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

24) as well as sections 4 & 5 of the Act. Therefore, such capital account transaction not falling within a statutory exception cannot be brought to tax. Even income arising from international Transaction between AE must satisfy the test of income under the Act and must find its home in one of the above heads i.e. charging provisions. There

ELARA CAPITAL (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT- CIRCLE 6(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Elara Capital (India) Pvt. Ltd., The Acit-Circle 6(2)(2), Tower 3, 21St Floor, One Room No. 506, 5Th Floor, Vs. International Center, Senapati Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Karve Road, Mumbai- Road (West), Mumbai-400013. 400020. Pan No. Aabce 6487 B Appellant Respondent

disallowance under Section 14 A of the Act was called for in the AY in question because no exempt income was for in the AY in question because no exempt income was for in the AY in question because no exempt income was earned. earned 24

BAJAJ ELECTRICALS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 2(1), MUMBAI

Accordingly we remit the impugned issue back to the AO with similar directions. The grounds raised by the assessee in this regard are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

disallowed by the AO should be allowed as a deduction. Through additional ground the assessee is making an additional claim of Rs. 3,36,85,160/- towards ESOP expenditure being the difference between the value of shares using Fair Value method of Rs.4,95,88,603 and the intrinsic value of Rs.1,59,03,443 debited in the books

DCIT 2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. BAJAJ ELECTRICALS LTD, MUMBAI

Accordingly we remit the impugned issue back to the AO with similar directions. The grounds raised by the assessee in this regard are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

disallowed by the AO should be allowed as a deduction. Through additional ground the assessee is making an additional claim of Rs. 3,36,85,160/- towards ESOP expenditure being the difference between the value of shares using Fair Value method of Rs.4,95,88,603 and the intrinsic value of Rs.1,59,03,443 debited in the books

BAJAJ ELECTRICALS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 2(1), MUMBAI

Accordingly we remit the impugned issue back to the AO with similar directions. The grounds raised by the assessee in this regard are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

disallowed by the AO should be allowed as a deduction. Through additional ground the assessee is making an additional claim of Rs. 3,36,85,160/- towards ESOP expenditure being the difference between the value of shares using Fair Value method of Rs.4,95,88,603 and the intrinsic value of Rs.1,59,03,443 debited in the books

FRIGORIFICO ALLANA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(1)(4), MUMBAI

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri N. K. Pradhan, Am

disallowed under section 43B or under section 36(1)(va) - Whether SLP against said impugned order was to be dismissed - Held, yes (ii) [2017] 79 taxmann.com 305 (Mumbai - Trib.) IN THE ITAT MUMBAI BENCH 'E1 DCIT Vs Saraswat Co-operative Bank Ltd OCTOBER 31, 2016 Section 43B, read with sections 2(24

APL LOGISTICS (INDIA) P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 10(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

24. The ld. DR endorsed that in so far as issue no. 2 & 3 raised in the present appeal relating to disallowance of interest expenditure under section

APL LOGISTICS (INDIA) P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 10(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

24. The ld. DR endorsed that in so far as issue no. 2 & 3 raised in the present appeal relating to disallowance of interest expenditure under section

DCIT 10(1), MUMBAI vs. APL LOGISTICS (INDIA ) P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

24. The ld. DR endorsed that in so far as issue no. 2 & 3 raised in the present appeal relating to disallowance of interest expenditure under section

DCIT 10(1), MUMBAI vs. APL LOGISTICS (INDIA) P. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

24. The ld. DR endorsed that in so far as issue no. 2 & 3 raised in the present appeal relating to disallowance of interest expenditure under section

APL LOGISTICS (INDIA) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 10(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

24. The ld. DR endorsed that in so far as issue no. 2 & 3 raised in the present appeal relating to disallowance of interest expenditure under section

APL LOGISTICS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 14(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

24. The ld. DR endorsed that in so far as issue no. 2 & 3 raised in the present appeal relating to disallowance of interest expenditure under section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CC-7(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S MACROTECH DEVELOPERS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS LODHA DEVELOPERS PVT LTD) (SUCCESSOER OF M/S BELLISSIMO CROWN BUILDMART PVT LTD ), MUMBAI

Accordingly should be allowed as a deduction

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

disallowed a sum of Rs. 1,39,44,406/-. 24. On further appeal, aggrieved the assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) held that the issue of allowance of depreciation should be 16 ITA 2382 & 2383/Mum/2022 Macrotech Developers Ltd considered and decided in the first year itself. If depreciation is allowed for the first year action

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-7(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S MACROTECH DEVELOPERS LIMITED , MUMBAI

Accordingly should be allowed as a deduction

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

disallowed a sum of Rs. 1,39,44,406/-. 24. On further appeal, aggrieved the assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) held that the issue of allowance of depreciation should be 16 ITA 2382 & 2383/Mum/2022 Macrotech Developers Ltd considered and decided in the first year itself. If depreciation is allowed for the first year action

DCIT, CIR 16(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S KPMG ASSURANCE AND CONSULTING SERVICES LLP, MUMBAI

Section 195 of the Act as the same were\nchargeable to tax in India in terms of Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act\nread with either Article 12 or Article 22/23 of the corresponding\nDTAAs as FTS or Other Income, respectively. Since the Assessee\nhad failed to deduct tax from the same in terms of Section

DCIT 2(2), MUMBAI vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2006 – 07 and 2007 – 08 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm A.Y.2006-07 [ By Assessee] &

24. Another important judgment dealing with section 14A disallowance which merits consideration is Godrej & Boyce Mfgr. Co. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2017] 1 SCC 421. Here

SICOM LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assesee is partly allow for statistical purpose and the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judicialmember Sicom Ltd, Vs. Dy Commissioner Of Solitaire Corporate Income Tax Circle Park, Bldg No.04, 3(3)(1), Chakala, Andheri(E), 6Th Floor, Room No. Mumbai-400093. 609,Aayakar Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai- 400020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं.Pan/Gir No. Aaacs5524J (अपीलाथ"/Applicant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Dy Commissioner Of Vs. Sicom Ltd, Income Tax Circle Solitaire Corporate Park, 3(3)(1), Bldg No.04, Chakala, 6Th Floor, Room No. Andheri(E), 609,Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400093. Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai- 400020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं.Pan/Gir No. Aaacs5524J (अपीलाथ"/Applicant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

24 ITA . No. 1694/MUM/2023 & 2036/MUM/2023 SICOM LTD. • DCIT vs Hira Ferro Alloys Ltd (2018) (90 taxmann.com 430) (Raipur ITAT) (b) Disallowance under section

THE GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 5(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee (ITA number 1597/M/2018) is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Narfendrakumar Choudhary , Jm & & The Great Eastern Shipping Co. The Dy. Commissioner Of Ltd. Income-Tax, Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Llp Range-5(3), Esplanade House, 2 N D Floor, Vs. Room No.525B, 5Th Floor, M.K. Marg, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaact1565C The Dy. Commissioner Of Income- The Great Eastern Shipping Co. Tax, Ltd. Range-5(3), Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Llp Vs. Esplanade House, 2 N D Floor, Room No.525B, 5Th Floor, M.K. Marg, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Mumbai-400 020 Fort, Mumbai-400 001 (Appellant) (Respondent)

24,995/– wherein the adjustment of arm‟s-length price of international transaction of ₹ 93,024,605/–, disallowance under section