GREAVES COTTON LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 6(3), MUMBAI

In the result this ground of appeal

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhgreaves Cotton Ltd. Acit Circle-6(3), Industry Manor, Appasaheb Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Marathe Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400025. Pan: Aaacg2062M Appellant Respondent Greaves Cotton Ltd. Acit Circle-6(3), Industry Manor, Appasaheb Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Marathe Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400025. Pan: Aaacg2062M Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Smt. Arati Vissanji (Advocate) Respondent By : Shri Abbi Rama Karthikey (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 04.06.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.06.2019 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act

disallowance under section 40A(9). We have noted that this ground of appeal is identical to the ground no. G of appeal for A.Y. 2006-07, which we have dismissed by following the order for A.Y. 2004-05, 19 ITA No. 7424 Mum 2010 & 8533 Mum 2011-Greaves Cotton Ltd. therefore, following the principle of consistency, this ground of appeal

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

36. The expression "fees for technical services" has been defined in Explanation (2) of Section 9(1)(vii) of the Income Tax Act to mean any consideration (including any lumpsum consideration) for the rendering of any managerial, technical or consultancy services (including the provision of services of technical or other personal) but does not include consideration for any I.T.A. No.1774/Mum/2013

DCIT 8(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. SHAMROCK PHARMACHEMI P. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, both appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M.Balaganeshita Nos. 862 & 863/Mum/2018 (Assessment Years :2013-14 & 2014-15) Dcit-8(2)(1) Vs. M/S. Shamrock Pharmachemi Room No.624, Pvt.Ltd. Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road Off Dr. E Moses Road Mumbai-400 020 Worli, Mumbai-400 025 Pan/Gir No.Aaacs6290H (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Bharat Gandhi, Ar Revenue By Shri V.Vinod Kumar, Sr.Ar Date Of Hearing 28/10/2020 Date Of Pronouncement 11/11/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per M. Balaganesh (A.M): These Two Appeals Filed By Revenue In Ita Nos. 862 & 863/Mum/2018 For Assessment Years (Ay) 2013-14 & 2014-15 Arise Out Of The Order By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 14, Mumbai In Appeals No.Cit(A)-14/It-170/15-16 & Cit(A)-14/It- 119/16-17, Dated 27/11/2017 (Ld. Cit(A) In Short) Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As Act) Dated 31/08/2016 By The Ld. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-8(2)(1), Mumbai (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. Ao).

36. The expression "fees for technical services" has been defined in Explanation (2) of Section 9(1)(vii) of the Income Tax Act to mean any consideration (including any lumpsum consideration) for the rendering of any managerial, technical or consultancy services (including the provision of services of technical or other personal) but does not include consideration for any construction, assembly

M/S LASA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (23)(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita Nos.4713 & 4714/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15 ) M/S Lasa Acit 23(2) 43, Lydia, Hill Road, Vs. Matru Mandir, Grant Road, Opp. Elco Market, Mumbai – 400 007 Bandra (West), Mumbai – 400 050 Pan No. Aacfl6401E (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Gosalia, A.R Revenue By : Shri Brajendra Kumar, Sr. D.R Date Of Hearing : 23/08/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/09/2021 Order Per Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeals Filed By The Assessee Firm Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Cit(A)-48, Mumbai, Dated 31.05.2019, Which In Turn Arises From The Respective Orders Passed By The A.O Under Sec. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short „Act‟) For A.Y.2012-13 & A.Y. 2014-15. As Common Issues Are Involved In The Captioned Appeals, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Off By Way Of A Consolidated Order. We Shall First Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee For A.Y. 2012-13. The Assessee Has Assailed The Impugned Order On The Following Grounds (As Thereafter Amended Vide Letter Dated 05.08.2021) As Under :

36(1)(iii) of Rs.6,58,237/- made by the A.O, which thereafter had rightly been sustained by the CIT(A). The Ground of appeal No. 1 is dismissed. 10. We shall now take up the grievance of the assessee that the CIT(A) had erred in confirming the disallowance of the entire amount of interest expenditure of Rs.62

M/S LASA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (23)(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita Nos.4713 & 4714/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15 ) M/S Lasa Acit 23(2) 43, Lydia, Hill Road, Vs. Matru Mandir, Grant Road, Opp. Elco Market, Mumbai – 400 007 Bandra (West), Mumbai – 400 050 Pan No. Aacfl6401E (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Gosalia, A.R Revenue By : Shri Brajendra Kumar, Sr. D.R Date Of Hearing : 23/08/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/09/2021 Order Per Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeals Filed By The Assessee Firm Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Cit(A)-48, Mumbai, Dated 31.05.2019, Which In Turn Arises From The Respective Orders Passed By The A.O Under Sec. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short „Act‟) For A.Y.2012-13 & A.Y. 2014-15. As Common Issues Are Involved In The Captioned Appeals, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Off By Way Of A Consolidated Order. We Shall First Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee For A.Y. 2012-13. The Assessee Has Assailed The Impugned Order On The Following Grounds (As Thereafter Amended Vide Letter Dated 05.08.2021) As Under :

36(1)(iii) of Rs.6,58,237/- made by the A.O, which thereafter had rightly been sustained by the CIT(A). The Ground of appeal No. 1 is dismissed. 10. We shall now take up the grievance of the assessee that the CIT(A) had erred in confirming the disallowance of the entire amount of interest expenditure of Rs.62

ACIT-1(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD., DELHI

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

disallowable item and added back to its profit before tax for computing total income in the earlier years. In the year under consideration, balance in the lease equalisation account is a credit balance at the year end. For this credit balance, assessee reduced the same from the profits while computing total income for the year. However, ld. Assessing Officer denied

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT 1(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 36(1)(viii). VIII. Disallowance of entrance fees and subscriptions paid to clubs. IX. Exemption u/s. 54EC in respect of capital gains arising on depreciable assets. X. Disallowance of FCCB issue expenses. XI. Set-off of short-term capital loss. XII. Income from India Value Fund. 11 HDFC Bank Ltd. ITA No.4315/MUM/2007

ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI vs. HDFC LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 36(1)(viii). VIII. Disallowance of entrance fees and subscriptions paid to clubs. IX. Exemption u/s. 54EC in respect of capital gains arising on depreciable assets. X. Disallowance of FCCB issue expenses. XI. Set-off of short-term capital loss. XII. Income from India Value Fund. 11 HDFC Bank Ltd. ITA No.4315/MUM/2007

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 36(1)(viii). VIII. Disallowance of entrance fees and subscriptions paid to clubs. IX. Exemption u/s. 54EC in respect of capital gains arising on depreciable assets. X. Disallowance of FCCB issue expenses. XI. Set-off of short-term capital loss. XII. Income from India Value Fund. 11 HDFC Bank Ltd. ITA No.4315/MUM/2007

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 36(1)(viii). VIII. Disallowance of entrance fees and subscriptions paid to clubs. IX. Exemption u/s. 54EC in respect of capital gains arising on depreciable assets. X. Disallowance of FCCB issue expenses. XI. Set-off of short-term capital loss. XII. Income from India Value Fund. 11 HDFC Bank Ltd. ITA No.4315/MUM/2007

PATEL ENGINEERING LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC-3(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, except for one ground no

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

XVII of the Act and no TDS was allowable to be deducted. Accordingly, the order of the ld. CIT M/s. Patel Engineering Limited (A) is confirmed and the grounds raised by the Revenue in both the years are dismissed. ITA NOs.2801/Mum/2024 & 3063/Mum/2024 19. These are the cross appeals filed by the assessee as well as by the Revenue against order

M/S. STANDARD CHARTERED BANK,MUMBAI vs. THE DIT (I.T), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blestandard Chartered Bank V. The Director Of Income-Tax (It) 3Rd Floor, Tax Department 1St Floor, Scindia House 23-25, M.G. Road, Fort N.M. Road Ballard Pier Mumbai - 400001 Mumbai - 400038 Pan: Aabcs4681D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri P.J. Pardiwala & Shri Fenil Bhatt Department Represented By : Shri. Soumendu Kumar Dash

36. Coming to the Ground No. 3 which is relating to payment made to visa and master card. We observe that Ld. DIT observed from the record that assessee has not made the payments to visa and Master card and failed to deduct TDS for the fourth quarter. Therefore, it is disallowable

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD.),MUMBAI vs. DCIT, RANGE-1(1)(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 36(1)(viii). VIII. Disallowance of entrance fees and subscriptions paid to clubs. IX. Exemption u/s.54EC in respect of capital gains arising on depreciable assets. X. Disallowance of FCCB issue expenses. XI. Set-off of short-term capital loss. XII. Income from India Value Fund. XIII. Addition on account of receipts as per the ITS details not found recorded

ACIT-2(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. HDFC BANK LTD ( MERGED ENTITY HDFC INVESTMENTS LIMITED ), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

Disallowance of FCCB issue expenses. 18. This issue arises in the following appeals: Assessment year Ground No. in Assessee's appeal Ground No. in Revenue's appeal 2007-08 3 - 18. 1. During the relevant year, assessee had incurred expenses of Rs.8,66,200/- in connection with issue of Foreign Currency Convertible Bonds (FCCB) for which deduction was claimed

NERKA CHEMICALS P. LTD,GUJRAT vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 38, MUMBAI

In the result this ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Accountant Mamber & Shri Pawan Singh

36. Now we shall proceed to discuss Ground No.2 relates to validity of taxability of gifted shares to Assessee Company, under various sections of Income-tax Act. We have considered the rival submissions of the ld Counsels of the parties. We have also deliberated on various judicial pronouncement referred by the lower authorities in their orders as well as various

ACIT-1(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 36(1)(viii) w.e.f. 01.04.1998 whereby assessee alongwith creation of reserve was also required to maintain the said reserve. A corresponding amendment was also brought to section 41(4A) which reads as under: “41(4A). where a deduction has been allowed in respect of any special reserve created and maintained under clause (viii) of sub-section (1) of Section

RISHABH METALS AND CHEMICALS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. CPC, DCIT -CIR 1(3)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singhrishabh Metals & Vs. Dcit, Circle- 1(3)(1) Chemicals Pvt Ltd, Aayakar Bhavan, 4Th Floor, Eros Theater Mk Road, Bldg, J.T.Road, Mumbai-400020. Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacr2214E Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Pankaj Kumar.Dr Date Of Hearing 23.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 27.06.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Cit(A)- National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), New Delhi Passed U/S 143(1) & 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal.

XVII-B which is not a permissible adjustment under section 143(1) of the Act. 3. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the assessee has made the payment on account of the salary to its employees who are Non Resident Indians and not Citizens of India for the services rendered outside India. Thus, the provisions of section

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 36(1)(viii). VIII. Disallowance of entrance fees and subscriptions paid to clubs. IX. Exemption u/s.54EC in respect of capital gains arising on depreciable assets. X. Disallowance of FCCB issue expenses. XI. Set-off of short-term capital loss. XII. Income from India Value Fund. 11 HDFC Bank Ltd. ITA No.4315/MUM/2007