PAHILAJRAI JAIKISHAN,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 19(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1562/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

43C essentially deal with Business Income. Sections 30 to 38 deal with Deductions. Sections 40A and 43B deal with Business Disallowances

ASST CIT 19(3), MUMBAI vs. PAHILAJRAI JAIKISHIN, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1562/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

43C essentially deal with Business Income. Sections 30 to 38 deal with Deductions. Sections 40A and 43B deal with Business Disallowances

THE GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 5(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm The Great Eastern Shipping Co. The Dy. Commissioner Of Ltd. Income-Tax, Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Llp Range-5(3), Esplanade House, 2 Nd Floor, Vs. Room No.525B, 5Th Floor, M.K. Marg, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaact1565C The Dy. Commissioner Of The Great Eastern Shipping Income-Tax, Co. Ltd. Range-5(3), Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Llp Vs. Esplanade House, 2 Nd Floor, Room No.525B, 5Th Floor, M.K. Marg, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Mumbai-400 020 Fort, Mumbai-400 001 (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 28 to 43C. It, therefore, follows that when the income of the assessee from the business of operating ships is computed as per the special provisions contained in Chapter XIIG, only the expenses incurred by the assessee for earning income of the said business are deemed to be allowed and nothing else. It, therefore, cannot be said that when

DCIT 5(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. THE GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm The Great Eastern Shipping Co. The Dy. Commissioner Of Ltd. Income-Tax, Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Llp Range-5(3), Esplanade House, 2 Nd Floor, Vs. Room No.525B, 5Th Floor, M.K. Marg, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaact1565C The Dy. Commissioner Of The Great Eastern Shipping Income-Tax, Co. Ltd. Range-5(3), Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Llp Vs. Esplanade House, 2 Nd Floor, Room No.525B, 5Th Floor, M.K. Marg, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Mumbai-400 020 Fort, Mumbai-400 001 (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 28 to 43C. It, therefore, follows that when the income of the assessee from the business of operating ships is computed as per the special provisions contained in Chapter XIIG, only the expenses incurred by the assessee for earning income of the said business are deemed to be allowed and nothing else. It, therefore, cannot be said that when

THE GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO.,MUMBAI vs. ADDL.C.I.T. RG.5(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

disallowance under section 14A of the Act has to be disregarded in line with the decision of Special Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd. (supra). 10.6. Consequently, ground of appeal No.2 to 9 of the appeal are allowed for statistical purpose. Additional ground No.1 and 3 are allowed. Additional ground No.2 is dismissed

ESSAR PORTS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-6(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhessar Ports Ltd. Acit-6(2)(2), Essar House, 11, Keshavrao Room No. 563 (C), Vs. Khadye Marg, Mahalaxmi, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400034. M.K. Road, Pan: Aaace8391D Mumbai-400020 Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Vijay Mehta & Anuj Kisnadwala Ar’S Respondent By : Shri Mukundraj Chate Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.06.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.06.2019 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act

disallowance under section 14A is warranted in this case when the assessee has admittedly not claimed any expenditure, towards taxable income i.e, it has not claimed any deduction of expenditure debited in the Profit & Loss account while computing the total income. 11. Further, the co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in the case of CGU Logistics Ltd (supra) while dealing

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE- 3(4) MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. THE SHIPPING CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singhshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

43C of the Act. For the year under consideration, the assessee filed its return of income on ITAs No.1751 & 1971/Mum/2024 (A.Ys. 2018-19) 3 28/11/2018 declaring a total income of Rs.161,55,42,230. The return of income was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS and statutory notices under section 143(2) and section 142(1) were issued and served

THE SHIPPING CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ADDL.C.I.T. LTU, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Disallowance of expenses: 4.1 On the facts and circumstances of the case and as per provisions of law, interest income of Rs. 227.68 crore and dividend income Rs. 1.92 crore constituted profits from core activities and therefore could not be assessed to tax. 4.2 In the alternative and without prejudice to the above, assuming without admitting that interest and dividend

ADDL CIT LTU, MUMBAI vs. THE SHIPPING CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Disallowance of expenses: 4.1 On the facts and circumstances of the case and as per provisions of law, interest income of Rs. 227.68 crore and dividend income Rs. 1.92 crore constituted profits from core activities and therefore could not be assessed to tax. 4.2 In the alternative and without prejudice to the above, assuming without admitting that interest and dividend

VAN OORD INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 5(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as above

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year : 2007-08

disallowance under section 14A is warranted in this case when the assessee has admittedly not claimed any expenditure, towards taxable income i.e, it has not claimed any deduction of expenditure debited in the Profit & Loss account while computing the total income. 11. Further, the co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in the case of CGU Logistics Ltd(supra) while dealing

TATA CONSULTANCY SERVICES LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX 3(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of both, revenue and assessee are partly allowed for all the three assessment years

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 37(1), thereby accepting the submission that the brand is not owned by the assessee. The Id AR further presented same line of arguments to submit that the TPO is not correct in making any TP adjustment towards the notional fees on the brand that is not owned by the assessee, which the TPO held as to be received

ACIT CIRCLE 5(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S ESSAR SHIPPING LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned AO is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Jm M/S Essar Shipping Limited Acit, Circle 5(1)(1) Essar House, 11, R.No.568, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Kk Marg, Mahalaxmi, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 034 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacce3707D

disallowance under section 14A is warranted in M/s Essar Shipping Limited; A.Y. 2012-13 this case when the assessee has admittedly not claimed any expenditure, towards taxable income i.e. it has not claimed any deduction of expenditure debited in the Profit & Loss account while computing the total income. 11. Further, the co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in the case

THE SHIPPING CORPORATION OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DY COMM OF INCOME TAX-3(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

43C of the Act. For the\nyear under consideration, the assessee filed its return of income on\n28/11/2018 declaring a total income of Rs.161,55,42,230. The return of\nincome was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS and statutory notices\nunder section 143(2) and section 142(1) were issued and served on the\nassessee. The Assessing Officer

KJMC CAPITAL MARKET SERVICES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 4(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal and cross objections of the assessee are allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2008-09

43C." These sections include, inter alia, deduction of depreciation under section 32 and deduction regarding expenditure on scientific research in the manner set out in section 34. Therefore, the deductions which the Supreme Court was concerned with, were the deductions which were within the scheme of Chapter IV, to be taken into account while computing the income under section

ACIT - 3(4), MUMBAI vs. THE SHIPPING CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the\nappeal of the revenue is dismissed

43C, when there is no other activity or business carried on by\nthe company, other than business of operating qualifying ships. In view of the\nabove discussion, we allow ground no.1 of the assessee.”\n11. There is nothing before us on hand to differ from the issues raised\nin the cases cited supra so as to take a different view

M/S ESSAR SHIPPING LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 5(1)(1) , MUMBAI

In the result, ground no. 5 raised by the assessee is dismissed

disallowance in respect of vessel\nMV Maithili and MV Mannika for the impugned year amounting to Rs.51,46,215/-.\nThe assessee's contention that the ships are qualifying asset for which no adjustment\nought to have been made for the reason that the assessee has offered the income under\ntonnage tax scheme and the same was reiterated by the coordinate

ACIT-5(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. ESSAR SHIPPING LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed partly for In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed partly for In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed partly for statisti...

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Acit Circle 5(1)(1), M/S Essar Shipping Ltd., R. No. 568, Aayakar Bhavan, Essar House, 11, K K Marg, Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. Mahalaxmi, Mumbai-400034. Pan No. Aacce 3707 D Appellant Respondent

disallowance u/s 14A of the Act . The Ld. CIT(A) shall decide the issue in dispute in accordance with law shall decide the issue in dispute in accordance with law shall decide the issue in dispute in accordance with law after allowing adequate opportunity of allowing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The being heard to the assessee

KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-3(2)(2), ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPT, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

43C(6)(c)\napply where the capital assets enters a block of asset as in case of the\nassessee. Thus, as per the section what is required to be reduced is money\npayable in respect of asset sold, discarded, demolished and\ndestroyed.There is no provisions in section 43(6) to state that if value as\nperstamp duty is higher than

DCIT-2(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD, MUMBAI

43C(6)(c)\napply where the capital assets enters a block of asset as in case of the\nassessee. Thus, as per the section what is required to be reduced is money\nPage 11\nITA No. 3754/Mum/2023& ITA No. 4103/Mum/2023\nA.Y. 2019-20\nKotak Mahindra Bank Limited\npayable in respect of asset sold, discarded, demolished and\ndestroyed.There is no provisions