MEHLI MEHTA MUSIC FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD-2(4), MUMBAI

disallowance for all the years under\nconsideration. The Ld. Sr. Counsel thus submitted that A.Y.2009-\n10 may be considered as it covers all the issues alleged by the\nassessee in present appeals even on merits. The submissions of the\nLd. Sr. Counsel was acceptable to the Ld. DR.\nAccordingly, grounds pertaining to A.Y. 2009-10 raised by the\nassessee

MEHLI MEHTA MUSIC FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-2(4), MUMBAI

disallowance for all the years under\nconsideration. The Ld. Sr. Counsel thus submitted that A.Y.2009-\n10 may be considered as it covers all the issues alleged by the\nassessee in present appeals even on merits. The submissions of the\nLd. Sr. Counsel was acceptable to the Ld. DR.\nAccordingly, grounds pertaining to A.Y. 2009-10 raised by the\nassessee

ACIT CIRCLE 4.3.1, MUMBAI vs. JUST DIAL LTD, MUMBAI

disallowed\nthe deduction primarily on the basis that the expenditure incurred is capital\nin nature and therefore not allowable under section 37(1) of the Act. We find\nthat similar contentions of the Revenue were rejected by the Hon'ble\nKarnataka High Court in CIT v/s Biocon Ltd [2020] 121 taxmann.com 351\n(Karn.), wherein the Hon'ble High Court

MEHLI MEHTA MUSIC FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD-2(4), MUMBAI

disallowance for all the years under\nconsideration. The Ld. Sr. Counsel thus submitted that A.Y.2009-\n10 may be considered as it covers all the issues alleged by the\nassessee in present appeals even on merits. The submissions of the\nLd. Sr. Counsel was acceptable to the Ld. DR.\nAccordingly, grounds pertaining to A.Y. 2009-10 raised by the\nassessee

MEHLI MEHTA MUSIC FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-2(4), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment\nyear 2009-10 stands partly allowed and appeals for assessment\nyears 2014-15, 2016-17 and 2017-18 stands allowed

disallowance for all the years under\nconsideration. The Ld. Sr. Counsel thus submitted that A.Y.2009-\n10 may be considered as it covers all the issues alleged by the\nassessee in present appeals even on merits. The submissions of the\nLd. Sr. Counsel was acceptable to the Ld. DR.\nAccordingly, grounds pertaining to A.Y. 2009-10 raised by the\nassessee

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.631/मुं/2013 (िन.व. 2008-09) Tata Motors Limited Bombay House, 24,Homi Mody Street, Hutama Chowk, Mumbai – 400001. Pan: Aaact-2727-Q ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. The Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle -2(3), Mumbai. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ....."ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Shri J.D.Mistry, Sr.Advocate With Shri Nikhil Tiwari,Advocate "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Ms. Vatsala Jha, Cit-Dr & Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, Sr.Ar सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 10/11/2023 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 05/02/2024 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm:

disallowed assessee’s claim on the reasoning that FCCNs issued by the assessee are in the nature of convertible debentures, hence, expenditure related to issue of such debenture is capital in nature. However, it is observed that while deciding identical issue in assessee’s own case for assessment year 2005–06, in ITA no.3336/Mum /2011, dated 13th April

ACIT CIRCLE-2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S BOMBAY DYEING & MANUFACTURING CO. LTD. , MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S Bombay Dyeing & Income-Tax 2(1)(1), Mumbai, Manufacturing Co. Ltd Room No.561, 5Th Floor, Vs. Neville House, Jn Herdia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 M/S Bombay Dyeing & Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Manufacturing Co. Ltd Tax 2(1), Mumbai, Room Neville House, Jn Herdia No.561, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Vs Marg, Ballard Estate, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai-400 001 400 020 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent

disallowances and assessed total income under normal provisions of the Act at ₹354,42,01,379/ 354,42,01,379/- and computed book profit of ₹40,69,06,175/-. As the income determined under section 115JB . As the income determined under section 115JB . As the income determined under section 115JB

THE BOMBAY DYEING & MANUFACTURING COMPANY LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, C--2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S Bombay Dyeing & Income-Tax 2(1)(1), Mumbai, Manufacturing Co. Ltd Room No.561, 5Th Floor, Vs. Neville House, Jn Herdia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 M/S Bombay Dyeing & Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Manufacturing Co. Ltd Tax 2(1), Mumbai, Room Neville House, Jn Herdia No.561, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Vs Marg, Ballard Estate, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai-400 001 400 020 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent

disallowances and assessed total income under normal provisions of the Act at ₹354,42,01,379/ 354,42,01,379/- and computed book profit of ₹40,69,06,175/-. As the income determined under section 115JB . As the income determined under section 115JB . As the income determined under section 115JB

ACIT CIRCLE-2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S BOMBAY DYEING & MANUFACTURING CO. LTD. , MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S Bombay Dyeing & Income-Tax 2(1)(1), Mumbai, Manufacturing Co. Ltd Room No.561, 5Th Floor, Vs. Neville House, Jn Herdia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 M/S Bombay Dyeing & Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Manufacturing Co. Ltd Tax 2(1), Mumbai, Room Neville House, Jn Herdia No.561, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Vs Marg, Ballard Estate, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai-400 001 400 020 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent

disallowances and assessed total income under normal provisions of the Act at ₹354,42,01,379/ 354,42,01,379/- and computed book profit of ₹40,69,06,175/-. As the income determined under section 115JB . As the income determined under section 115JB . As the income determined under section 115JB

THE BOMBAY DYEING & MANUFACTURING COMPANY LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, C--2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S Bombay Dyeing & Income-Tax 2(1)(1), Mumbai, Manufacturing Co. Ltd Room No.561, 5Th Floor, Vs. Neville House, Jn Herdia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 M/S Bombay Dyeing & Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Manufacturing Co. Ltd Tax 2(1), Mumbai, Room Neville House, Jn Herdia No.561, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Vs Marg, Ballard Estate, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai-400 001 400 020 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent

disallowances and assessed total income under normal provisions of the Act at ₹354,42,01,379/ 354,42,01,379/- and computed book profit of ₹40,69,06,175/-. As the income determined under section 115JB . As the income determined under section 115JB . As the income determined under section 115JB

M/S SANOFI INDIA LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS AVENTIS PHARMA LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT RG 8(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

2 to 8). Copy of the order is placed on record. 68. On the other hand, Ld. DR has fairly accepted the submissions of the Ld.AR. 69. Considered the submissions and material placed on record, we observe from the record that identical issue is decided in favour of the assessee for the A.Y. 2002-03. While deciding the issue

ACIT- 3(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. MM/S SANOFI INDIA LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS AVENTIS PHARMA LTD)., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

2 to 8). Copy of the order is placed on record. 68. On the other hand, Ld. DR has fairly accepted the submissions of the Ld.AR. 69. Considered the submissions and material placed on record, we observe from the record that identical issue is decided in favour of the assessee for the A.Y. 2002-03. While deciding the issue

BENNET COLEMAN & CO.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly\nallowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the\nrevenue stands dismissed

256(1) which is accepted by the Revenue. Further,\nfor Assessment Years 1983-84 and 1984-85, the Assessing Officer by\nhis orders dated 4 March 1986 and 23 March 1987 accepted the value\nof the closing stock as per the LIFO method and the assessments were\ncompleted under Section 143(3). Those assessment orders have\nattained finality. For Assessment

VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS VODAFONE INDIA LTD. WHICH STANDS MERGED WITH IDEA CELLULAR LTD. AND CONSEQUENTLY KNOWN AS IDEA LTD.),MUMBAI vs. ACIT - CIRCLE- 5 (3)(2), MUMBAI

Appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

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

2,45,23,347 Total 39,27,36,605/- 3.1. On 28/12/2017, the Assessing Officer passed Draft Assessment Order under Section 143(3) read with Section 92CA read with Section 144C(1) of the Act incorporating the above transfer pricing adjustment. In addition the Assessing Officer also proposed other additions/disallowances as per the provisions of the Act. 3.2. The Appellant

DCIT (LTU) 2, MUMBAI vs. ASIAN PAINTS LTD, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

section 5(1) of the Act in the case of a resident, the total income, inter-alia, includes all income from whatever sources derived which accrues or arises to him outside India during the year. As per the assessee, it is entitled to receive the Royalty from its overseas subsidiaries @3% on the net sales price of products sold

ASIAN PAINTS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY. CIT LTU, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

section 5(1) of the Act in the case of a resident, the total income, inter-alia, includes all income from whatever sources derived which accrues or arises to him outside India during the year. As per the assessee, it is entitled to receive the Royalty from its overseas subsidiaries @3% on the net sales price of products sold

GETINGE MEDICAL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(2)(1), MUMBAI MAHARASHTRA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

256 and decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Sarla Holdings (Pvt.) (Ltd) vs. PCIT reported in (2025) 179 taxmann.com 83.The Ld.AR submitted that the ratio of Sarla Holdings(supra) is that the benefit of section 115BAA cannot be granted where the assessee has not exercised the option in the return within the time prescribed

EVEREST KANTO CYLINDER LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC BENGALURU, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Miss Padmavathy S.Everest Kanto Cylinder Ltd Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income- 204, Raheja Centre, Free Press Tax,Circle 3(4), Mumbai Journal Marg, Nariman Point World Trade Centre 1, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 005 Pan : Aaace30836F Appellant Respondent

disallowed by the AO (CPC) does not require any interference. Thus, the sum of Rs. 56,79,598/- is confirmed.” 8. The Ld.AR in argument and placed thatwhere the full value of theconsideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer of the asset togetherwith the full value of such consideration received or accruing as a result