SATELLITE TELEVISION ASIAN REGION LTD,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (IT) 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Taneja

disallowance. Regarding taxation of service fee and up-linking income, he submitted that, the assessee had offered tax @ 10.45% and 20.91%, respectively in the return of income which is in accordance with section 115A

ITO(IT)1(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. ATOS WORLDWIDE INDIA PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 6424/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16) बिाम/ Ito(It)1(1)(2) Atos Worldwide India Pvt. R.No. 113, First Floor, Ltd. Scindia House, N.M. Road, 701, Interface-11, V. Ballard Estate, New Link Road, Mumbai- 400038 Malad(W), Mumbai-400064 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aaace2403J (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

section 90, 115A, 195 of I.T. Act, 1961 and Finance Act, 2013/2014 will be allowed and if not then the benefit of the rate of 20% will be denied in respect of the balance entities will be disallowed

THOMAS COOK (INDIA) LTD,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT 1 (3)92), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2015-16 Thomas Cook (India) Ltd., Dy. Cit-1(3)(2), A Wing, 11Th Floor, Marathon Room No. 540, 5Th Floor, Vs. Futurex, N.M. Joshi Marg, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Lower Parel (East), Road, Mumbai-400013. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaact 4050 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Ketan Ved Revenue By : Ms. Richa Gulati, Dr : Date Of Hearing 30/05/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 31/05/2023 Order

disallowing Rs.8,70,45,135/ Rs.8,70,45,135/- pertaining to discount on Employee Stock pertaining to discount on Employee Stock Option Plan (being the difference of market price at the time Option Plan (being the difference of market price at the time Option Plan (being the difference of market price at the time of grant of option and exercise

ABU DHABI COMMERCIAL BANK PJSC,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-1(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms. Padmavathy S, Am Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank Pjsc Dcit (International Taxation)- Wework India Management Private 1(1)(1) 5Th Floor, Room No. 517, Limited Vs. 2Nd Floor, Express Towers, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Ranath Goenka Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 021 Pan/Gir No. Aaaca 4216 B (Appellant) : (Respondent)

section 115A(1)(a)(iiaa) r.w.s. 194LC of the Act, the interest income is subject to concessional tax rate of 5% with applicable surcharge and cess. He submitted, while negating assessee’s claim and holding that the interest income would be subject to tax @ 20% u/s. 115A(1)(a)(ii), the DRP has completely overlooked the press release dated

DCIT CEN CIR 4(1), MUMBAI vs. GODAWARI CORPORATION LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ramit Kochar, Am Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S Godavari Corporation Central Circle-4(1), Ltd. R. No. 1916, 19Th Floor, Air Vs. Industry House, 159, Backbay India Building, Nariman Point, Reclamation, Churchgate, Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 020 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aaacg1850D Revenue By .. Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal, Dr Assessee By .. Miss Aarti Vissanji, Ar Date Of Hearing .. 10-04-2017 Date Of Pronouncement .. 10-04-2017 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

disallowance u/s 14A to 2% of total exempt income and thereby computing adjusted total income under section 115A on revised

SATELLITE TELEVISION ASIAN REGION LTD,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (IT) 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

section 115A of the Act. 19. In grounds no.15 to 19, the assessee has challenged disallowance made under section 40(a)(i) of the Act in respect

CHETAN SHANTIAL SHAH,BARODA vs. ITO (IT) 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result this ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singhshri Chetan Shantilal Shah Ito (International Taxation)- 36, Lavkush Apartment, 2(1), Mumbai. Pratapganj, Vs. Baroda-390002 Pan: Blnps4745R Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Nirmit Mehta (Ar) Respondent By : Shri Himanshu Sharma (Sr. Dr) Date Of Hearing : 08.08.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.08.2018 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh;

disallowing the tax credit on the addition of Rs. 21,76,154/-. (vi) The learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in facts and in law in confirming action of assessing officer in charge interest under section 234B of the Act. (vii) The learned Commissioner (Appeals)erred in facts and in law in confirming action of assessing officer in charging interest under section

THE BANK OF NOVA SCOTIA,MUMBAI vs. ADIT (IT) 3(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowance is not justified. Accordingly, this ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed. ITA No. 5634/Mum/2011 (Revenue's Appeal) "1. 2. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) erred in holding that the interest under section 115A

DDIT (IT) 3(2), MUMBAI vs. THE BANK OF NOVA SCOTIA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are also partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhita No.8841/Mum/2010 The Bank Of Nova Scotia Vs. Assistant Director Of Mittal Towers, B Wing Income Tax (It) -3(2) Nariman Point Scindia House Mumbai – 400 020 Ballard Pier Mumbai – 400 038 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacb1536H Appellant .. Respondent It(Tp)A. No.3862/Mum/2013 The Bank Of Nova Scotia Vs. Additional Director Of Mittal Towers, B Wing Income Tax (It) -3 Nariman Point Air India Building Mumbai – 400 020 Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacb1536H Appellant .. Respondent Ita.No.3989/Mum/2012 Deputy Director Of Income Vs. M/S The Bank Of Nova Tax (It) -3(2) Scotia, Mittal Towers, B Scindia House Wing, Nariman Point Ballard Pier, N. M. Road Mumbai – 400 021 Mumbai – 400 038

disallowance is not justified. Accordingly, this ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed. “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) erred in holding that the interest under section 115A

BANK OF NOVA SCOTIA,MUMBAI vs. ADDL DIT (IT) RG 3, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowance is not justified. Accordingly, this ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed. ITA No. 5634/Mum/2011 (Revenue's Appeal) "1. 2. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) erred in holding that the interest under section 115A

THE BANK OF NOVA SCOTIA,MUMBAI vs. ADIT (IT) 3(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowance is not justified. Accordingly, this ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed. ITA No. 5634/Mum/2011 (Revenue's Appeal) "1. 2. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) erred in holding that the interest under section 115A

ADIT CIR 3(2), MUMBAI vs. THE BANK OF NOVA SCOTIA, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowance is not justified. Accordingly, this ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed. ITA No. 5634/Mum/2011 (Revenue's Appeal) "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) erred in holding that the interest under section 115A

JCIT(OSD) I/C. OF DCIT -1(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ZT SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed as per our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1729/Mum/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 The Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd), I/C. Dcit-1(3)(1), Mumbai (M.H.)

section 115A of the Income-tax Act should be applicable and Dividend Distribution Tax should have been deducted? 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) is correct in deleting the adjustment made by TPO without appreciating that the facts of the case were different from the facts in the case

GENERAL MOTORS OVERSEAS CORPORATION,GURGAON vs. DDIT (IT) 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri M. Balaganesha.Y : 2004-05 :

disallowance u/s 44D(b) would not apply wherever Article 7 of the Treaty is being applied. As per Section 90(2) of the Income Tax Act, the provisions of DTAA are to be read over-riding the provisions of Income Tax Act and this issue is not open for debate as the Apex Court has decided this in the case

GENERAL MOTORS OVERSEAS CORPORATION,GURGAON vs. DDIT (IT) 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri M. Balaganesha.Y : 2004-05 :

disallowance u/s 44D(b) would not apply wherever Article 7 of the Treaty is being applied. As per Section 90(2) of the Income Tax Act, the provisions of DTAA are to be read over-riding the provisions of Income Tax Act and this issue is not open for debate as the Apex Court has decided this in the case

GENERAL MOTORS OVERSEAS CORPORATION vs. ACIT (IT) 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri M. Balaganesha.Y : 2004-05 :

disallowance u/s 44D(b) would not apply wherever Article 7 of the Treaty is being applied. As per Section 90(2) of the Income Tax Act, the provisions of DTAA are to be read over-riding the provisions of Income Tax Act and this issue is not open for debate as the Apex Court has decided this in the case

GENERAL MOTORS OVERSEAS CORPORATION,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri M. Balaganesha.Y : 2004-05 :

disallowance u/s 44D(b) would not apply wherever Article 7 of the Treaty is being applied. As per Section 90(2) of the Income Tax Act, the provisions of DTAA are to be read over-riding the provisions of Income Tax Act and this issue is not open for debate as the Apex Court has decided this in the case

ADIT (IT) 1(2), MUMBAI vs. CREDIT AGRICOLE CORPORATE AND INVESTMENT BANK, MUMBAI

Accordingly these grounds are dismissed as not pressed

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am I.T. (Tp) A. No. 1479/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Credit Agricole Corporate & Dcit (International Taxation)- Investment Bank (Formerly 2(1)(1), 1St Floor, Room No. 136, Known As ‘Calyon Bank’) Vs. 11Th Floor, Hoechst House, Scindia House, N.M. Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Ballard Pier, Mumbai-400038. Pan: Aaccc3872B Appellant) : Respondent)

disallowance made by the AO a sum of Rs. 9,17,63,933/- is claimed by the Indian Branch on the basis of allocation done by the HO and has not been actually paid by the Indian Branch to the HO. Therefore the ld AR argued that the amount is not taxable as per Article-13 of DTAA between India