OCEANEERING INTERNATIONAL GMBH,MUMBAI vs. DCIT(INT. TAXATION)RANGE-3(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, ground no. 4 of the appeal is allowed for statistical\npurposes

depreciation (including unabsorbed\ndepreciation of earlier years), the balancing charge/allowance and the\napportionment of overhead expenses. With a view to simplifying and\nrationalizing the assessments in such cases, the Finance Act, 1975 has made\na special provision in section 44B

OCEANEERING INTERNATIONAL GMBH,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) RANGE 3(2)(2), MUMBAI

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

depreciation (including unabsorbed\ndepreciation of earlier years), the balancing charge/allowance and the\napportionment of overhead expenses. With a view to simplifying and\nrationalizing the assessments in such cases, the Finance Act, 1975 has\nmade a special provision in section 44B

SEADRILL INTERNATIONAL LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-4(2)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

depreciation and brought forward loss shall be allowed to the assessee\nfor such previous year. ]\nExplanation. For the purposes of this section,—\n(i) \"plant\" includes ships, aircraft, vehicles, drilling units, scientific apparatus and\nequipment, used for the purposes of the said business;\n(ii) \"mineral oil\" includes petroleum and natural gas.\n7. For the purpose of receipt under section

SWIWAR OFFSHORE PTE .LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL DIT (IT) RG 2, MUMBAI

44B, the unabsorbed depreciation for earlier years will not be allowed in determining the profits and gains for the asst. yr. 1976-77 and subsequent years. Losses incurred in earlier years, other than the losses due to depreciation, will, however, be allowed to be set off against the profits for the asst. yr. 1976-77 and subsequent years subject

DDIT (IT) 2(1), NAVI MUMBAI vs. SWIWER OFFSHORE PTE LTD, MUMBAI

44B, the unabsorbed depreciation for earlier years will not be allowed in determining the profits and gains for the asst. yr. 1976-77 and subsequent years. Losses incurred in earlier years, other than the losses due to depreciation, will, however, be allowed to be set off against the profits for the asst. yr. 1976-77 and subsequent years subject

ADDL CIT 3(2), MUMBAI vs. MANGALORE REFINER & PETROCHEMICALS LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & C. N. Prasadआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./1240/Mum/2010,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year:2006-07 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Mangalore Refinery & Petrochemicals Ltd. Addl. Cit-Range-3(2) Maker Tower-F Wing, 16Th Floor, Mumbai. Vs. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400 005. Pan:Aaacm 5132 A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./1826/Mum/2010,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year:2006-07 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Addl. Cit-Range-3(2) Vs. Mangalore Refinery & Petrochemicals Ltd. Mumbai. Mumbai-400 005. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By: Shri Jasbir Chohan-Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Assessee By:S/ Shri S.E. Dastur & Madhur Aggarwal सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 30/03/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement:17/05/2017 लेखा सद"य सद"य, राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार/ Per Rajendra A.M.- लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Order,Dated 15/12/2009,Of Cit (A)-7,Mumbai, The Assessing Officer (Ao) & The Assessee Have Filed Cross Appeals For The Above-Mentioned Assessment Year.Assessee- Company, Engaged In The Business Of Refining Of Crude Oil, Selling Of Petroleum Products & Captive Generation & Distribution Of Power, Filed Its Return Of Income On 25/10/2006, Declaring Total Income Of Rs.Nil. The Ao Completed The Assessment On 18/12/2008, Under Section 143 (3) Of The Act, Determining Its Income At Rs.Nil.

depreciation is untenable. As a consequence, the order of CIT(A) on this aspect is upheld and Revenue fails.” Respectfully following the above,we decide last ground of appeal against the AO. ITA/1240/Mum/2010 6.First ground,raised by the assessee,pertains to disallowance of freight charges u/s.40(a)(i) of Rs.75.38 crores paid to foreign shipping companies.During the assessment proceedings

DCIT (IT) 3(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. MSC MEDITERRANEAN SHIPPING CO. SA ( MSC), MUMBAI

In the result, these appeals by the Revenue and the cross objections by the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

44B of the Act. In this regard, a reference can usefully be made to the DTAA between India and Libya which has no clause prescribing the tax treatment for capital gains nor any residuary clause such as other income clause. The capital gains earned by a resident of Libya in India thus is taxable in India if exigible

DCIT (IT) 3(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. MSC MEDITERANEAN SHIPPING CO. SA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and the cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm Dcit(It)3(2)(2), Mumbai – Vs. M/S. Msc Mediterranean 400 038 Shipping Co. Sa C/O. Msc Agency India (India) Pvt. Ltd., Msc House, Andheri – Kurla Road, Andheri – East, Mumbai – 400 059 Pan/Gir No. Aaccm4945P Appellant) .. Respondent) Co No.137/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year :2011-12) M/S. Msc Vs. Dcit(It)3(2)(2), Mumbai – 400 Mediterranean Shipping 038 Co. Sa C/O. Msc Agency India (India) Pvt. Ltd., Msc House, Andheri – Kurla Road, Andheri – East, Mumbai – 400 059 Pan/Gir No. Aaccm4945P Appellant) .. Respondent) Revenue By Shri Narendra Kumar Assessee By Shri Nishant Thakkar

44B of the Act. In this regard, a reference can usefully be made to the DTAA between India and Libya which has no clause prescribing the tax treatment for capital gains nor any residuary clause such as other income clause. The capital gains earned by a resident of Libya in India thus is taxable in India if exigible

MANGALORE REFINERY AND PETROCHEMICALS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 3(2), MUMBAI

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.4448/Mum/2013 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Mangalore Refinery & Addl Cit 3(2) Petrochemicals Ltd. Mumbai बिधम/ 15Th Floor, Maker Tower, E- Vs. Wing, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400005. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacm5132A & आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 4436/Mum/2013 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2008-09) Dcit-3(2) Mangalore Refinery & Room No. 674, 6Th Floor, Petrochemicals Ltd. बिधम/ 15Th Floor, Maker Aayakarbhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400020 Tower, E-Wing, Cuffe Vs. Parade, Mumbai- 400005. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacm5132A अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Madhur Agrawal /Ronak Desai प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Sh. Samuel Darse सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 08/06/2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 08/06/2018 Date Of Pronouncement Mangalore Refinery & Petrochemicals Ltd.

44B itself nothing was chargeable to tax in India and thus question of deducting withholding tax does not arise. 4. Further, there was no amount outstanding as on the Balance Sheet date and hence no disallowance shall be made. Mangalore Refinery & Petrochemicals Ltd. 5. The Appellant therefore, prays that the entire disallowance u/s. 40(a)(i) be deleted. GROUND

SI GROUP INDIA P. LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT (LTU), MUMBAI

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kochar

depreciation is nil; or (iv) to (vi) [***] (vii) the amount of profits of sick industrial company for the assessment year commencing on and from the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the said company has become a sick industrial company under sub-section (1) of section 17 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions

GROUP INDIA P. LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT (LTU), MUMBAI

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kochar

depreciation is nil; or (iv) to (vi) [***] (vii) the amount of profits of sick industrial company for the assessment year commencing on and from the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the said company has become a sick industrial company under sub-section (1) of section 17 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions

ROCKLINE DEVELOPERS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 9(3)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, ground “A” raised in the appeal by the assessee stands dismissed

depreciation is nil; or (iv) to (vi) [***] 11 M/s. Rockline Developers Pvt. Ltd. (vii) the amount of profits of sick industrial company for the assessment year commencing on and from the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the said company has become a sick industrial company under sub-section (1) of section 17 of the Sick Industrial

ACIT 17(1), MUMBAI vs. ELVE CORPORATION, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kochar

depreciation and unabsorbed investment allowance for limited period in case of certain domestic companies. Section 35 deals with expenditure on scientific research, section 35AB deals with expenditure on know-how and section 35ABB deals with expenditure for obtaining licence to operate telecommunication services. Section 35AC deals with expenditure on eligible projects or schemes and section 35AD deals with deduction

ACIT 17(1), MUMBAI vs. ELVE CORPORATION, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kochar

depreciation and unabsorbed investment allowance for limited period in case of certain domestic companies. Section 35 deals with expenditure on scientific research, section 35AB deals with expenditure on know-how and section 35ABB deals with expenditure for obtaining licence to operate telecommunication services. Section 35AC deals with expenditure on eligible projects or schemes and section 35AD deals with deduction

SHELF DRILLING RON TAPPMEYER LTD,,MUMBAI vs. DY. C.I.T. (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) - 4(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 7414/Mum/2017 (यिर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2014-15) Shelf Drilling J.T. Angel Limited Dy. Commissioner Of 4Th Floor, Chemtex House, Main Income Tax, (International Street, Hiranandani Gardens, बनाम/ Taxation)-4(2)(1), Powai, Mumbai-400706, 17Th Floor, Air India Vs. Maharashtra Building, Mumbai-400 021 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aascs2719P आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 7415/Mum/2017 (यिर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2014-15) Shelf Drilling Ron Tappmeyer Dy. Commissioner Of Limited Income Tax, (International 4Th Floor, Chemtex House, Main Taxation)-4(2)(1), बनाम/ Street, Hiranandani Gardens, 17Th Floor, Air India Vs. Powai, Mumbai-400706, Building, Mumbai-400 021 Maharashtra (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aascs2715B अपीलार्थी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri J D Mistry, Ar प्रत्यर्थी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri A Mohan, Dr

44B of the Act at ₹ 4,34,79,980/- as against the loss returned by assessee at ₹ 120,18,44,672/-. For this assessee has raised the following grounds: - “General Ground 1.1 erred in assessing the income under section 446B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 3 | P a g e ITA Nos. 7414 & 7415/Mum/2017 Shelf Drilling J.T. Angel

SHELF DRILLING J. T. ANGEL LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DY. C.I.T. (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) - 4(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 7414/Mum/2017 (यिर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2014-15) Shelf Drilling J.T. Angel Limited Dy. Commissioner Of 4Th Floor, Chemtex House, Main Income Tax, (International Street, Hiranandani Gardens, बनाम/ Taxation)-4(2)(1), Powai, Mumbai-400706, 17Th Floor, Air India Vs. Maharashtra Building, Mumbai-400 021 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aascs2719P आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 7415/Mum/2017 (यिर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2014-15) Shelf Drilling Ron Tappmeyer Dy. Commissioner Of Limited Income Tax, (International 4Th Floor, Chemtex House, Main Taxation)-4(2)(1), बनाम/ Street, Hiranandani Gardens, 17Th Floor, Air India Vs. Powai, Mumbai-400706, Building, Mumbai-400 021 Maharashtra (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aascs2715B अपीलार्थी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri J D Mistry, Ar प्रत्यर्थी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri A Mohan, Dr

44B of the Act at ₹ 4,34,79,980/- as against the loss returned by assessee at ₹ 120,18,44,672/-. For this assessee has raised the following grounds: - “General Ground 1.1 erred in assessing the income under section 446B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 3 | P a g e ITA Nos. 7414 & 7415/Mum/2017 Shelf Drilling J.T. Angel

TAJ TV LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-4(1)(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Taj Tv Limited Dcit (International C/O. Suresh Surana & Taxation)-4(1)(2) Associates Llp Air India Building, 8Th Floor, Bakhtawar, Vs. Nariman Point, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 Mumbai-400 021 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabct6542J Reference Of Orders / Directions In Appeal Sr Orders & Directions Passed By Date No 1 Draft Assessment Order U/S The Deputy 27/12/2019 144C Of The Act Commissioner Of Income Tax , International Taxation, Circle 4 (1) (2), Mumbai 2 Direction U/S 144C (5) Of The Cit (Drp-2) , 22/03/2021 Act Mumbai - 2 3 Assessment Order U/S 143 93) The Deputy 12/04/2021 R.W.S 144C (13) Of The Act Commissioner Of Income Tax , International Taxation, Circle 4 (1) (2), Mumbai

44B of the act that is a self- contained code. f. Circular number 1 of 2004 also provides that when activities of the business of the assessee are outsourced, then there would be substantial profit of the principal would be the income of the non-resident taxable in India. g. It would make principles of „force of attraction‟ inapplicable

MAGNALORE REFINERY AND PETROCHEMICALS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 3(2),

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mangalore Refinery & Addl. Cit-3(2), Mumbai Petrochemicals Ltd. 15Th Vs. Floor, Maker Tower, Ewing, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400005. Pan No. Aaacm5132A Respondent Appellant Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit-3(2) Room No. Mangalore Refinery & 674, 6Th Floor, Petrochemicals Ltd. 15Th Vs. Aayakarbhavan, M. K. Floor, Maker Tower, Ewing, Road, Mumbai-400020. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400005. Pan No. Aaacm5132A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. J.D.J. Mistri, Senior Advocate & Mr. Madhur Agrawal, Advocate Revenue By : Mr.Samuel Darse, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 12/06/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 07/09/2018

44B(2)(ii) of the Act. The Ld. counsel submits that the above issue has been decided by the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for AY 2006-07 (ITA No. Mangalore Refinery 1240/M/2010), AY 2007-08 (ITA No. 3588/M/2013) and AY 2008-09 (ITA No. 4448/M/2013). Reference is also made to the decision in ACIT v. Avon Organics