RAYMOND LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 2(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailita Nos. 8641 & 8642/Mum/2011 (A.Ys. 1999-2000 & 2000-01) Raymond Limited, Vs. The Dcit-2(3) New Hind House, Aayakar Bhavan, Narottam Morarjee Marg, M.K. Road, Ballard Estate, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 001 स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaacr4896A Assessee .. Revenue

disallowing the proportionate interest expenses as per the provisions of section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rule; ii. to consider total turnover excluding taxes and duties while computing deduction under section 80HHC from book profit. ITA Nos. 8641 & 8642/Mum/2011 A.Ys. 1999-2000 & 2000-01 4 Raymond Limited Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income

RAYMOND LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 2(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailita Nos. 8641 & 8642/Mum/2011 (A.Ys. 1999-2000 & 2000-01) Raymond Limited, Vs. The Dcit-2(3) New Hind House, Aayakar Bhavan, Narottam Morarjee Marg, M.K. Road, Ballard Estate, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 001 स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaacr4896A Assessee .. Revenue

disallowing the proportionate interest expenses as per the provisions of section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rule; ii. to consider total turnover excluding taxes and duties while computing deduction under section 80HHC from book profit. ITA Nos. 8641 & 8642/Mum/2011 A.Ys. 1999-2000 & 2000-01 4 Raymond Limited Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income

M/S. STANDARD CHARTERED BANK,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT (IT)1(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blestandard Chartered Bank V. Acit – Range-1(3) Taxation Department, 23-25 Scindia House, Ballard Estate M.G. Road, 3Rd Floor N.M. Marg, Mumbai - 400038 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aabcs4681D (Appellant) (Respondent) Adit (It)– 2(3) V. Standard Chartered Bank Room No. 120, 1St Floor Taxation Department, 23-25 Scindia House, Ballard Estate M.G. Road, 3Rd Floor N.M. Marg, Mumbai - 400038 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aabcs4681D (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri P.J. Pardiwala & Assessee Represented By : Shri Fenil Bhatt Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash Department Represented By :

disallowed: - 9 ITA NO. 803 & 850/MUM/2009 (A.Y. 1999-2000) Standard Chartered Bank Refurbishment: (i). Madras Auto Service Pvt. Ltd., [233 ITR 468 (SC) (ii). R.B Bansilal Abirchand Spg & Weaving Mills vs. CIT 31 ITR 427 (Nagpur- HC) (iii). CIT vs. Rex Talkies (18 Taxman 363 (Karnataka - HC) (iv). CIT vs. Oxford University Press 108 ITR 166 (Bom - HC) (v). ACIT

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

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

244A of the Act (m) Ground No. 9: Incorrect computation of Book Profits under Section 115JB of the Act (n) Ground No. 10 : Non-Grant of full credit in respect of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) (o) Ground No. 11 : Initiation of penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act 2.2. In ITA No. 1919/Mum/2016, the Revenue

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

244A", "Section 199", "Rule 37BA of the Income-tax Rules, 1962"], "issues": "The appeals involve multiple assessment years and grounds, including challenges to disallowances

LIC HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, MUMBAI

disallow statutory rights to interest on delayed refunds.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "244A", "154", "153(5)", "265", "4(1)", "4(5)", "4(7)", "7", "5(2)", "143(1)(a)", "153(5)", "244A

HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 6(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assesse bearing ITA No

244A", "Section 194H", "Section 197", "Section 105A", "Section 44", "Section 40(1)", "Section 40(2A)", "Section 10", "Section 105B", "Section 105", "Section 104", "Section 103", "Section 102"], "issues": "Disallowance

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

244A", "Sec 154" ], "issues": "The key issues involved are the allowability of provision for leave encashment, deduction under section 80G for CSR expenditure, correct computation of TDS credit, taxability of short-term capital gains, and various other disallowances

ACIT 6(3), MUMBAI vs. GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD, MUMBAI

disallowance and held\nthat the provision of section 40(a)(ia) are not applicable in\nthe case.\"\n8. 1. During the course of hearing the Learned Senior Counsel, on\ninstructions, stated that the Assessee does not wish to pursue this\nground since relief has been granted to the assessee in relation to\nthis ground in appellate proceedings pertaining

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

Appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

disallowing the tax depreciation claimed by the Appellant under section 32(1) of the Act on the one-time expenditure incurred by the Appellant on acquisition of 36 spectrum amounting to INK 4,08,01,38,956. 3.2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, while the learned DRP/AO has clearly held that

TATA MOTORS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

disallowance of interest on refund under section 244A of the Act. 26. Brief facts are, at the time of processing

GREAVES COTTON LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 6(3), MUMBAI

In the result this appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singh

244A. Ground I: Interest under section 234D. Ground J: Addition to book profit under section 115JB on disallowance of section

DBS BANK LTD,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (IT) 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Us Is A Non Resident & Its Assessment Under Section 143(3) Was Completed On 28Th March 2005 At An Assessed Income Of Rs 24,18,54,060. Subsequently, However, The Revenue Audit Party Pointed Out Certain Mistakes Said To Have Crept In This Assessment Order. The Mistakes So Pointed Out, On The Basis Of Which The Impugned Rectification Of Mistakes Under Section 154 Is Said To Have Been Carried Out- As Is Started In The Impugned Order Itself, Were As Follows:

disallowing the same under section 40(a)(i). As for the second point, the Assessing Officer was of the view that as the refund arose on account of delayed claim of Rs 2,50,65,962 under section 10(23G), the interest under section 244A

DCIT-2(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. THE INDIAN HOTELS COMPANY LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

disallowance of INR 4,22,19,634/- under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act as well as deletion/reduction of the transfer pricing adjustment in appeal before the Tribunal. Since the Appellant was not satisfied by the relief granted by the DRP, the Assessee has also preferred appeal before the Tribunal challenging the Final Assessment Order, dated

THE INDIAN HOTELS COMPANY LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR. 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

disallowance of INR 4,22,19,634/- under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act as well as deletion/reduction of the transfer pricing adjustment in appeal before the Tribunal. Since the Appellant was not satisfied by the relief granted by the DRP, the Assessee has also preferred appeal before the Tribunal challenging the Final Assessment Order, dated

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

disallowances where facts supported the assessee.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": [ "250", "143(1)", "143(2)", "142(1)", "143(3)", "144B", "80G", "36(1)(va)", "40(a)(ia)", "43B", "234B", "234C", "270A", "115P", "111A", "112A", "234D", "244A

DCIT, MUMBAI vs. TRENT LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, these grounds of appeal are

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Girish Agrawal(Physical Hearing) Trent Limited Dcit-2(3)(1), Mumbai 552, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Bombay House, Mumbai, Vs Maharashtra – 400001. Maharishi Karve Road, [Pan: Aaacl1838J] Mumbai-400020. Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Dcit-2(3)(1), Mumbai Trent Limited 552, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs G Block, Plot No. C 60, Trent House, Maharishi Karve Road, Beside City Bank, Bandra K Complex, Mumbai-400020. Bandra E Mumbai – 400051. [Pan: Aaacl1838J] Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee

Disallowance of Sales Promotion Discount, Provision for Club West Loyalty Program, and Customer Loyalty Program for Computation of Book Profit under Section 115JB 10. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs 4,42,99,771/- (Sales Promotion Discount