BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. THE NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, MUMBAI

251 of the Act and disallowed the entire expenditure claimed by the assessee therein instead of restricting the disallowance to the amount which was claimed as exempt income. The ITAT set aside the order of the AO as well as CIT(A). The High Court upheld the order of the ITAT and dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue

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

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

ITO 3(3)2, MUMBAI vs. SHAMROCK PHARMACHEMI P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.1774/Mum/2013 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) बिाम/ Ito 3(3)2, M/S. Shamrock R.No. 602, Pharmachemi Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, 83E,Hansraj Pragi Bldg., V. M.K Road, Opp. Dr. E Moses Road, Mumbai 400020 Worli, Mumbai-400018 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaacs6290H (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Shri. Ashim Kumar Modi (Cit- Dr), Shri V. Justin & Ms. Chaitna Ajaria Shri. Bharat L. Gandhi Assessee By: सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 01.03.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.05.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Revenue, Being Ita No. 1774/Mum/2013, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 29.10.2012, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called ―The Cit(A)‖) In Appeal Number Cit(A)-7/Ito-3(3)(2)/It-166/11-12, For Assessment Year 2009-10, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From The Assessment Order Dated 29.12.2011 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called ―The Ao‖) U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ―The Act‖) For Ay 2009-10. I.T.A. No.1774/Mum/2013

disallowance made by the Assessing Officer towards export commission paid by the assessee to the non-resident was rightly deleted.' 16. When the transaction does not atract the provisions of Section 9 of the Act, then there is no question of applying Explanation 4 to Section 9 of the Act. Therefore, the Revenue has no case and the Tax Case

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

251 of the Act\nand disallowed the entire expenditure claimed by the assessee therein instead of\nrestricting the disallowance to the amount which was claimed as exempt income. The\nITAT set aside the order of the AO as well as CIT(A). The High Court upheld the order\nof the ITAT and dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue

ACIT, CIRCLE - 3 3 1, MUMBAI vs. JAMNAGAR UTILITIES AND POWER PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed\npartly

disallowed under Section 37(1), are\nallowable as deductions under Section 80G of the Act:\n(i) (Mumbai ITAT) DCIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd. [2023] I.T.A. No.\n2587 & 2588/Mum/2022\n(ii) FNF India (P.) Ltd. Vs. ACIT [2021] (133 taxmann.com 251

ACIT, CIRCLE - 3 3 1, MUMBAI vs. JAMNAGAR UTILITIES AND POWER PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed\npartly

disallowed under section 37(1), are\nallowable as deductions under section 80G of the Act:\n(i) (Mumbai ITAT) DCIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd. [2023] I.T.A. No.\n2587 & 2588/Mum/2022\n(ii) FNF India (P.) Ltd. Vs. ACIT [2021] (133 taxmann.com 251

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)

251] (Bangalore ITAT), Sling Media Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT [194 ITD 1] (Bangalore ITAT), Infinera India Pvt. Ltd. v. JCIT [194 ITD 463] (Bangalore ITAT), National Seeds Corporation Ltd. v. ACIT (Delhi ITAT), and DCIT v. Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd. (Kolkata ITAT), wherein the Tribunal has consistently taken the view that deductions allowable under Chapter VI-A cannot

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

disallowance, which does not appear\nto be the legislative intent.\n109. A careful reading of section 80G further shows that the\nlegislature has expressly excluded only certain CSR contributions\nfrom the ambit of deduction. Specifically, section 80G(2)(a)(iiihk)\nand 80G(2)(a)(iiihl) provide that contributions made to Swachh\nBharat Kosh and Clean Ganga Fund shall not qualify

DCIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI vs. M.R. CONSTRUCTION, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

251 and 252 reads as under: - “Q.13. I am showing you blank letter heads and blank bills in the name of following entities impounded at page numbers from 83 to 94 of impounded material at Annexure ‘A’. 46 Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction Blank Letter Heads 1. National Institute of Industrial Engineering. 2. Indian Institute of technology Bombay

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

251 and 252 reads as under: - “Q.13. I am showing you blank letter heads and blank bills in the name of following entities impounded at page numbers from 83 to 94 of impounded material at Annexure ‘A’. 46 Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction Blank Letter Heads 1. National Institute of Industrial Engineering. 2. Indian Institute of technology Bombay

DCIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI vs. M.R. CONSTRUCTION, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

251 and 252 reads as under: - “Q.13. I am showing you blank letter heads and blank bills in the name of following entities impounded at page numbers from 83 to 94 of impounded material at Annexure ‘A’. 46 Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction Blank Letter Heads 1. National Institute of Industrial Engineering. 2. Indian Institute of technology Bombay

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

251 and 252 reads as under: - “Q.13. I am showing you blank letter heads and blank bills in the name of following entities impounded at page numbers from 83 to 94 of impounded material at Annexure ‘A’. 46 Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction Blank Letter Heads 1. National Institute of Industrial Engineering. 2. Indian Institute of technology Bombay

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

251 and 252 reads as under: - “Q.13. I am showing you blank letter heads and blank bills in the name of following entities impounded at page numbers from 83 to 94 of impounded material at Annexure ‘A’. 46 Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction Blank Letter Heads 1. National Institute of Industrial Engineering. 2. Indian Institute of technology Bombay

ACIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI vs. M.R. CONSTRUCTION, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

251 and 252 reads as under: - “Q.13. I am showing you blank letter heads and blank bills in the name of following entities impounded at page numbers from 83 to 94 of impounded material at Annexure ‘A’. 46 Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction Blank Letter Heads 1. National Institute of Industrial Engineering. 2. Indian Institute of technology Bombay

M.R. CONSTRUCTION,.,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

251 and 252 reads as under: - “Q.13. I am showing you blank letter heads and blank bills in the name of following entities impounded at page numbers from 83 to 94 of impounded material at Annexure ‘A’. 46 Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction Blank Letter Heads 1. National Institute of Industrial Engineering. 2. Indian Institute of technology Bombay

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

251 and 252 reads as under: - “Q.13. I am showing you blank letter heads and blank bills in the name of following entities impounded at page numbers from 83 to 94 of impounded material at Annexure ‘A’. 46 Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction Blank Letter Heads 1. National Institute of Industrial Engineering. 2. Indian Institute of technology Bombay

ASST CIT CC-22, MUMBAI vs. JAWAHAR PUROHIT, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

251 and 252 reads as under: - “Q.13. I am showing you blank letter heads and blank bills in the name of following entities impounded at page numbers from 83 to 94 of impounded material at Annexure ‘A’. 46 Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction Blank Letter Heads 1. National Institute of Industrial Engineering. 2. Indian Institute of technology Bombay