HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

144B 24/1055381 637(1) 39 4313/Mum/2010 CIT(A)-I/IT- 09.03.2010 DCIT, Range 30.03.2009 271(1)(c) 2002-03 Assessee 378/2009-10 1(1), Mumbai [Appeals 40 4314/Mum/2010 CIT(A)-I/IT- 09.03.2010 DCIT, Range 30.03.2009 271(1)(c) 2003-04 against 374/2009-10 1(1), Mumbai Penalty 41 2866/Mum/2012 CIT(A)-I/IT- 06.02.2012 DCIT, Cir-1(1), 08.10.2010 271(1

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT 1(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

144B 24/1055381 637(1) 39 4313/Mum/2010 CIT(A)-I/IT- 09.03.2010 DCIT, Range 30.03.2009 271(1)(c) 2002-03 Assessee 378/2009-10 1(1), Mumbai [Appeals 40 4314/Mum/2010 CIT(A)-I/IT- 09.03.2010 DCIT, Range 30.03.2009 271(1)(c) 2003-04 against 374/2009-10 1(1), Mumbai Penalty 41 2866/Mum/2012 CIT(A)-I/IT- 06.02.2012 DCIT, Cir-1(1), 08.10.2010 271(1

STATE BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

xvi) Reimbursement of leave fare concession (LFC):\nThe assessee has made reimbursement of LFC on\nforeign travel of its employees, the details of which\nare not on record as the AO has not examined this\nissue. On perusal of the Assessment Order for A.Y.\n2018-19, it is seen that the disallowance

INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI vs. K K VENTURA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands\ndismissed

144B on 06/08/2021, wherein the Assessing Officer\nbrought to tax unexplained loans aggregating\nto\n*8,43,50,000/- under section 68, together with disallowance\nof interest expenditure of ₹29,95,911/-.\n5. The assessee thereafter preferred a writ petition before the\nHon'ble Bombay High Court, inter alia contending that the\nAssessing Officer had failed to provide a meaningful

CREDIT GUARANTEE FUND TRUST FOR MICRO AND SMALL ENTERPRISES,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (E) , MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2018-19

disallowed deduction of Rs.9,92,75,616/- being 15% of the income derived by the assessee trust under section 11(1)(a) of the Act. The AO accordingly framed the assessment under section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act. 7 M/s. Credit Guarantee Fund Trust For Micro And Small Enterprises 3. The assessee carried the matter before

DCIT, 13(3)(2), MUMBAI., AAYAKAR BHAWAN, MUMBAI. vs. MOSHAU VALUE RESEARCH PRIVATE LIMITED, GOREGAON EAST, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2021-22

144B(1)(xvi) (b) of the Act. In the Final Order, the Assessing Unit disallowed 30% of Rs. 10,90,97,527/- amounting to Rs. 3,27,29,258/- u/s 69C. Correct fact submitted is that purchases from the alleged bogus suppliers was only Rs. 8,62,47,027/- as against Rs.10,90,97,527/-. In the order, Assessing Unit

CREDIT GUARANTEE FUND TRUST FOR MICRO AND SMALL ENTERPRISES ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION -1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Rahul Chaudharyassessment Year : 2018-19 Credit Guarantee Fund Trust Deputy Commissioner Of For Micro & Small Enterprises, Income Tax, Exemption-1(1), 1St Floor, Vs. Mtnl Tel. Exch. Building, Sidbi Swavalamban Bhavan, Cumballa Hills, Pedder Road, Avenue 3, Lane 2, G-Block, Mumbai-400026. Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051. Pan : Aaatc2613D (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Shailesh Shah & Shri Jay Dharod For Revenue : Shri R.A. Dhyani, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04-09-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 15-09-2025 O R D E R Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [„Ld.Cit(A)‟], Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19, Wherein The Assessee Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “(1) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Ld. Cit(A)], Nfac Has Erred In Confirming The Order Of Levying Penalty U/S 270A Of The Act Of Rs. 293,63,60,258/- On 2 Disallowances Made In The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S 144B Of The Act Without Appreciating The Fact That The Hon'Ble Itat, Mumbai Has Fully Deleted The Said Disallowances & Reasons Assigned By Him For Doing So Are Wrong & Contrary To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Provisions Of The Act & Income Tax Rules, 1962 ("The Rules") Made Thereunder. The Appellant Prays That The Penalty U/S 270A Of The Act Of Rs. 293,63,60,258/- Be Deleted. The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Amend, Alter, Modify And/Or Delete All Or Any Of The Above Grounds Of Appeal, On Or Before The Date Of Hearing.”

144B of the Act without appreciating the fact that the Hon'ble ITAT, Mumbai has fully deleted the said disallowances and reasons assigned by him for doing so are wrong and contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case, provisions of the Act and Income Tax Rules, 1962 ("the Rules") made thereunder. The appellant prays that the penalty