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

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

M/S. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORP. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR. 1(1), MUMBAI

section\n14A of the Act by making such disallowance also in respect of income from tax\nfree bonds (refer Ground Nos. 4.1 and 4.3 of the Concise Grounds of Appeal).\nf) Whether the ld. CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition of Rs.5 crores\ntowards receipt of non-compete fees when it was taxable neither as revenue re-\nceipt

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

ASST CIT 3, MUMBAI vs. PRAMOD RATAN PATIL, MUMBAI

In the result, Appeal of Ld AO is dismissed, appeal of assessee is allowed partly

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Shri Pramod Ratan Patil Acit A–1, Chandresh Oasis, Lodha Circle–3, Kalyan, 2 Nd Floor, Heaven, Vs. Kalyan Shil Road, Dombivali (East), Rani Mansion, Murbad Road, Thane–421201 Kalyan West–421301 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadpp6274F Acit Shri Pramod Ratan Patil Circle–3, A–1, Chandresh Oasis, Lodha Kalyan, 2 Nd Floor, Heaven, Vs. Rani Mansion, Murbad Road, Kalyan Shil Road, Dombivali (East), Kalyan West–421301 Thane–421201 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Mr. Satyaprakash Singh, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Nihar Ranjan Samal, Dr

1,761,657/–, Rs 291,330 are more than ₹ 20,000. Therefore, according to him as per the provisions of section 40 A (3) the above sum is disallowable. Accordingly, he issued notice under section 251

PRAMOD RATAN PATIL,THANE vs. ASST CIT CIR 3, KALYAN

In the result, Appeal of Ld AO is dismissed, appeal of assessee is allowed partly

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Shri Pramod Ratan Patil Acit A–1, Chandresh Oasis, Lodha Circle–3, Kalyan, 2 Nd Floor, Heaven, Vs. Kalyan Shil Road, Dombivali (East), Rani Mansion, Murbad Road, Thane–421201 Kalyan West–421301 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadpp6274F Acit Shri Pramod Ratan Patil Circle–3, A–1, Chandresh Oasis, Lodha Kalyan, 2 Nd Floor, Heaven, Vs. Rani Mansion, Murbad Road, Kalyan Shil Road, Dombivali (East), Kalyan West–421301 Thane–421201 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Mr. Satyaprakash Singh, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Nihar Ranjan Samal, Dr

1,761,657/–, Rs 291,330 are more than ₹ 20,000. Therefore, according to him as per the provisions of section 40 A (3) the above sum is disallowable. Accordingly, he issued notice under section 251

KPMG ASSURANCE AND CONSULTING SERVICES LLP,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CIRCLE-16(2), MUMBAI

1 Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) remanding\nissue to the Assessing Officer is bad in law\n1. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the\nCIT(A) erred in directing the AO to verify the Appellant's\narguments in respect of disallowances under Section 40(a)(i)\nof the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act'] amounting

M/S. HOUSING DEVELOP,MENT FINANCE CORPN. LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ADDL CIT RG-1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the three appeals by the Revenue are partly\nallowed

section\n14A of the Act by making such disallowance also in respect of income from tax\nfree bonds (refer Ground Nos. 4.1 and 4.3 of the Concise Grounds of Appeal).\nf) Whether the ld. CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition of Rs.5 crores\ntowards receipt of non-compete fees when it was taxable neither as revenue re-\nceipt

THE DY CIT CIR 1(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPN LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the three appeals by the Revenue are partly\nallowed

section\n14A of the Act by making such disallowance also in respect of income from tax\nfree bonds (refer Ground Nos. 4.1 and 4.3 of the Concise Grounds of Appeal).\nf) Whether the ld. CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition of Rs.5 crores\ntowards receipt of non-compete fees when it was taxable neither as revenue re-\nceipt

M/S. HOUSING DEVELOP,MENT FINANCE CORPN. LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

section\n14A of the Act by making such disallowance also in respect of income from tax\nfree bonds (refer Ground Nos. 4.1 and 4.3 of the Concise Grounds of Appeal).\nf) Whether the ld. CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition of Rs.5 crores\ntowards receipt of non-compete fees when it was taxable neither as revenue re-\nceipt

THE DY CIT CIR 1(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPN LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the three appeals by the Revenue are partly\nallowed

section\n14A of the Act by making such disallowance also in respect of income from tax\nfree bonds (refer Ground Nos. 4.1 and 4.3 of the Concise Grounds of Appeal).\nf) Whether the ld. CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition of Rs.5 crores\ntowards receipt of non-compete fees when it was taxable neither as revenue re-\nceipt

DCIT CIR 1(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPN. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the three appeals by the Revenue are partly\nallowed

section\n14A of the Act by making such disallowance also in respect of income from tax\nfree bonds (refer Ground Nos. 4.1 and 4.3 of the Concise Grounds of Appeal).\nf) Whether the ld. CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition of Rs.5 crores\ntowards receipt of non-compete fees when it was taxable neither as revenue re-\nceipt

THE DY CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. VODAFONE WEST LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

disallowance made u/s.40(a)(ia)\nof the Act in respect of discount offered to pre-paid distributors.\"\n(9). \"The DRP, Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts in deleting the\naddition of Rs.133,79,00,000/- made on account of receipt for pre-paid\nservices which crystallized during the year itself.\"\n10). \"The DRP, Ahmedabad has erred

VODAFONE WEST LIMITED,(FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE ESSAR GUJARAT LIMITED),AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

disallowance made u/s.40(a)(ia)\nof the Act in respect of discount offered to pre-paid distributors.\"\n(9). \"The DRP, Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts in deleting the\naddition of Rs.133,79,00,000/- made on account of receipt for pre-paid\nservices which crystallized during the year itself.\"\n10). \"The DRP, Ahmedabad has erred