DCIT-1(2)1, MUMBAI., MUMBAI vs. PATIL CONSTRUCTION AND INFRASTRUCTURE LTD, MUMBAI

In the result In the result, all the three appeals filed by the revenue s filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon’Ble & Ms. Padmavathy S., Hon’Ble

801A stipulates stipulates stipulates development development development or or or maintenance of infrastructure facility." maintenance of infrastructure facility." 5. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case 5. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case 5. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld.CIT

GRASIM INDUSTRIES LIMITED (AS A SUCCESSOR TO ADITYA BIRLA NUVO LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT LTU, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

10. We heard the DR. The facts for year under consideration being similar, in our considered view the issue is covered by the above decision of the coordinate bench. Accordingly we direct the AO to delete the adjustment made to book profits under section 115JB towards disallowance under section 14A. Deduction under section 80IA of the Act – Ground No.3

ASST CIT (LTU) 1, MUMBAI vs. GRASIM INDUSTRIES LIMITED (AS A SUCCESSOR TO ADITYA BIRLA NUVO LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

10. We heard the DR. The facts for year under consideration being similar, in our considered view the issue is covered by the above decision of the coordinate bench. Accordingly we direct the AO to delete the adjustment made to book profits under section 115JB towards disallowance under section 14A. Deduction under section 80IA of the Act – Ground No.3

SJR COMMODITIES AND CONSULTANCIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-8(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, second issue raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sandeep Gosainआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4548/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12)

section 801A(8) and 801A(10). After considering the submissions of the appellant the AO was not convinced with the extraordinary profits of SEZ units vis-â-vis meagre profit/loss of non- SEZ units. The AO also observed that huge administrative and other expenses were claimed by the appellant against the income of non-SEZ unit as compared to meagre

ACIT -3(4) , MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vice Preside & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

disallowance of interest payment when thin capitalization rule is not in force, which is in no way connected to the facts and issue of the instant case? - (Included in 7) 7.3 Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is correct in deleting the of capital loss by stating that General Anti

RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ASSTT. CIT-CC-3(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vice Preside & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

disallowance of interest payment when thin capitalization rule is not in force, which is in no way connected to the facts and issue of the instant case? - (Included in 7) 7.3 Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is correct in deleting the of capital loss by stating that General Anti

ASST CIT 15(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. ZYDUS NYCOMED HEALTHCARE P. LTD, NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.3336/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2009-10) Acit 15(3)(1) बिधम/ M/S. Zydus Nycomed Room No.451, 4Th Floor, Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. Vs. C-4 Mid, Vill. Pawane, Aaykar Bhavan, Maharshi Thane Belapur Road, Vashi, Karve Road, Mumbai- Navi Mumbai-400705. 400020. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.4670/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2011-12) बिधम/ Dcit-15(3)(1) M/S. Zydus Nycomed Room No. 451, 4Th Floor, Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. Vs. C-4 Mid, Vill. Pawane, Aayakar Bhavan,Maharshi Thane Belapur Road, Vashi, Karve Road, Mumbai- Navi Mumbai-400705. 400020. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacz0736D (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Manjunatha Swamy (Dr) Assessee By: Shri B. V. Jhaveri (Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01/08/2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/08/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Jm): The Revenue Has Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Different Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-24, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Ys. 2009- 10 & 2011-12. I.T.A. Nos.3336/Mum/2016 4670/Mum/2016 A.Y. 2009-10 & 2011-12

10) of section 801A. Therefore, after giving due weightage of 20% to 25% higher range than the prevailing market price as per enquiries conducted, Ld. AG adopted the market price of sale of KSM-6 at Rs.3,000/- and KSM-14 at Rs.5,200/- per kg and thereby disallowed

VODAFONE INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 8(3)(2), MUMBAI

disallowance of deduction under section 80IA of the Act. 8.1. The relevant facts in brief are the Assessee incurred tax loss for the Assessment Year 2011-12 and, therefore, claimed `Nil' deduction under Section 80IA of the Act. However, during the assessment proceedings it was prayed before the Assessing Officer that in case any additions were made during the course

JT. COMM OF INCOME TAX (OSD) , CC - 7(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S. RAJAMUNDRY EXPRESSWAY PVT. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Us :-

801A is available only for development of the new infrastructure facility. 4. On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) was correct in allowing the appeal of the assessee by ignoring the fact that the assessee company was a mere paper company and not a developer. 5. On the facts and the circumstances

THE DY CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. VODAFONE WEST LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

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

801A of the Act on the following:\n6.1 Served from India Scheme (SFIS) income of Rs 3,31,38,860\n6.2 Rs 92,75,000 disallowed under section 14A of the Act\nGround no 7- Addition of Rs 92,75,000 disallowed under section 14A\nwhile computing book profits under section 115JB of the Act\n7. On the facts

VODAFONE WEST LIMITED,(FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE ESSAR GUJARAT LIMITED),AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

801A of the Act on the following:\n6.1 Served from India Scheme (SFIS) income of Rs 3,31,38,860\n6.2 Rs 92,75,000 disallowed under section 14A of the Act\nGround no 7- Addition of Rs 92,75,000 disallowed under section 14A\nwhile computing book profits under section 115JB of the Act\n7. On the facts

ADITYA BIRLA NUVO LTD (SINCE AMALGAMATED WITH GRASIM INDUSTRIES LIMITED),MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT (LTU) 1, MUMBAI

10 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Since the assessee has not apportioned any expenses as having\nbeen incurred for earning this exempt income, I am not satisfied with regard to correctness\nof the claim of expenditure made by the assessee and provisions of Rule 80 of Income Tax\nRules are being invoked. Therefore, vide questionnaire dated 04.12.2015, the assessee

DCIT (LTU)-1, MUMBAI vs. ADITYA BIRLA NUVO LTD, MUMBAI

10 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Since the assessee has not apportioned any expenses as having\nbeen incurred for earning this exempt income, I am not satisfied with regard to correctness\nof the claim of expenditure made by the assessee and provisions of Rule 80 of Income Tax\nRules are being invoked. Therefore, vide questionnaire dated 04.12.2015, the assessee

ACIT (CIR.) - 6(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. BHANDAR POWER LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14 Assistant Commissioner Of Bhandar Power Ltd. Income Tax, 14Th Floor, Essar House, Circle 6(1)(2), 11, K. K. Marg, Mahalaxmi, Vs. Mumbai Mumbai - 400034 (Pan: Aaacb6693B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Vijay Mehta, Fca & Shri Tarang Mehta, Advocate Revenue : Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.10.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), Delhi, Vide Order Dated 25.01.2018 Passed Against The Assessment Order By Ito 6(1)(4), Mumbai, U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 20.12.2016, For Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Grounds Taken By The Revenue Are Reproduced As Under: 1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Cit(A) Is Not Justified In Deleting The Disallowance Of Deduction U/S 80Ia Of The Income Tax Act Of Rs. 203,13,43,740/-Without Considering The Fact That The Provisions Of Section 801A(10) Is Clearly Attracted In This Case Hence The Assessee Is Not Eligible For Claiming Deduction U/S 801A Of The Income Tax Act.

section 801A(10) is clearly attracted in this case hence the assessee is not eligible for claiming deduction u/s 801A of the Income Tax Act. 2 Bhandar Power Ltd. AY 2013-14 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) is not justified in deleting the disallowance

RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT , MUMBAI

In the result, the ITA No

10 AA of the Act. 29. Learned representatives fairly agree that this issue is also covered, in favour of the assessee, by a decision of the coordinate bench in the assessee‟s own cases for the assessment years 2011-12 and 2013-14. Vide its order, the coordinate bench, in the assessee‟s own case for the assessment year

RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LARGE TAXPAYER UNIT-2, MUMBAI

In the result, the ITA No

10 AA of the Act. 29. Learned representatives fairly agree that this issue is also covered, in favour of the assessee, by a decision of the coordinate bench in the assessee‟s own cases for the assessment years 2011-12 and 2013-14. Vide its order, the coordinate bench, in the assessee‟s own case for the assessment year

DCIT (LTU)-2, MUMBAI vs. M/S RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the ITA No

10 AA of the Act. 29. Learned representatives fairly agree that this issue is also covered, in favour of the assessee, by a decision of the coordinate bench in the assessee‟s own cases for the assessment years 2011-12 and 2013-14. Vide its order, the coordinate bench, in the assessee‟s own case for the assessment year

EXCEL CROP CARE LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 38, MUMBAI

In the result, all 7 appeals pertaining to the assessee are disposed of by partly allowing the appeal is of the assessee and the learned assessing officer for assessment year 2009 – 10, 2010 – 11 a...

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

10 in ITA No. 7140/Mum/2014 in appeal of the learned assessing officer are as under:- “1. "Whether on the facts an in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) is justified in deleting the disallowance of subscription expenses amounting to Rs. 28, 59,772/ while the assessee has neither during the assessment proceedings nor during