ABBOTT HEALTHCARE PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, Ground No. 3 with its Sub-Grounds is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Gagan Goyalabbott Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. 3, Corporate Park, Sion Trombay Road, Mumbai - 400 071 Pan: Aaack3935D ..... Appellant Vs. Acit 2(1) (1) R. No. 561, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Marg, Mumbai- 400 020 ..... Respondent & Acit 2(1) (1) R. No. 561, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Marg, Mumbai- 400 020 ...... Appellant Vs.

iii) disallowance of loss claimed, if return of the previous year for which set off of loss is claimed was furnished beyond the due date specified under sub-section (1) of section 139; (iv) disallowance of expenditure indicated in the audit report but not taken into account in computing the total income in the return; (v) disallowance of deduction claimed

APL LOGISTICS (INDIA) P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 10(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

6. We have heard the submissions made by rival sides and have examined the orders of authorities below. The assessee in appeal has raised primarily two grounds with sub-grounds. These exhaustive grounds of appeal deal with only two issues i.e. & 2917 M 15- APL Logistics (India) Pvt. Ltd. (1) Disallowance of interest expenditure under section 36(1)(iii

DCIT 10(1), MUMBAI vs. APL LOGISTICS (INDIA) P. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

6. We have heard the submissions made by rival sides and have examined the orders of authorities below. The assessee in appeal has raised primarily two grounds with sub-grounds. These exhaustive grounds of appeal deal with only two issues i.e. & 2917 M 15- APL Logistics (India) Pvt. Ltd. (1) Disallowance of interest expenditure under section 36(1)(iii

APL LOGISTICS (INDIA) P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 10(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

6. We have heard the submissions made by rival sides and have examined the orders of authorities below. The assessee in appeal has raised primarily two grounds with sub-grounds. These exhaustive grounds of appeal deal with only two issues i.e. & 2917 M 15- APL Logistics (India) Pvt. Ltd. (1) Disallowance of interest expenditure under section 36(1)(iii

DCIT 10(1), MUMBAI vs. APL LOGISTICS (INDIA ) P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

6. We have heard the submissions made by rival sides and have examined the orders of authorities below. The assessee in appeal has raised primarily two grounds with sub-grounds. These exhaustive grounds of appeal deal with only two issues i.e. & 2917 M 15- APL Logistics (India) Pvt. Ltd. (1) Disallowance of interest expenditure under section 36(1)(iii

APL LOGISTICS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 14(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

6. We have heard the submissions made by rival sides and have examined the orders of authorities below. The assessee in appeal has raised primarily two grounds with sub-grounds. These exhaustive grounds of appeal deal with only two issues i.e. & 2917 M 15- APL Logistics (India) Pvt. Ltd. (1) Disallowance of interest expenditure under section 36(1)(iii

APL LOGISTICS (INDIA) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 10(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

6. We have heard the submissions made by rival sides and have examined the orders of authorities below. The assessee in appeal has raised primarily two grounds with sub-grounds. These exhaustive grounds of appeal deal with only two issues i.e. & 2917 M 15- APL Logistics (India) Pvt. Ltd. (1) Disallowance of interest expenditure under section 36(1)(iii

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)

Disallowances. Keeping in mind the said scheme the position is that sections 30 to 38 are deductions which are limited by section 40. Therefore, even if an assessee is entitled to deduction under section 36(1)(iii), the assessee (firm) will not be entitled to claim deduction for interest payment exceeding 18/12 per cent per se. This is because section

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)

Disallowances. Keeping in mind the said scheme the position is that sections 30 to 38 are deductions which are limited by section 40. Therefore, even if an assessee is entitled to deduction under section 36(1)(iii), the assessee (firm) will not be entitled to claim deduction for interest payment exceeding 18/12 per cent per se. This is because section

M/S. TATA INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ITO 2(3)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Accoutant Member & Shri Sanjay Gargtata Industries Ltd., Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- Bombay House,24,Homi 2 (3) (3), Room No.555, Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi 400 001 Karve Road, Mumbai 400 020 Pan: Aaact 4058 L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By Shri Dinesh Vyas, Ar Respondent By Shri Alok Johri, Dr Date Of Hearing 22-06-2016 Date Of Pronouncement 20-07-2016

1 to apply • rule 8D of the Rules for computing the amount of disallowance under section 14A of the Act.” The assessee has, in addition, filed a Petition under Article 226 of the • Constitution in order to challenge the constitutional validity of the provisions of section 14A and of rule 8D Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court held that “Section

BRILLPHARMA PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CPC,BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

iii) disallowance of loss claimed, if return of the previous year for which set off of loss is claimed was furnished beyond the due date specified under sub-section (1) of section 139; (iv) disallowance of expenditure indicated in the audit report but not taken into account in computing the total income in the return; (v) disallowance of deduction claimed

KETAN BROTHERS DIAMONDS EXPORTS ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 23(2) /ACIT 23(1) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

iii) disallowance of loss claimed, if return of the previous year for which set off of loss is claimed was furnished beyond the due date specified under sub-section (1) of Ketan Brothers Diamondz Exports ITA No. 1627/Mum./2021 section 139; (iv) disallowance of expenditure indicated in the audit report but not taken into account in computing the total income

STATE BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, as indicated above

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri G Manjunatha, Am आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 3644/Mum/2016 (ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2008-09) State Bank Of India The Dy. Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Corporate Centre Income Tax, Circle -2(2)(1) बनाम/ Madam Cama Road Mumbai Vs. Nariman Point Mumbai-400021 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aaacs8577K

6. The AO, after discussing provisions of Sections 36(1)(iv), 36(1)(v), 40A(7) and 40(9) of the Act, noted that since these specific provisions are applicable for allowability of the above noted expenditure and expenditure of similar nature, they cannot be allowed under the general provisions of section 37(1) of the Act. The AO further

M/S. SUPER TILES & MARBLES PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. NFAC, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Income Tax Returns U/S.139(1) Of The Act, Could Be Subject Matter Of Adjustment U/S.143(1)(A) Of The Act By The Central Processing Centre (Cpc).

iii) disallowance of loss claimed, if return of the previous year for which set off of loss is claimed was furnished beyond the due date specified under sub-section (1) of section 139; (iv) disallowance of expenditure indicated in the audit report but not taken into account in computing the total income in the return; (v) disallowance of deduction claimed

M/S PAPER RECYCLE ,MUMBAI vs. CIT (APPEAL) , DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Income Tax Returns U/S.139(1) Of The Act, Could Be Subject Matter Of Adjustment U/S.143(1)(A) Of The Act By The Central Processing Centre (Cpc).

6 M/s. Paper Recycle permissible types of adjustments, denying a deduction, under section 143(1)(a) which goes well beyond such adjustments and includes the cases such as "(iii) disallowance

SWAROOPSINGH BHADURSINGH RATHORE,THANE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CPC, BANGLORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Income Tax Returns U/S.139(1) Of The Act, Could Be Subject Matter Of Adjustment U/S.143(1)(A) Of The Act By The Central Processing Centre (Cpc).

disallowed only when such a deduction was "on the basis of information available in such return, accounts or documents is prima facie inadmissible" [see Section 143(1)(a)(iii) as it then stood] and it was in this context that the connotations of the expression "prima facie inadmissible" came up for 6

SWAROOPSING BHADURSINGH RATHORE,THANE vs. ASSTT.DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGLORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Income Tax Returns U/S.139(1) Of The Act, Could Be Subject Matter Of Adjustment U/S.143(1)(A) Of The Act By The Central Processing Centre (Cpc).

disallowed only when such a deduction was "on the basis of information available in such return, accounts or documents is prima facie inadmissible" [see Section 143(1)(a)(iii) as it then stood] and it was in this context that the connotations of the expression "prima facie inadmissible" came up for 6

DUCK CREEK TECHNOLOGIES INDIA LLP,MUMBAI vs. ACIT- CIRCLE 26 (1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

iii) disallowance of loss claimed, if return of the previous year for which set off of loss is claimed was furnished beyond the due date specified under sub-section (1) of section 139; (iv) disallowance of expenditure indicated in the audit report but not taken into account in computing the total income in the return; (v) disallowance of deduction claimed