STRIDES PHARMA SCIENCE LTD.,NAVI MUMBAI vs. THE DY CIT -5(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result ITA number 1004/M/2021 filed by the assessee for assessment year 2016 – 17 is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Strides Pharma Science Ltd. Dcit 15(1)(2) 201, Devavrata, Sector-17, Aayakar Bhavan, M K Road, Vs. Vashi, Navi Mumbai, 400703 Mumbai 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcs8104P

199,296 as expenditure incurred but prohibited by law. iv. The learned assessing officer further noted that assessee has incurred expenditure in the form of provision of expenses, audit fees amounting to ₹ 29,802,989/– on which tax deduction at source has not been made and therefore 30% of same is disallowable under section

MACROTECH DEVELOPRS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 7(3), MUMBAI

The appeal is allowed

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

199,690/– by disallowance under section 14 A of the act while calculating MAT liability under section 115JB of the act 4. The learned

MACROTECH DEVELOPERS LTD.(SUCCESSOR TO BELLISSIMO CROWN BUILDMART PVT LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 7(3), MUMBAI

The appeal is allowed

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

199,690/– by disallowance under section 14 A of the act while calculating MAT liability under section 115JB of the act 4. The learned

M/S. TATA INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ITO 2(3)(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Accoutant Member & Shri Sanjay Gargtata Industries Ltd., Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- Bombay House,24,Homi 2 (3) (3), Room No.555, Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi 400 001 Karve Road, Mumbai 400 020 Pan: Aaact 4058 L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By Shri Dinesh Vyas, Ar Respondent By Shri Alok Johri, Dr Date Of Hearing 22-06-2016 Date Of Pronouncement 20-07-2016

section 37, it is not necessary that the loan amount should be exclusively used in the business of the assessee. However, the requirement is that it should be used for the purpose of the business which need not necessarily be the business of the assessee itself. What is to be seen is that the transfer of borrowed funds

WNS GLOBAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMM. OF INCOME TAX-14(1)(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Vikas Awasthy () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

section 32(1)(ii) and therefore, disallowed the depreciation on the same. The DRP gave relief to the assessee with respect to the depreciation on customer contract with WNS UK – Town & Country to the tune of Rs.10,88,199

WNS GLOBAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMM. OF INCOME TAX -14(1)(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Vikas Awasthy () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

section 32(1)(ii) and therefore, disallowed the depreciation on the same. The DRP gave relief to the assessee with respect to the depreciation on customer contract with WNS UK – Town & Country to the tune of Rs.10,88,199

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

199 or in sections or in sections 28 to [43B], the profits and gains of any business of insurance, [43B], the profits and gains of any business of insurance, [43B], the profits and gains of any business of insurance, including any such business carried on by a mutual including any such business carried on by a mutual including any such

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

199 or in sections or in sections 28 to [43B], the profits and gains of any business of insurance, [43B], the profits and gains of any business of insurance, [43B], the profits and gains of any business of insurance, including any such business carried on by a mutual including any such business carried on by a mutual including any such

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

199 or in sections or in sections 28 to [43B], the profits and gains of any business of insurance, [43B], the profits and gains of any business of insurance, [43B], the profits and gains of any business of insurance, including any such business carried on by a mutual including any such business carried on by a mutual including any such

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

199 or in sections or in sections 28 to [43B], the profits and gains of any business of insurance, [43B], the profits and gains of any business of insurance, [43B], the profits and gains of any business of insurance, including any such business carried on by a mutual including any such business carried on by a mutual including any such

ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE AMC LIMITED,MAHARASHTRA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CIRCLE 6(1)(1), MAHARASHTRA

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar1. Ita No. 6663/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) 2. Ita No. 6701/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) 3. Ita No. 6702/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 4. Ita No. 6703/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2023-24) Aditya Birla Sun Life Dcitcircle-6(1)(1), Amc Limited, Room No. 502, 5Th 17Th Floor, One World Vs. Floor, Aayakar Centre Tower-1, Jupiter Bhavan, M. K. Mill Compount, 841, Road, Churchgate, Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai-400 020 Delisle Road, S.O. Mumbai-400 013 Pan/Gir No. Aaacb6134D (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ronak Doshi, Shri Shrey Agrawal & Shri Aadish Jain, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 27.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 06.02.2026

disallowance of Rs. 54,93,734/- made under section 36(1)(va) of the Act. Thus, Ground No. I raised by the assessee for A.Y. 2022– 23 is allowed. Ground No. II - Short grant of consequential interest under section 244A of the Act 81. This ground relates to the grievance of the assessee that the Assessing Officer has granted short

VODAFONE INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 8(3)(2), MUMBAI

Section 37(1) 2,05,35,800 TP Adjustment 36,38,25,151 Total Disallowances 659,75,09,200 Taxable income under the head business or profession 474,01,91,199

ELDELWEISS SECURITIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 4(1) (1) , MUMBAI

The appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

section 199 clearly shows that the year in which the assessee offers the income on which tax is deducted, for that year, credit for TDS should be allowed. Accordingly, we direct the learned Assessing Officer to grant assessee the credit ITA Nos. 92, 93 & 15/Mum/2022 Edelweiss Financial Services Ltd; A.Y. 16-17 & 17–18 of ₹32,04,902/-. Another

EDELWEISS FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CENT CIR -1(2), MUMBAI

The appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

section 199 clearly shows that the year in which the assessee offers the income on which tax is deducted, for that year, credit for TDS should be allowed. Accordingly, we direct the learned Assessing Officer to grant assessee the credit ITA Nos. 92, 93 & 15/Mum/2022 Edelweiss Financial Services Ltd; A.Y. 16-17 & 17–18 of ₹32,04,902/-. Another

EDELWEISS FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIR-1(2), MUMBAI

The appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

section 199 clearly shows that the year in which the assessee offers the income on which tax is deducted, for that year, credit for TDS should be allowed. Accordingly, we direct the learned Assessing Officer to grant assessee the credit ITA Nos. 92, 93 & 15/Mum/2022 Edelweiss Financial Services Ltd; A.Y. 16-17 & 17–18 of ₹32,04,902/-. Another

ASST CIT 19(3), MUMBAI vs. PAHILAJRAI JAIKISHIN, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1562/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

section 40(a)(i) of the Act and tax should have been deducted at source by the assessee firm u/s 195 of the Act or an application should have been made by the assessee firm for no deduction of tax at source u/s 195(2) of the Act . Thus the AO held that these payments to non-resident by assessee

PAHILAJRAI JAIKISHAN,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 19(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1562/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

section 40(a)(i) of the Act and tax should have been deducted at source by the assessee firm u/s 195 of the Act or an application should have been made by the assessee firm for no deduction of tax at source u/s 195(2) of the Act . Thus the AO held that these payments to non-resident by assessee

ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE AMC LIMITED,MAHARASHTRA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CIRCLE 6(1)(1), MAHARASHTRA

Section 199", "Rule 37BA of the Income-tax Rules, 1962"], "issues": "The appeals involve multiple assessment years and grounds, including challenges to disallowances