

section 154 expired on 31-03-2017 it was decided by the assessee company to file appeals for the concerned assessment years. 3. On consideration of the reasonable cause of delay, we condone the said delay. 4. Since the issues are common and connected, the appeals were heard together. These are being consolidated and hence disposed of together by this

INDOCO REMEDIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

154 of the Act, has been initiated are debatable issues, upheld the decision of learned Commissioner (Appeals). Facts being identical, the aforesaid decision of the Co–ordinate Bench will clearly apply. In view of the aforesaid, we uphold the decision of learned Commissioner (Appeals) by dismissing the grounds raised by the Revenue. 10. In the result, Revenue’s appeal

MISTRY CONSTRUCTION CO. PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 41, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am

section 154 of the Act thereby the disallowing the claim of additional depreciation. For this assessee has raised following three

DEWANCHAND RAMSARAN INDUSTRIES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 6(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am Dewanchand Ramsaran Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Industries P. Ltd. Mumbai, 7/8 B Trade World, Kamla City, Circle 6(2) Vs. Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Mumbai Parel, Mumbai- 400 013 Pan No. Aabcd7193H .. Appellant Respondent Assessee By .. Miss Arti Sathe, Ar .. Shri B. S. Bist, Dr Revenue By Date Of Hearing .. 05-04-2017 .. Date Of Pronouncement 05-04-2017 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

section 154 of the Act on 05-01-2012 claiming an unabsorbed depreciation of Rs. 11,11,82,315/- pertaining

PFIZER LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - 14(2) (2), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm M/S Pfizer Limited The Capital, 1802/1901, Acit-14(2)(2) Plot No.C-70, G-Block, 461, 4T H Floor, Aaykar Bhavan Bandra Kurla Complex, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacp3334M

depreciation on this goodwill by invoking the sixth proviso to section 32 (1) of the act. For this proposition the revenue authorities of relied upon the decision of Bangalore bench in case of United breweries Ltd. He submitted that identical issue arose before the honourable Karnataka High Court in ITA number 154

ACIT - 14(2) (2), MUMBAI vs. PFIZER LTD, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm M/S Pfizer Limited The Capital, 1802/1901, Acit-14(2)(2) Plot No.C-70, G-Block, 461, 4T H Floor, Aaykar Bhavan Bandra Kurla Complex, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacp3334M

depreciation on this goodwill by invoking the sixth proviso to section 32 (1) of the act. For this proposition the revenue authorities of relied upon the decision of Bangalore bench in case of United breweries Ltd. He submitted that identical issue arose before the honourable Karnataka High Court in ITA number 154

DR. D. Y. PATIL VIDYAPEETH SOCIETY,PUNE vs. JT. CIT (OSD), CENTRAL CIRCLE-7(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals for the A

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

depreciation for the relevant assessment years after discussing the reasons for such disallowance in the respective assessment order. Before the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed application under section 154

DR. D. Y. PATIL VIDYAPEETH SOCIETY,PUNE vs. JT. CIT (OSD) CENTRAL CIRCLE-7(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals for the A

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

depreciation for the relevant assessment years after discussing the reasons for such disallowance in the respective assessment order. Before the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed application under section 154

DR. D. Y. PATIL VIDYAPEETH SOCIETY,PUNE vs. JT. CIT (OSD) CENTRAL CIRCLE-7(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals for the A

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

depreciation for the relevant assessment years after discussing the reasons for such disallowance in the respective assessment order. Before the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed application under section 154

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)

154 or section 250, direct the Assessing] Officer to appeal to the Appellate Tribunal against the order. (2A) *** (3) Every appeal under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) shall be filed within sixty days of the date on which the order sought to be appealed against is communicated to the assessee or to the Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner

ACIT 2(3), MUMBAI vs. TATA CHEMICALS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 7325/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2003-04) Tata Chemicals Limited The Deputy Commissioner Bombay House, Fort, Of Income Tax Vs. Mumbai-400 001 M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aaact4059M Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 7377/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2003-04) The Deputy Commissioner Of Tata Chemicals Limited Income Tax Bombay House, Fort, Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai-400 020 .. (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri Nitesh Joshi, Ar प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, Dr ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 12-02-2019 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 10-05-2019 Aadosa / O R D E R महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य/ Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

154 of the Act and the Revision proceedings under section 263 of the Act was finally not taken to conclusion. In the given facts and circumstances ITAs No. 7325&7377/Mum/2013 when all the facts were available before the AO during the original proceedings and he has gone through the entire details of the claim of bad debt. Even there

TATA CHEMICALS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 7325/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2003-04) Tata Chemicals Limited The Deputy Commissioner Bombay House, Fort, Of Income Tax Vs. Mumbai-400 001 M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aaact4059M Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 7377/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2003-04) The Deputy Commissioner Of Tata Chemicals Limited Income Tax Bombay House, Fort, Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai-400 020 .. (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri Nitesh Joshi, Ar प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, Dr ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 12-02-2019 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 10-05-2019 Aadosa / O R D E R महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य/ Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

154 of the Act and the Revision proceedings under section 263 of the Act was finally not taken to conclusion. In the given facts and circumstances ITAs No. 7325&7377/Mum/2013 when all the facts were available before the AO during the original proceedings and he has gone through the entire details of the claim of bad debt. Even there

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6(1), MUMBAI vs. INDOCO REMEDIES LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumardcit-Cent. Cir-6(1), Vs M/S Indoco Remedies Ltd, Room No.1905,19Th Floor, Indoco House, 166 Cst Road, Air India Building, Santacruz (East) Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 098 Mumbai-400021 Pan : Aaaci0380C Appellant Respondednt

154, dated 29th July 2015, which was set aside by learned Commissioner (Appeals) vide order dated 20 March 2017. All appeal relates to same assessment year, therefore, all the appeals were clubbed, heard together and are decided by common order for the sake of brevity and to avoid the conflicting decision. The assessee in its appeal in ITA No. 4538/M/2017

ULTRA TECH CEMENT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ASSTT. CIT CC-1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

depreciation on factory building to that assessee. Whereas in the instant appeal before us, as stated supra, the subject matter of first rectification proceedings was granting further credit of TDS and rectification of excess interest charged u/s.234C of the Act and the subject matter of impugned section 154