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

disallowance by invoking the provisions of section 251 (2) of the act. The disallowance contested here by the assessee is of Rs. 85,000 only

DCIT-2(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. YES BANK LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue and assessee he appeals of the Revenue and assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit-2(2)(2), M/S Yes Bank Ltd., Room No. 545, 5Th Floor, 9Th Floor, Nehru Centre, Discovery Of Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, India, Dr. Ab Road, Worli, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400018. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacy 2068 D Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Yes Bank Ltd., Dcit-2(2)(2), 9Th Floor, Nehru Centre, Room No. 545, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Discovery Of India, Dr. Ab Vs. Bhavan, Road, Worli, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400018. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacy 2068 D Appellant Respondent

section 251 of the Act. 2. The Appellant prays that it be held that the order of the 2. The Appellant prays that it be held that the order of the 2. The Appellant prays that it be held that the order of the CIT(A) is void ab CIT(A) is void ab-initio and/or otherwise

YES BANK LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - 2(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue and assessee he appeals of the Revenue and assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit-2(2)(2), M/S Yes Bank Ltd., Room No. 545, 5Th Floor, 9Th Floor, Nehru Centre, Discovery Of Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, India, Dr. Ab Road, Worli, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400018. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacy 2068 D Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Yes Bank Ltd., Dcit-2(2)(2), 9Th Floor, Nehru Centre, Room No. 545, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Discovery Of India, Dr. Ab Vs. Bhavan, Road, Worli, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400018. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacy 2068 D Appellant Respondent

section 251 of the Act. 2. The Appellant prays that it be held that the order of the 2. The Appellant prays that it be held that the order of the 2. The Appellant prays that it be held that the order of the CIT(A) is void ab CIT(A) is void ab-initio and/or otherwise

DCIT CC-8(2),MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RAKESH S KATHOTIA, MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

disallowance can be made in relation to that assessment year in the exercise of powers under section 153A of the Act and the earlier assessment shall have to be reiterated only. Hon'ble SC in CIT, Delhi of India Ltd., has observed and held as under: "Post 01.04.1989, power to re-open is much wider. However, one needs to give

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

disallowances under Section 40(a)(i)\nof the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act'] amounting to Rs.\n8,55,053 and decide the issue. Such findings of the CIT(A)\nare in violation of the provisions of section 251 of the Act,\naccordingly the said findings are bad in law and ought to be\nquashed.\nGround No. 2

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

disallowances under Section 40(a)(i)\nof the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act'] amounting to Rs.\n8,55,053 and decide the issue. Such findings of the CIT(A)\nare in violation of the provisions of section 251 of the Act,\naccordingly the said findings are bad in law and ought to be\nquashed.\nGround No. 2

ACIT - 2(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. YES BANK LIMITED, MUMBAI

section 14A\nof the Act on the ground of non-applicability of Rule 8D of Income\nTax Rules. Therefore the ground raised by the Revenue is\ninfructuous, and same is dismissed.\n10. In ground No. II, the assessee has challenged finding of the\nLd. CIT(A) with regard to disallowance under rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Act\nfor directing

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

disallowances under Section 40(a)(i)\nof the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act'] amounting to Rs.\n8,55,053 and decide the issue. Such findings of the CIT(A)\nare in violation of the provisions of section 251 of the Act,\naccordingly the said findings are bad in law and ought to be\nquashed.\nGround No. 2

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

disallowances under Section 40(a)(i)\nof the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act'] amounting to Rs.\n8,55,053 and decide the issue. Such findings of the CIT(A)\nare in violation of the provisions of section 251 of the Act,\naccordingly the said findings are bad in law and ought to be\nquashed.\nGround No. 2

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

disallowances under Section 40(a)(i)\nof the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act'] amounting to Rs.\n8,55,053 and decide the issue. Such findings of the CIT(A)\nare in violation of the provisions of section 251 of the Act,\naccordingly the said findings are bad in law and ought to be\nquashed.\nGround No. 2

YES BANK LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT(2)(2)(2), MUMBAI

section 14A\nof the Act on the ground of non-applicability of Rule 8D of Income\nTax Rules. Therefore the ground raised by the Revenue is\ninfructuous, and same is dismissed.\n10.\nIn ground No. II, the assessee has challenged finding of the\nLd. CIT(A) with regard to disallowance under rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Act\nfor directing

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

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)

2)(a)(iiihl) provide that contributions made to Swachh Bharat Kosh and Clean Ganga Fund shall not qualify for deduction if such payments are made in pursuance of CSR obligations. The presence of such specific exclusions indicates that the legislature was conscious of CSR-related contributions and deliberately chose to restrict deduction only in respect of the aforesaid funds

HILLWAY SADHNA CO OP OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

disallowed. Against the intimation under section 143(1) of the Act the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A)-41 on March 13, Hillway Sadhna Co-operative Hsg. Society Ltd. 2019. The assessee also filed rectification application before the Assessing Officer (AO) under section 154 of the Act on March 19, 2019. The assessee filed a letter dated

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. BLEND FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the R

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant (Account Member) & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2018-19

disallowance made u/s 37 of the Act on account of foreign travel amounting to Rs. 1,11,69,620/ foreign travel amounting to Rs. 1,11,69,620/- relying upon the additional relying upon the additional evidence filed during the appellate proceeding without giving evidence filed during the appellate proceeding without giving opportunity of opportunity of being heard

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

2) of the Act is to be made without resorting to the\ncomputation as contemplated under section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D\nof the Rules. Thus, respectfully following the aforesaid decision of the Special\nBench of the Tribunal, we direct the AO to compute the book profit under\nsection 115-JB of the Act, without resorting

BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-2(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2018-

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No.1452/Mum/2023 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Assessment Year : 2018-19

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

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2018-

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No.1452/Mum/2023 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Assessment Year : 2018-19

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

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

2) of the Act is to be made without resorting to the\ncomputation as contemplated under section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D\nof the Rules. Thus, respectfully following the aforesaid decision of the Special\nBench of the Tribunal, we direct the AO to compute the book profit under\nsection 115-JB of the Act, without resorting