BAJAJ INTERNATIONAL REALTY PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, 1(2)1, MUMBAI

In the result both the appeals of the parties are partly allowed for In the result both the appeals of the parties are partly allowed for the statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

disallowance of Rs. 1,19,32,795/- under under Section 14A read with Rule 8D Rule 8D, both under normal provisions and in the computation of book profits under normal provisions and in the computation of book profits under normal provisions and in the computation of book profits under Section 115JB. 5. In Ground Nos.1 .1-4 of the appeal

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

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated 14.03.2013 3 ITA 4172/M/13-5749-5750/M/15-110- 111/M/16 Bajaj Electricals Limited for AY 2009-10, dated 07.09.2015 for AY 2011-12, dated 04.09.2015 for AY 2010- 11. AY 2009-10 2. The assessee is a company engaged in the business of manufacturing of Fans, Telecommunication, Transmission Line Towers, Hot Dip Galvanizing and trading

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

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated 14.03.2013 3 ITA 4172/M/13-5749-5750/M/15-110- 111/M/16 Bajaj Electricals Limited for AY 2009-10, dated 07.09.2015 for AY 2011-12, dated 04.09.2015 for AY 2010- 11. AY 2009-10 2. The assessee is a company engaged in the business of manufacturing of Fans, Telecommunication, Transmission Line Towers, Hot Dip Galvanizing and trading

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

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated 14.03.2013 3 ITA 4172/M/13-5749-5750/M/15-110- 111/M/16 Bajaj Electricals Limited for AY 2009-10, dated 07.09.2015 for AY 2011-12, dated 04.09.2015 for AY 2010- 11. AY 2009-10 2. The assessee is a company engaged in the business of manufacturing of Fans, Telecommunication, Transmission Line Towers, Hot Dip Galvanizing and trading

INCOME TAX OFFICER , MUMBAI vs. IDBI STAFF CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD , MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals in ITA Nos

disallowed the deduction, which was confirmed by the CIT(A). The Revenue preferred an appeal before the Tribunal.", "held": "The Tribunal held that interest income earned by a co-operative society from its investments with other co-operative banks is eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. The exclusion under Section 80P(4) does not apply

DCIT-1(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD., MUMBAI

250 of the Act rectifying order, dated 19/03/2019,\npassed by the CIT(A).\n2.2. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal in ITA No.\n3195/Mum/2019:\n\"1. Disallowance under Section 14A(2) read with Rule 8D.\nThe Appellant submits that on the facts and in the circumstances of\nthe case and true interpretation of the provisions of Section

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

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

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated 14.03.2013\nfor AY 2009-10, dated 07.09.2015 for AY 2011-12, dated 04.09.2015 for AY 2010-\n11.\nAY 2009-10\nITA No. 4172/Mum/2013\n2.\nThe assessee is a company engaged in the business of manufacturing of Fans,\nTelecommunication, Transmission Line Towers, Hot Dip Galvanizing and trading in\nelectrical appliances, Lamps

HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORP LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 1(1)(2), MUMBAI

Bench: us. 2.

250 of the Act rectifying order, dated 19/03/2019, passed by the CIT(A). 2.2. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal in ITA No. 3195/Mum/2019: “1. Disallowance under Section 14A(2) read with Rule 8D. The Appellant submits that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and true interpretation of the provisions of Section

ADDL CIT R G 7(1), MUMBAI vs. NOVARTIS INDIA LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS HINDUSTAN CIBA GIEGY LTD. ), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Novartis India Limited V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income –Tax - 7(2)(2) {Earlier Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} 6Th& 7Th Floor 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Inspire Bkc M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 “G” Block, Bkc Main Road Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400051 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1) V. M/S. Novartis India Limited Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No.190/Mum/2011 [Arising Out Of Ita No.6772/Mum/2010 (A.Y. 2002-03)] M/S. Novartis India Limited V. Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent)

250, direct the Assessing] Officer to appeal to the Appellate Tribunal against the order. (2A) *** (3) Every appeal under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) shall be filed within sixty days of the date on which the order sought to be appealed against is communicated to the assessee or to the Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner, as the case

INCOME TAX OFFICER, BKC,MUMBAI vs. IDBI STAFF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD, MUMBAI

disallowed this deduction by invoking Section 80P(4). The CIT(A) overturned the AO's decision. The Revenue appealed this order.", "held": "The Tribunal held that interest income earned by a co-operative society from its investments with other co-operative banks is eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Income-tax Act. Section 80P(4) does

RELIANCE RETAIL LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 8(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed,\nwhereas the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961\n[hereinafter referred to as \"the Act\"] in relation to the assessment\nframed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) read with\nsection 144B of the Act vide order dated 27.09.2022.\nFacts of the Case\n2. The assessee is a company engaged in the business of\ntrading and merchandising of goods

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)

250 of the Act. 2. We shall take up ITA No. 1694/MUM/2023 as a lead case and facts narrated. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeals. I. Disallowance of notional Interest of Rs. 48,84,000/- under section 36(1)(iii) of theAct on Loan given to subsidiary General Ground 1. erred in confirming the action

ACIT, MUMBAI vs. K RAHEJA CORP PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2020-21

4,62,717 SHOPPERS STOP LIMITED SHOPPERS STOP LIMITED 25,36,653 25,36,653 DLF Limited DLF Limited 73,200 73,200 Balaji Telefilms Ltd Balaji Telefilms Ltd 16,000 16,000 Ambuja Cements Ltd Ambuja Cements Ltd 7,500 7,500 JM Financial Limited JM Financial Limited 45,000 45,000 FAERING CAPITAL INDIA EVOLVING FAERING CAPITAL INDIA

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE RETAIL LIMITED, MUMBAI

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

Bench: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (Vice President), SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR (Accountant Member)

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”] in relation to the assessment framed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act vide order dated 27.09.2022. Facts of the Case 2. The assessee is a company engaged in the business of trading and merchandising of goods and providing

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

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

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated 14.03.2013\nfor AY 2009-10, dated 07.09.2015 for AY 2011-12, dated 04.09.2015 for AY 2010-\n11.\nAY 2009-10\nITA No. 4172/Mum/2013\n2.\nThe assessee is a company engaged in the business of manufacturing of Fans,\nTelecommunication, Transmission Line Towers, Hot Dip Galvanizing and trading in\nelectrical appliances, Lamps

EFFICIENT ILLUMINATION PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

disallowed the deduction, contending that the project did not qualify as developing an infrastructure facility.", "held": "The Tribunal held that the assessee's activities, including design, financing, implementation, operation, and maintenance of the street lighting system, constituted the development of an integral part of a road and highway project. Therefore, it qualified as an 'infrastructure facility' under Section 80IA(4

SHRI RENUKAMATA MULTI-STATE CO-OPERATIVE URBAN SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(4), MUMBAI

250 of the\nIncome Tax Act, 1961 (\"the Act\") by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax\n(Appeals)-52, Mumbai, [\"learned CIT(A)\"], for the assessment years 2016–17,\n2017-18 and 2018–19.\n2. Since these appeals pertain to the same assessee and involve similar\nissues that arise out of a similar factual matrix, therefore, these appeals were\nheard

M/S RENUKAMATA MULTI STATE CO-OP. URBAN CREDITN SOC. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSTT. CIT, CC-4(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed, while the\nappeal by the Revenue is dismissed

250 of the\nIncome Tax Act, 1961 (\"the Act\") by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax\n(Appeals)-52, Mumbai, [\"learned CIT(A)\"], for the assessment years 2016–17,\n2017-18 and 2018–19.\n2. Since these appeals pertain to the same assessee and involve similar\nissues that arise out of a similar factual matrix, therefore, these appeals were\nheard