DCIT- 3(4) , MUMBAI vs. M/S RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

depreciation relatable to the steel purchases claimed by the assessee in both the years under consideration. Accordingly, this ground raised by the assessee in both the years are dismissed. 7. Ground Nos. 4 to 6 raised by the assessee in both the years relate to disallowance under section 14A, r.w. Rule 8D of I T Rules. 7.1 The details relating

RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 3(4), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

depreciation relatable to the steel purchases claimed by the assessee in both the years under consideration. Accordingly, this ground raised by the assessee in both the years are dismissed. 7. Ground Nos. 4 to 6 raised by the assessee in both the years relate to disallowance under section 14A, r.w. Rule 8D of I T Rules. 7.1 The details relating

RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(4), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

depreciation relatable to the steel purchases claimed by the assessee in both the years under consideration. Accordingly, this ground raised by the assessee in both the years are dismissed. 7. Ground Nos. 4 to 6 raised by the assessee in both the years relate to disallowance under section 14A, r.w. Rule 8D of I T Rules. 7.1 The details relating

DCIT-3(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

depreciation relatable to the steel purchases claimed by the assessee in both the years under consideration. Accordingly, this ground raised by the assessee in both the years are dismissed. 7. Ground Nos. 4 to 6 raised by the assessee in both the years relate to disallowance under section 14A, r.w. Rule 8D of I T Rules. 7.1 The details relating

WNS GLOBAL SERVICES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 14(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negiita No.2257/Mum/2017 Assessment Year : 2012 -13 Ita No.1955/Mum/2016 Assessment Year : 2011 -12

207 instead of the income offered by the Appellant for the subject AY under normal provisions of the Act in its income-tax return. 2. The learned AO has erred in passing a draft assessment order in the case of the Appellant in lieu of the final assessment order given that the Appellant is an Indian Company in whose case

WNS GLOBAL SERVICES P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 14(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negiita No.2257/Mum/2017 Assessment Year : 2012 -13 Ita No.1955/Mum/2016 Assessment Year : 2011 -12

207 instead of the income offered by the Appellant for the subject AY under normal provisions of the Act in its income-tax return. 2. The learned AO has erred in passing a draft assessment order in the case of the Appellant in lieu of the final assessment order given that the Appellant is an Indian Company in whose case

ZODIAC JRD MKJ LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIR 5(3)(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2014-15

section 143(3) of the Act. 3. The assessee carried the matter before the Ld. CIT(A) by way of filing appeal who has confirmed the addition by partly allowing the appeal. Feeling aggrieved with the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing present appeal

TRAFIGURA INDIA PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. PCIT-6, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Accountat Member Trafigura India Pvt Ltd., Vs. Pr. Cit-6 Unit No.1101, A-Wing, 501, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Plot No. C, 66G Block, Bhavan, Mg Road, Bkc, Mumbai – 400051. Mumbai – 400020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadct3128N Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri Madhur Agrawal.Ar Respondent By : Shri Biswanath Das.Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 03.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 25.07.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Pr.Cit)-6, Mumbai Passed U/S 263 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

207 before tax Less Unabsorbed depreciation 4,76,89,669 Business Losses 206,52,56,399 Deduction allowed under 4,76,89,669 clause (iii) of explanation 1 to section

ASIAN PAINTS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT LTU, MUMBAI

207 ITR 985 (Bom.) it was held that expenditure\nincurred on obtaining market survey for setting up new line of business is a\ncapital expenditure. Therefore, respectfully following the aforesaid decision and\nin view of the aforementioned findings, we find no infirmity in the findings of\nthe learned CIT(A) on this issue. However, from the details of expenditure

ACIT CEN CIR 13, MUMBAI vs. IPCA LABORATORIES LTD, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

207/- was disallowed being amount debited on account of diminution in the value of investments. vii. While working out the booking profit, it was found that provision for doubtful debts of ₹68,05,647/- is not allowable as per clause (i) to explanation 1 to sub section 2 of section 115JB of the Act and therefore, same was added

IPCA LABORATORIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT (LTU), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

207/- was disallowed being amount debited on account of diminution in the value of investments. vii. While working out the booking profit, it was found that provision for doubtful debts of ₹68,05,647/- is not allowable as per clause (i) to explanation 1 to sub section 2 of section 115JB of the Act and therefore, same was added

IPCA LABORATORIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (LTU), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

207/- was disallowed being amount debited on account of diminution in the value of investments. vii. While working out the booking profit, it was found that provision for doubtful debts of ₹68,05,647/- is not allowable as per clause (i) to explanation 1 to sub section 2 of section 115JB of the Act and therefore, same was added

IPCA LABORATORIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (LTU), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

207/- was disallowed being amount debited on account of diminution in the value of investments. vii. While working out the booking profit, it was found that provision for doubtful debts of ₹68,05,647/- is not allowable as per clause (i) to explanation 1 to sub section 2 of section 115JB of the Act and therefore, same was added

IPCA LABORATORIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT LTU, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

207/- was disallowed being amount debited on account of diminution in the value of investments. vii. While working out the booking profit, it was found that provision for doubtful debts of ₹68,05,647/- is not allowable as per clause (i) to explanation 1 to sub section 2 of section 115JB of the Act and therefore, same was added

DCIT CENT. CIR. 5(2), MUMBAI vs. IPCA LABORATORIES LTD., MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

207/- was disallowed being amount debited on account of diminution in the value of investments. vii. While working out the booking profit, it was found that provision for doubtful debts of ₹68,05,647/- is not allowable as per clause (i) to explanation 1 to sub section 2 of section 115JB of the Act and therefore, same was added

IPCA LABORATORIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (LTU), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

207/- was disallowed being amount debited on account of diminution in the value of investments. vii. While working out the booking profit, it was found that provision for doubtful debts of ₹68,05,647/- is not allowable as per clause (i) to explanation 1 to sub section 2 of section 115JB of the Act and therefore, same was added

DCIT (LTU) 1, MUMBAI vs. IPCA LABORATORIES LTD, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

207/- was disallowed being amount debited on account of diminution in the value of investments. vii. While working out the booking profit, it was found that provision for doubtful debts of ₹68,05,647/- is not allowable as per clause (i) to explanation 1 to sub section 2 of section 115JB of the Act and therefore, same was added

IPCA LABORATORIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT (LTU), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

207/- was disallowed being amount debited on account of diminution in the value of investments. vii. While working out the booking profit, it was found that provision for doubtful debts of ₹68,05,647/- is not allowable as per clause (i) to explanation 1 to sub section 2 of section 115JB of the Act and therefore, same was added