M/S. SATELITE TELEVISION ASIAN REGION LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (INT. I.T) 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee and the Revenue are partly

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm

1 The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) - XXXI ['CIT(A)'] has erred in disallowing the payment made by the Appellant to various non-resident television content aggregators ('channel companies') in computing the income of the Appellant by applying the provisions of Section 40(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act') to the aforesaid payment. The Appellant respectfully

ITO(E)-1(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. BHAVITHA FOUNDATION, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2021-22

disallowed the benefit of dividend income for exemption u/s 11 of the Act and made addition of Rs.48,70,00 the Act and made addition of Rs.48,70,00,000/- to the returned to the returned income of the assessee. income of the assessee. 3. On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition. On further appeal

SHIV SHANKAR SHARMA,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

disallowance made by the Learned Assessing Officer to the extent of Rs.3,11,94,122 u/s 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by treating the genuine expense as alleged non- genuine expenses, without considering the facts & circumstances of the case.” 7. “The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete the said ground of appeal

SHRI SHIV SHANKAR SHARMA,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

disallowance made by the Learned Assessing Officer to the extent of Rs.3,11,94,122 u/s 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by treating the genuine expense as alleged non- genuine expenses, without considering the facts & circumstances of the case.” 7. “The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete the said ground of appeal

SHIV SHANKAR SHARMA,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

disallowance made by the Learned Assessing Officer to the extent of Rs.3,11,94,122 u/s 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by treating the genuine expense as alleged non- genuine expenses, without considering the facts & circumstances of the case.” 7. “The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete the said ground of appeal

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 8 (1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SHIV SHANKAR SHARMA, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

disallowance made by the Learned Assessing Officer to the extent of Rs.3,11,94,122 u/s 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by treating the genuine expense as alleged non- genuine expenses, without considering the facts & circumstances of the case.” 7. “The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete the said ground of appeal

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SHIVSHANKAR RAMSWAROOP SHARMA, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

disallowance made by the Learned Assessing Officer to the extent of Rs.3,11,94,122 u/s 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by treating the genuine expense as alleged non- genuine expenses, without considering the facts & circumstances of the case.” 7. “The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete the said ground of appeal

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SHIV SHANKAR SHARMA, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

disallowance made by the Learned Assessing Officer to the extent of Rs.3,11,94,122 u/s 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by treating the genuine expense as alleged non- genuine expenses, without considering the facts & circumstances of the case.” 7. “The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete the said ground of appeal

DCIT 4(1), MUMBAI vs. DEUTSCHE EQUITIES INDIA P.LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

disallowed as per the provision of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer. 6.2. In appeal before the Tribunal it was submitted that the M/s Team Lease had obtained a certificate under Section 197(1

GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD ( CORPORATE FINANCE DIVISION),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 6(3), MUMBAI

Bench: the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal preferred by the Assessee vide order, dated 18/05/2009. 4. Not being satisfied with the relief granted by the Id. CIT(A), the Assessee has preferred appeal before this Tribunal. The Revenue has also filed cross-appeal challenging the relief granted by the Id. CIT(A).

197 ITD 31 [27-07-2022]. 14.12. We further note in the immediately preceding assessment year also identical additional ground raised by the Assessee challenging the disallowance of cess under Section 40(a)(ii) of the Act was dismissed by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal by following the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case

NERKA CHEMICALS P. LTD,GUJRAT vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 38, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Accountant Mamber & Shri Pawan Singh

disallowance of direct expenses as provided under Rule 8D(2)(i) and the interest expenses under Rule 8D(2)(ii). The dispute is with regard to administrative expenses only as prescribed under Rule 8D(2)(iii). We have noted that the assessee has claimed investment in its group companies for strategic purpose on which no other expenses or administrative expenses

JCIT (OSD)- 10(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. BAYER CROPSCIENCE LTD (SUCESSOR TO MONSANTO INDIA LIMITED, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

disallowed in the present case. 9. We have considered the submissions of both sides and perused the material available on record. We have also considered the detailed written submissions filed by the learned representatives along with various case laws and other documents, forming part of the record, relied upon by both sides. Monsanto India Ltd. has merged with Bayer CropScience

BAYER CROPSCIENCE LTD (SUCESSOR TO MONSANTO INDIA LIMITED MIL),MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG- 10(2)(2), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

disallowed in the present case. 9. We have considered the submissions of both sides and perused the material available on record. We have also considered the detailed written submissions filed by the learned representatives along with various case laws and other documents, forming part of the record, relied upon by both sides. Monsanto India Ltd. has merged with Bayer CropScience

BAYER CROPSCIENCE LTD (SUCESSOR TO MONSANTO INDIA LIMITED MIL),MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG- 10(2)(2), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

disallowed in the present case. 9. We have considered the submissions of both sides and perused the material available on record. We have also considered the detailed written submissions filed by the learned representatives along with various case laws and other documents, forming part of the record, relied upon by both sides. Monsanto India Ltd. has merged with Bayer CropScience

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SHIVSHANKAR RAMSWAROOP SHARMA, MUMBAI

disallowance made u/s 37(1) of the Act\namounting to Rs.4,98,90,418/- relying on the reconciliation\ndocuments which were not produced before the Assessing\nOfficer for verification during the assessment proceedings.”\n3. “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in\nlaw, the Ld CIT(A) erred in allowing relief to the assessee by\ndeleting

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SHIVSHANKAR RAMSWAROOP SHARMA, MUMBAI

disallowance made u/s 37(1) of the Act\namounting to Rs.4,98,90,418/- relying on the reconciliation\ndocuments which were not produced before the Assessing\nOfficer for verification during the assessment proceedings.”\n3. “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in\nlaw, the Ld CIT(A) erred in allowing relief to the assessee by\ndeleting

STRIDES PHARMA SCIENCE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, 15(3)(2),, MUMBAI

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

section\nand is therefore upheld. However, the alternative claim of the assessee to allow\ndeduction u/s 37 in respect of the balance amount deserves consideration.\nAccordingly, we deem it proper to restore the issue to Ld. AO for the limited\nNCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUN\nPage | 14\nITA No. 5721/Mum/2024\nΑ.Υ. 2020-21\nStrides Pharma Science Limited\npurpose of verification

SHIV SHANKAR SHARMA,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

disallowance made by the Learned Assessing Officer to the extent of Rs.3,11,94,122 u/s 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by treating the genuine expense as alleged non genuine expenses, without considering the facts & circumstances of the case." 7. "The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete the said ground of appeal

SHIV SHANKAR SHARMA,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

disallowance made by the Learned Assessing Officer to the extent of Rs.3,11,94,122 u/s 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by treating the genuine expense as alleged non genuine expenses, without considering the facts & circumstances of the case.‟ 7. “The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete the said ground of appeal