A.C.I.T. CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, MUMBAI vs. ANKUR DRUGS & PHARMA LTD., MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the Revenue in I

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 7529/Mum/2011 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2006-07)

Section 10B and it was submitted that there is no requirement to own undertaking before claiming deduction u/s. 10B. It was submitted that the present proceedings are penalty proceedings u/s. 271

DCIT, CC-7(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S MANEESH PHARMACEUTICALS LTD., MUMBAI

10B and ALP adjustments. In respect of both these issues, Id. AO has levied penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act concluding that "the assessee company has furnished inaccurate particulars of income. In the assessment order dated 31.03.2022, it is mentioned that "Penalty proceedings u/s

HEMAL MAGANLAL SHAH,MUMBAI vs. CIT (A) NFAC, DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyalhemal Maganlal Shah 84, 4Th Floor, Pankaj-B, Lbs Road, Ghatkopar (W), Mumbai-400086. Pan: Amfps8271G ...... Appellant Vs. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Mumbai. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. H.M. Shah Respondent By : Sh. Prasoon Kabra Date Of Hearing : 17/05/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 10/08/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M:

U/s. 271(1) (c) cannot be levied and assessee pleads that there is neither "Concealment' nor 'furnishing of inaccurate particulars' by him. The assessee also relies on following decisions of various High Courts to put weight that he has not concealed the Income. Judicial Pronouncements: 1. Surat Fashions Ltd. vs. ACIT [2011-ITRV-ITAT-AHD-124] 2. Narayansingh J. Deora

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7(1), MUMBAI , MUMBAI vs. MANEESH PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Maneesh Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Tax, Vs. 29-33, Ancillary Industrial Central Circle – 7(1), Plots, Near M Ward, Mumbai Govandi, Mumbai – 400 043 (Pan : Aaacm3635Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Jaypraksh Bairagra, Ca Revenue : Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, Cit, Dr

u/s 10B was thus reworked by him, restricting it to Rs. 52,04,147/- as against assessee’s claim of Rs. 8,83,74,822/-. Penalty was imposed for this disallowance by charging the assessee with the charge of ‘furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income.’ 7.1. The scheme of section 271

FRANKLIN TEMPLETON INTERNATIONAL SERVICES (INDIA) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 6(3)(1), MUMBAI

271(1)(c)\nof the Act.\nThe Appellant prays that the penalty proceedings be dropped in the\nmatter.\nGround 5 - Levy of interest under section 234B of the Act\n5.1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned AO\nhas erred in charging interest of Rs. 2,81,17,008.\nThe Appellant prays that

ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Camac Street, Vs. Mk Road, Kolkata-700017. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Jcit, Central Circle-1(4), M/S Essel Mining & Industries Room No. 902, Pratishtha Ltd., Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Building Annexe, Camac Street, Mumbai-400020. Kolkata-700017. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Essel Mining & Industries Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Ltd., 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Mk Road

u/s 80IA and u/s 10B of the Act on claim of deduction u/s 80IA and u/s 10B of the Act on claim of deduction u/s 80IA and u/s 10B of the Act – Rs 2,62,53,000/ Rs 2,62,53,000/- We find that this is only concerned with workin We find that this is only concerned with workin

ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Camac Street, Vs. Mk Road, Kolkata-700017. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Jcit, Central Circle-1(4), M/S Essel Mining & Industries Room No. 902, Pratishtha Ltd., Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Building Annexe, Camac Street, Mumbai-400020. Kolkata-700017. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Essel Mining & Industries Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Ltd., 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Mk Road

u/s 80IA and u/s 10B of the Act on claim of deduction u/s 80IA and u/s 10B of the Act on claim of deduction u/s 80IA and u/s 10B of the Act – Rs 2,62,53,000/ Rs 2,62,53,000/- We find that this is only concerned with workin We find that this is only concerned with workin

WORLDWIDE SOFTWARE (EXPORTS),MUMBAI vs. ITO 18(2)(3), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ()

10B of the Act, the same should be restricted to 2.88% of the turnover as against 14% claimed by the appellant; Applicability of provision of section 92E and initiation of penalty under section 271 BA of the Act 8. erred in confirming the action of the AO, in holding that (even though software exported by the appellant

WORLDWIDE SOFTWARE (EXPORTS),MUMBAI vs. ITO 18(2)(3), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ()

10B of the Act, the same should be restricted to 2.88% of the turnover as against 14% claimed by the appellant; Applicability of provision of section 92E and initiation of penalty under section 271 BA of the Act 8. erred in confirming the action of the AO, in holding that (even though software exported by the appellant

SHELL INDIA MARKETS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT LTU 2, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood ()

10B of the Act. 4. Initiation of penalty proceedings and section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in lass, the teamed CIT has legally erred in direction the AO to initiate penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The learned

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 3(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. STONE SHIPPERS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

10B of the Act and not followed the amended provisions of section 115JB of the Act. Therefore, the AO made addition and initiated the penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The AO levied the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The CIT(A) deleted the penalty on the jurisdictional issue by observing

SHELL INDIA MARKETS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT LTU, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (A.M.) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm) Shell India Markets Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax- Trent House, First Floor, Large Tax Units (Ltu) G-Block, Plot No.C-60, Mumbai Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai-400 051 Pan : Aaics1404P Appellant Respondednt

u/s 10B. 6. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(LTU), the assessee has filed the present appeal before this Tribunal, by raising the following grounds of appeal:- “Appeal under section 253(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act') against the order dated 25 June 2018 (received by the Appellant on 2 July 2018) passed under section

ITO 8(2)4, MUMBAI vs. PHARMACEUTICAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION INDIA P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, ITA No. 1643/M/2014 and ITA No

Bench: S/Sh. Rajendra & Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.1643/Mum/2014,"नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year-2003-04 Ito 8(2)(4), M/S Pharmaceutical Research Room No. 213/216A, 2Nd Floor, Association India Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs (Formerly Known As M/S Sterling Mumbai-400020 Synergy System Pvt. Ltd., Kamdar Shopping Centre, Office No.5,V.S. Khandekar Marg, Vile Parle(E), Mumbai-400057. Pan:Aaacs9202R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.1644/Mum/2014,"नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year-2003-04 Ito 8(2)(4), M/S Pharmaceutical Research Room No. 213/216A, 2Nd Floor, Association India Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs (Formerly Known As M/S Sterling Mumbai-400020 Synergy System Pvt. Ltd., Kamdar Shopping Centre, Office No.5,V.S. Khandekar Marg, Vile Parle(E), Mumbai-400057. Pan:Aaacs9202R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.685/Mum/2013,"नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year-2005-06 M/S Sterling Synergy System Pvt.Ltd. Dcit 8(3), (Now Known As M/S Pharmaceutical Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Research Associates India Pvt. Ltd.) Vs Mumbai-400020 Office No.1, 1St Floor, Rang Bhavan, M.G.Cross Road, Near Bank Of Baroda,Vile Parle (E), Mumbai-400057. Pan:Aaacs9202R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.1726/Mum/2014,"नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year-2005-06 M/S Pharmaceutical Research Dcit 8(3), Associates India Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, (Formerly Known As M/S Sterling Vs Mumbai-400020 Synergy System Pvt. Ltd.), Office No.1, 1St Floor, Rang Bhavan, M.G.Cross Road, Near Bank Of Baroda,Vile Parle (E), Mumbai-400057. Pan:Aaacs9202R

section 10B which held that the profits from the local activity would also be eligible for the deduction u/s. 10B of the Act if the said activity constitutes less than 25% of the total turnover. To put it differently, if the turnover from tile local activity to exceeds 25% of the total turnover r such profit from the domestic sales

SCHOTT GLASS INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 8(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, ITA 7356/Mum/2014 of the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and ITA No

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Amarjit Singhschott Glass India Private Vs. Income Tax Officer 8(3)-1 Limited, Dynasty “A” Wing Room No. 201, Aayakar 303/304, 3Rd Floor, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Andheri Kurla Road, Mumbai – 400020 Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400 059 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcs8583L Appellant .. Respondent Schott Glass India Private Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, Dynasty “A” Wing Income Tax 8(3) 303/304, 3Rd Floor, Room No. 204, Aayakar Andheri Kurla Road, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400020 Mumbai – 400 059 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcs8583L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ketan Ved Respondent By : Mahesh Jiwade Date Of Hearing 12.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 24.01.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): Both These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Agasint The Different Orders Of Ld. Cit(A)-15, Mumbai. Since Both These Appeals

section (1) of Sec. 144C of the Act, after making addition of Rs.8,59,31,291/- pertaining to upward adjustment to the arm’s length price as recommended by the TPO. The P a g e | 4 ITA No.7356/Mum/2014 & ITA No.2594/Mum/2012 Schott Glass India Private Limited Vs. ITO-8(3)-1 AO has also initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271

SCHOTT GLASS INDIA PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. D.C.I.T. CIRCLE 8(3), MUMBAI

In the result, ITA 7356/Mum/2014 of the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and ITA No

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Amarjit Singhschott Glass India Private Vs. Income Tax Officer 8(3)-1 Limited, Dynasty “A” Wing Room No. 201, Aayakar 303/304, 3Rd Floor, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Andheri Kurla Road, Mumbai – 400020 Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400 059 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcs8583L Appellant .. Respondent Schott Glass India Private Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, Dynasty “A” Wing Income Tax 8(3) 303/304, 3Rd Floor, Room No. 204, Aayakar Andheri Kurla Road, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400020 Mumbai – 400 059 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcs8583L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ketan Ved Respondent By : Mahesh Jiwade Date Of Hearing 12.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 24.01.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): Both These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Agasint The Different Orders Of Ld. Cit(A)-15, Mumbai. Since Both These Appeals

section (1) of Sec. 144C of the Act, after making addition of Rs.8,59,31,291/- pertaining to upward adjustment to the arm’s length price as recommended by the TPO. The P a g e | 4 ITA No.7356/Mum/2014 & ITA No.2594/Mum/2012 Schott Glass India Private Limited Vs. ITO-8(3)-1 AO has also initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271

HANIL ERA TEXTILES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 6(3), MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz, Am & Shri Amit Shukla, Jm

10B(1) of the Act amounting to `8,69,14,631/- , and iii. The learned CIT(A) upheld the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act on account of the disallowance under section 94(7) of the Act amounting to `2,50,000/-. 3. This appeal was earlier fixed for hearing on various dates on 14 occasions

ACIT-23(1), MUMBAI, PIRAMAL CHAMBER, MUMBAI vs. PARISHI DIAMONDS, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2012-13 Acit-23(1), Parishi Diamonds, 511, 5Th Floor, Piramal Chamber, Cc2091 To Cc 2093 Tower Central Vs. Lalbaug, Parel, Wings Bharat Diamond Bourse Bandra Mumbai-400012. Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aajfp 2118 B Appellant Respondent

section 92C(1). of the method prescribed under section 92C(1). 38. The assessee's main argument is that due to the trade practice The assessee's main argument is that due to the trade practice The assessee's main argument is that due to the trade practice prevailing in the in the diamond industry separate identity of the diamond

STRIDES ARCOLAB LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 15(3)(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

penalty proceedings under Section 274 read with Section 271(l)(c) of the Act The Appellant craves leave to add, alter and modify the above grounds during the course of the appeal. For the above and any other grounds which may be raised at the time of hearing, it is prayed that necessary relief may be provided.‖ 5.1 The assessee

FAYZ E HUSAYNI TRUST,MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NAFC) DELHI , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

10B, details of Trust, certificate of registration and bank details.\n3. The assessee trust is registered with the Commissioner of Income-\nTax (Exemption), Mumbai under section 12A of the Act and also it is\nregistered with Charity Commissioner, Mumbai. The assessee is\nengaged in the charitable activities. The main object of the trust is to\narrange and provide assistance