THE SUPREME INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT LTU, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2006-07

section 801B of the Act to a sum of Rs.6,03,13,947/- as against the claim of Rs.6,04,73,590/- as per its return of income in respect of its unit at Silvassa. 6.The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in law upholding the action of the Assessing Officer in disallowing

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

disallowance made u/s.40(a)(ia)\nof the Act in respect of discount offered to pre-paid distributors.\"\n(9). \"The DRP, Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts in deleting the\naddition of Rs.133,79,00,000/- made on account of receipt for pre-paid\nservices which crystallized during the year itself.\"\n10). \"The DRP, Ahmedabad has erred

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

disallowance made u/s.40(a)(ia)\nof the Act in respect of discount offered to pre-paid distributors.\"\n(9). \"The DRP, Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts in deleting the\naddition of Rs.133,79,00,000/- made on account of receipt for pre-paid\nservices which crystallized during the year itself.\"\n10). \"The DRP, Ahmedabad has erred

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

section 801B(9)(ii). - Nil 3.2 Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id.CIT(A) erred in not accepting the decision of AO to restrict the deduction u/s 80IB(9)(ii) to the extent of ratio of production of oil. - Nil Reliance Industries Ltd. ITA No.579/Mum./2021 ITA No.1438/Mum./2021 4. Whether

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

section 801B(9)(ii). - Nil 3.2 Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id.CIT(A) erred in not accepting the decision of AO to restrict the deduction u/s 80IB(9)(ii) to the extent of ratio of production of oil. - Nil Reliance Industries Ltd. ITA No.579/Mum./2021 ITA No.1438/Mum./2021 4. Whether

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. BOMBAY SLUM REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2015-16

section 801B on the income from the sale of FSI (Floor Space Index). The case was re The case was re-opened by the Assessing Officer on the basis of the opened by the Assessing Officer on the basis of the fact that the allowability of deduction u/s 801B on this issue in the fact that the allowability of deduction

ITO WD 3(4), THANE vs. UMA DEVELOPERS, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainincome Tax Officer-3(4) M/S. Uma Developers 6Th Floor, Ashar It Park Shop No. 2, Mayur Chs Ltd. Vs. Road No. 16Z, Wagle Indl. M.G. Road, Naupada Estate, Thane (W) 400601 Thane (W) - 400602 Pan - Aabfu8250F Appellant Respondent

801B(10) on the ground that the return of income was filed beyond the due date as prescribed u/s. 139(1) in terms of provisions of section 80AC, is beyond the scope of section 143(1) of the I.T. Act. The disallowance

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

In the result, the ITA No

disallowance u/s 43B) from its above eligible unit. This very fact has been verified and confirmed by the AO at para 13.8.lof his order. As the refinery is situated inthe Special Economic Zone, company claimed deduction of Rs. 6832,18,56,826/- u/s 10AA of the IT. Act, as per Form 56F(Revised) submitted by the appellant on its export

RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT , MUMBAI

In the result, the ITA No

disallowance u/s 43B) from its above eligible unit. This very fact has been verified and confirmed by the AO at para 13.8.lof his order. As the refinery is situated inthe Special Economic Zone, company claimed deduction of Rs. 6832,18,56,826/- u/s 10AA of the IT. Act, as per Form 56F(Revised) submitted by the appellant on its export

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

In the result, the ITA No

disallowance u/s 43B) from its above eligible unit. This very fact has been verified and confirmed by the AO at para 13.8.lof his order. As the refinery is situated inthe Special Economic Zone, company claimed deduction of Rs. 6832,18,56,826/- u/s 10AA of the IT. Act, as per Form 56F(Revised) submitted by the appellant on its export

BHAVYA CONSTRUCTION CO.,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 21(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the assessee's appeals ITA No

disallowance. Appellant assessee\npreferred an appeal before this Tribunal against the order\ndated 22.01.2010 passed by learned CIT(A) and produced\nnotification No. S4 1896(E) dated 03.08.2010 issued by the\nCBDT, for the first time before the Tribunal. The tribunal, vide\norder dated 14.10.2011 passed in ITA No. 3090/MUM/2010\nfor A.Y. 2006-07 set aside the orders passed

S.B. ENTERPRISES,THANE vs. ITO WD 3(3), THANE

Bench: Sh. R. C. Sharma, Am & Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 6749/Mum/2014 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

disallowing deduction u/s 80IB(10) mentioned by the AO is that the appellant by allotting more than one residential unit to related persons had violated the provisions of sub-section (f) of section 801B

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LIMITED, MUMBAI

801B & 10B and are in no way dependent on\nthe said new industrial undertakings and therefore cannot be considered and\nallocated in arriving at the amount of profits derived from the said\nundertakings.\nExpenditure attributable to earning of tax-free income - Section 14A\ndisallowance\n4. erred in confirming disallowance

HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY.CIT-1(1)(2), MUMBAI

801B & 10B and are in no way dependent on\nthe said new industrial undertakings and therefore cannot be considered and\nallocated in arriving at the amount of profits derived from the said\nundertakings.\nExpenditure attributable to earning of tax-free income - Section 14A\ndisallowance\n4. erred in confirming disallowance

ASST CIT 27(2), NAVI MUMBAI vs. MERIT MAGNUM CONSTRUCTION, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyal

Section 801B (10) on Gawan Pada project cannot be disallowed on the basis that area on standalone of the plot

IPCA LABORATORIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (LTU), MUMBAI

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

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

Disallowance of expenses under Section 14A of the Act was also made as per Rule 8D of ₹4,68,977/- against the exemption of the income amounting to ₹73,43,364/-. The learned Assessing Officer further examine the deduction under Section 80IB for Silvassa unit and found that assessee is claimed deduction on export incentive of DEPB

DCIT CENT. CIR. 5(2), MUMBAI vs. IPCA LABORATORIES LTD., MUMBAI

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

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

Disallowance of expenses under Section 14A of the Act was also made as per Rule 8D of ₹4,68,977/- against the exemption of the income amounting to ₹73,43,364/-. The learned Assessing Officer further examine the deduction under Section 80IB for Silvassa unit and found that assessee is claimed deduction on export incentive of DEPB

ASST CIT (LTU) 1, MUMBAI vs. IPCA LABORATORIES LTD, MUMBAI

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

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

Disallowance of expenses under Section 14A of the Act was also made as per Rule 8D of ₹4,68,977/- against the exemption of the income amounting to ₹73,43,364/-. The learned Assessing Officer further examine the deduction under Section 80IB for Silvassa unit and found that assessee is claimed deduction on export incentive of DEPB