DCIT - 14(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

disallowed by the Assessing Officer under section\n43B(f) of the Act.\nPage No. 49\n82. While scrutinizing the return of income, Assessing Officer noticed\nthat the assessee made provision for leave encashment based on\nactuarial valuation of ₹.222.78 crores. It was claimed by the assessee\nrelying on the decision of the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court in the case

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, , KALYAN vs. M/S ASB INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandip Singh Karhaildcit, C-1,Kalyan Vs. M/S. Asb International 1St Floor, Mohan Plaza, Pvt. Ltd. Mayale Naar, E9, E44, Addl. Kalyan(W)- 421301 Ambernath, Industrial Area, Anand Nagar, Ambernath Thane-421506 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaaca8424F Appellant .. Respondent C.O. No. 65/Mum/2023 (A.Y. 2009-10)

32A. Clause (ii) of sub section (2) of section 33 and sub-section (4) of section 35 of the Act or the second proviso to clause (ix) of sub-section (1) of section 36 shall not be applicable in relation to any such allowance or deduction. Similarly, no loss as referred to in sub-section (1) or in section

NUCLEAR POWER CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT LTU, MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purpose

disallow deduction under section 32AC of the Act in respect of new assets acquired and installed during the FY 2013-14 with invoice date before 1st April 2013. 5. The learned CIT erred in directing the AO to initiate penalty under section 271(l)(c) of the Act mechanically, without giving any opportunity to the appellant to make any submission

M/S. BANK OF AMERICAN , N.A,MUMBAI vs. THE JT DIT (I.T)3, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

32A or section 33 or section 33A or the first proviso to clause\n(ix) of sub-section (1) of section 36 or any loss carried forward under sub-\nsection (1) of section 72 or sub-section (2) of section 73 or sub-section\n(1) 55 [or sub-section (3)] of section 74 or sub-section (3) of section

THE DY DIT (I.T) 1(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. BANK OF AMERICA N.A., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

32A or section 33 or section 33A or the first proviso to clause\n(ix) of sub-section (1) of section 36 or any loss carried forward under sub-\nsection (1) of section 72 or sub-section (2) of section 73 or sub-section\n(1) 55 [or sub-section (3)] of section 74 or sub-section (3) of section

STRIDES ARCOLAB LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ASST CIR 10(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Strides Shasun Limited The Asst. Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Strides Income Tax Circle 10(3), Arcolab Limited) 201, Mumbai Vs. Devavrata, Sector 17, Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400 703 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aadcs8104P

disallowed.” 4. The DRP also rejected the objection of the assessee vide Para 3.3. and 3.3.1 as under: - “3.3 We have considered the draft assessment order and the assessee's submissions. As we see, the assessee has sought to establish that the preparation of the dossier tantamount to production of article or thing in terms of Section

HELLIOS EXPORTS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(2), MUMBAI

disallowance u/s 32 and 32A in the\ncase of Shrivallabh Pittie Southwest Industries,\nShrivallabh Pittie Industries Limited and SVP Global\nLimited in AY 2017-18 and AY 2018-19.\n1. In the case of Platinum Textiles Limited, Shrivallabh\nPittie Industries Limited, and SVP Global Textiles\nPage | 23\nITA No.1275/Mum/2022\nSVP southwest Industries Ltd; A.Y. 16-17 & Ors\nLimited

INCOME TAX OFFICER 41(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. AJJAY AGARWAL (HUF), MUMBAI

In the result, ITA No.4295/Mum/2023 of revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Gagan Goyal

disallowances taking up frivolous issues. 54. we therefore, hold that the report of DI (Inv) has to be ignored as being illegal. 55. This also become infructuous, because, we have in any case based our decision on the facts emerging from the orders of the revenue authorities and other evidences, had written submissions before the CIT (A) cited case laws

HELIOS MERCANTILE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6(1), MUMBAI

disallowance u/s 32 and 32A in the\ncase of Shrivallabh Pittie Southwest Industries,\nShrivallabh Pittie Industries Limited and SVP Global\nLimited in AY 2017-18 and AY 2018-19.\n1. In the case of Platinum Textiles Limited, Shrivallabh\nPittie Industries Limited, and SVP Global Textiles\nLimited, for AY 2017-18, returned loss has been set off\nagainst additions

SAF YEAST COMPANY P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 40, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am

32A can be used to explain the term power as used in Section 80IA(4)(iv) of the Act. Therefore, it is clear that the term power used in Section 80IA(4)(iv) of the Act is not only restricted to generation of electricity but for generation of any form of power. For the use of internal aid, the assessee

DCIT CEN CIR 40, MUMBAI vs. SAF YEAST CO. P. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am

32A can be used to explain the term power as used in Section 80IA(4)(iv) of the Act. Therefore, it is clear that the term power used in Section 80IA(4)(iv) of the Act is not only restricted to generation of electricity but for generation of any form of power. For the use of internal aid, the assessee

SAF YEAST COMPANY P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 40, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am

32A can be used to explain the term power as used in Section 80IA(4)(iv) of the Act. Therefore, it is clear that the term power used in Section 80IA(4)(iv) of the Act is not only restricted to generation of electricity but for generation of any form of power. For the use of internal aid, the assessee

DCIT CEN CIR 40, MUMBAI vs. SAF YEAST CO. P. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am

32A can be used to explain the term power as used in Section 80IA(4)(iv) of the Act. Therefore, it is clear that the term power used in Section 80IA(4)(iv) of the Act is not only restricted to generation of electricity but for generation of any form of power. For the use of internal aid, the assessee

SAF YEAST COMPANY P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 40, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am

32A can be used to explain the term power as used in Section 80IA(4)(iv) of the Act. Therefore, it is clear that the term power used in Section 80IA(4)(iv) of the Act is not only restricted to generation of electricity but for generation of any form of power. For the use of internal aid, the assessee

SAF YEAST COMPANY P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 40, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am

32A can be used to explain the term power as used in Section 80IA(4)(iv) of the Act. Therefore, it is clear that the term power used in Section 80IA(4)(iv) of the Act is not only restricted to generation of electricity but for generation of any form of power. For the use of internal aid, the assessee

DCIT CEN CIR 40, MUMBAI vs. SAF YEAST CO. P. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed and the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am

32A can be used to explain the term power as used in Section 80IA(4)(iv) of the Act. Therefore, it is clear that the term power used in Section 80IA(4)(iv) of the Act is not only restricted to generation of electricity but for generation of any form of power. For the use of internal aid, the assessee

TOLANI SHIPPING CO. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT,CIR-5(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal by the assessee for A

32A, 32AB, 33 and 33A. As nothing is mentioned in section 33AC about the ownership of ships, the Legislature was not intending to make the ownership of ship a precondition at the threshold level for claiming deduction under section 33AC. Even in the circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, namely, Circular No. 554 of February

ROCKLINE DEVELOPERS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 9(3)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, ground “A” raised in the appeal by the assessee stands dismissed

disallow the claim of the appellant that book profit is to be reduced by claim of deduction u/s. 80IB(l0). The law u/s. 115JB is very clear that where in the case of an assessee being a company, the income tax payable on total income as computed under this Act in respect of any previous year relevant to assessment year