KANSAI NEROLAC PAINTS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 6(2), MUMBAI

Accordingly we see no infirmity in the decision of CIT(A) and uphold the decision of the CIT(A). This ground of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

House, G.K. Marg, Lower Power, Mumbai-400 013 PAN : AAACG1376N ASSESSEE RESPONDENT Present for the Assessee Mrs.Aarti Vissanji Present for the Department Shri. Rajesh Pardeshi, JCIT Date of hearing 17/11/2023 Date of pronouncement 04/12/2023 2 Kansai Nerolac Paints Limited I.T.A. No.3384&3385/Mum/2014 I.T.A. No.3642/Mum/2016 and I.T.A. No.4562&4607/Mum/2017 O R D E R Per Padmavathy S, AM: These appeal filed

KANSAI NEROLAC PAINTS LIMITED (ERSTWHILE KNOWN AS GOODLASS NEROLAC PAINTS LIMITED),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT, RANGE 6 (2), MUMBAI

Accordingly we see no infirmity in the decision of CIT(A) and uphold the decision of the CIT(A). This ground of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

House, G.K. Marg, Lower Power, Mumbai-400 013 PAN : AAACG1376N ASSESSEE RESPONDENT Present for the Assessee Mrs.Aarti Vissanji Present for the Department Shri. Rajesh Pardeshi, JCIT Date of hearing 17/11/2023 Date of pronouncement 04/12/2023 2 Kansai Nerolac Paints Limited I.T.A. No.3384&3385/Mum/2014 I.T.A. No.3642/Mum/2016 and I.T.A. No.4562&4607/Mum/2017 O R D E R Per Padmavathy S, AM: These appeal filed

KANSAI NEROLAC PAINTS LIMITED (ERSTWHILE KNOWN AS GOODLASS NEROLAC PAINTS LIMITED),MUMBAI vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE 6 (2), MUMBAI

Accordingly we see no infirmity in the decision of CIT(A) and uphold the decision of the CIT(A). This ground of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

House, G.K. Marg, Lower Power, Mumbai-400 013 PAN : AAACG1376N ASSESSEE RESPONDENT Present for the Assessee Mrs.Aarti Vissanji Present for the Department Shri. Rajesh Pardeshi, JCIT Date of hearing 17/11/2023 Date of pronouncement 04/12/2023 2 Kansai Nerolac Paints Limited I.T.A. No.3384&3385/Mum/2014 I.T.A. No.3642/Mum/2016 and I.T.A. No.4562&4607/Mum/2017 O R D E R Per Padmavathy S, AM: These appeal filed

M/S. NICHOLAS PIRAMAL INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT CUR 7(1),

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanpiramal Enterprises Ltd Vs. Acit, Circle – 7(1) (Formerly Known As Aayakar Bhavan Piramal Healthcare Ltd) Mumbai – 400020. (Before Known As Nicholas Piramal Ind) Piramal Tower, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400013. Pan/Gir No. : Aaacn4538P Appellant .. Respondent Dcit, Circle – 7(1) Vs. Piramal Enterprises Ltd Aayakar Bhyavan (Formerly Known As Mumbai – 400 020. Piramal Healthcare Ltd) (Before Known As Nicholas Piramal Ind) Piramal Tower, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013. Pan/Gir No. : Aaacn4538P Assessee By : Mr.Ronak Doshi & Ms.Manshi Padhiyar.Ar Revenue By : Mr.S.N.Kabra.Dr

House Property, since the assessee company is not the owner of the said properties during the financial year 2003-04. Further, the assessee company is also not in the business of letting out of premises. Hence, the rental receipts can also not be taxed under the head Business Income. Such rental receipts can only be taxed under the head "Income

PIRAMAL HEALTHCARE LTD ( EARLIER KNOWNAS NICHOLAS PIRAMAL INDIA LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 7(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 M/S. Piramal Enterprises Dy. Commissioner Of Limited (Formerly Known Income Tax, As Piramal Healthcare Range-8(2)(1), Limited) (Earlier Known As Mumbai. Nicholas Piramal India Ltd.), Vs. Piramal Tower, Agastya Corporate Park, Lbs Marg, Kamani Junction, Kurla (West), Mumbai – 400 070 Pan: Aaacn4538P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Dy. Commissioner Of M/S. Piramal Enterprises Income Tax, Limited (Formerly Known Circle-8(2)(1), As Piramal Healthcare [Erstwhile Dcit Circle- Ltd.) (As Ultimate 7(1)], Successor To Nicholas Vs. Mumbai. Piramal India Ltd.), Piramal Tower, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013 Pan: Aaacn4538P (Appellant) (Respondent)

house property" and to direct the Assessing Officer to grant deduction u/s.24(a). 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer in respect of deduction of Rs.24285714/- claimed u/s.35A in respect of the acquisition of the trade mark by M/s.Sarabhai Piramal

ADDL CIT RG 7(1), MUMBAI vs. PIRAMAL ENTERPRISES LTD (FORMERLY KNWON AS PIRAMAL HEALTHCARE LTD) (AS ULTIMATE SUCCESSOR TO NICHOLAS PIRAMAL INDIA LTD), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 M/S. Piramal Enterprises Dy. Commissioner Of Limited (Formerly Known Income Tax, As Piramal Healthcare Range-8(2)(1), Limited) (Earlier Known As Mumbai. Nicholas Piramal India Ltd.), Vs. Piramal Tower, Agastya Corporate Park, Lbs Marg, Kamani Junction, Kurla (West), Mumbai – 400 070 Pan: Aaacn4538P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Dy. Commissioner Of M/S. Piramal Enterprises Income Tax, Limited (Formerly Known Circle-8(2)(1), As Piramal Healthcare [Erstwhile Dcit Circle- Ltd.) (As Ultimate 7(1)], Successor To Nicholas Vs. Mumbai. Piramal India Ltd.), Piramal Tower, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013 Pan: Aaacn4538P (Appellant) (Respondent)

house property" and to direct the Assessing Officer to grant deduction u/s.24(a). 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer in respect of deduction of Rs.24285714/- claimed u/s.35A in respect of the acquisition of the trade mark by M/s.Sarabhai Piramal

ANIL BHAGWAN ADVANI,MUMBAI vs. ITO (IT) 1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyal

House, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400038. ..... Appellant Vs. Anil Bhagwan Advani, 6/64 Shyam Niwas, Warden Road, Mumbai-400026 PAN: ADPPA6266J ...... Respondent Appellant/Assessee by : Sh. Tapas Misra Respondent/Revenue by : Smt. Shailja Rai, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 31/05/2022 Date of pronouncement : 28/07/2022 PER GAGAN GOYAL, A.M: These three appeals by the assessee and Revenue are directed against the order of Commissioner

ADDL CIT RG 8(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. SANOFI INDIA LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S. AVENTIS PHARMA LTD), MUMBAI

In the result, the C.O. of the assessee for AY 2007-08 is partly allowed

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

145A has to be made both to the opening stock and closing stock. This issue therefore in our view requires fresh examination. We, therefore, set aside the order of CIT(A), and restore 6698 M 2011 & C.O. No. 165 M 2012-Sanofi India Limited the matter to AO for passing a fresh order after allowing opportunity of hearing to assessee

ADDL CIT 8(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. SANOFI INDIA LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S. AVENTIS PHARMA LTD), MUMBAI

In the result, the C.O. of the assessee for AY 2007-08 is partly allowed

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

145A has to be made both to the opening stock and closing stock. This issue therefore in our view requires fresh examination. We, therefore, set aside the order of CIT(A), and restore 6698 M 2011 & C.O. No. 165 M 2012-Sanofi India Limited the matter to AO for passing a fresh order after allowing opportunity of hearing to assessee

SANOFI INDIA LTD FORMERLY KNOWN AS AVENTIS PHARMA LTD ,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 8(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the C.O. of the assessee for AY 2007-08 is partly allowed

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

145A has to be made both to the opening stock and closing stock. This issue therefore in our view requires fresh examination. We, therefore, set aside the order of CIT(A), and restore 6698 M 2011 & C.O. No. 165 M 2012-Sanofi India Limited the matter to AO for passing a fresh order after allowing opportunity of hearing to assessee

DCIT(LTU) - 1, MUMBAI vs. ACC LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

145A in respect of unutilized CENVAT credit is carried out, deduction for the same is available to the assessee under provisions of Section-43B, since the assessee had paid excise duty payable on closing stock of cement as on last day of the accounting year before filing return of income for Assessment Year-2010-11 by adjusting unutilized CENVAT credit

ACC LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT(LTU) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

145A in respect of unutilized CENVAT credit is carried out, deduction for the same is available to the assessee under provisions of Section-43B, since the assessee had paid excise duty payable on closing stock of cement as on last day of the accounting year before filing return of income for Assessment Year-2010-11 by adjusting unutilized CENVAT credit

ACIT- 3(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. MM/S SANOFI INDIA LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS AVENTIS PHARMA LTD)., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

section 36(1)(vii) are satisfied, we allow assessee’s claim. This ground is allowed. 53. In the result, appeal is partly allowed.” Page No.| 10 ITA.NO.1606 & 1302/MUM/2007 (A.Y: 2003-04) ITA.NO.1128/MUM/2009 (A.Y. 2003-04) ITA.NO. 5939 & 6548/MUM/2010 (A.Y. 2004-05) ITA.NO. 6745/MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2004-05) M/s. Sanofi India Ltd 16. Respectfully following the above decision and following

M/S SANOFI INDIA LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS AVENTIS PHARMA LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT RG 8(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

section 36(1)(vii) are satisfied, we allow assessee’s claim. This ground is allowed. 53. In the result, appeal is partly allowed.” Page No.| 10 ITA.NO.1606 & 1302/MUM/2007 (A.Y: 2003-04) ITA.NO.1128/MUM/2009 (A.Y. 2003-04) ITA.NO. 5939 & 6548/MUM/2010 (A.Y. 2004-05) ITA.NO. 6745/MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2004-05) M/s. Sanofi India Ltd 16. Respectfully following the above decision and following

NOVARTIS INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 7(1), MUMBAI

house property at a notional value that, the property\nis owned by the assessee and used by the demerged\ncompany and rent is not collected/reflected in the assesses\nfinancial statements and the assessing officer has invoked\nthe provisions of Section22 of the Act and calculated the\nnotional rent. We find the Hon'ble Tribunal in ITA No.6832\n& 6772/Mum/2010 & C.O.190/Mum/2011

CABOT INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 1(1), MUMBAI

In the result ITA number 1911/M/2016 filed by the learned assessing officer for assessment year 2011 – 12 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

House, 29, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Marg, Mumbai Hazarimal Somani Marg, Fort Mumbai-400 001 PAN No. AAACU1414F Assessee by : Mr. Percy J Pardiwala Sr Adv, Mr. Jeet Kamdar, Adv Revenue by : Ms. Samruddhi Hande, Sr.AR. Date of hearing: 23-06-2023 Date of pronouncement : 21.08.2023 O R D E R PER BENCH 01. This is the bunch of 8 appeals

ASST CIT 15(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. CABOT INDIA LTD, NAVI MUMBAI

In the result ITA number 1911/M/2016 filed by the learned assessing officer for assessment year 2011 – 12 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

House, 29, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Marg, Mumbai Hazarimal Somani Marg, Fort Mumbai-400 001 PAN No. AAACU1414F Assessee by : Mr. Percy J Pardiwala Sr Adv, Mr. Jeet Kamdar, Adv Revenue by : Ms. Samruddhi Hande, Sr.AR. Date of hearing: 23-06-2023 Date of pronouncement : 21.08.2023 O R D E R PER BENCH 01. This is the bunch of 8 appeals

DCIT, 1(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. CABOT INDIA LTD., NAVI MUMBAI

In the result ITA number 1911/M/2016 filed by the learned assessing officer for assessment year 2011 – 12 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

House, 29, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Marg, Mumbai Hazarimal Somani Marg, Fort Mumbai-400 001 PAN No. AAACU1414F Assessee by : Mr. Percy J Pardiwala Sr Adv, Mr. Jeet Kamdar, Adv Revenue by : Ms. Samruddhi Hande, Sr.AR. Date of hearing: 23-06-2023 Date of pronouncement : 21.08.2023 O R D E R PER BENCH 01. This is the bunch of 8 appeals