ASST CIT CC 38, MUMBAI vs. UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c)) ACIT, CC-38, Room no. M/s. United Phosphorous Ltd. 32(1), Ayakar Bhavan, Vs. Uniphos House, Madhu Park, 11th Road, Khar (W), Mumbai. Maharishi Karve Rd., Mumbai-400020. PAN: AAACU 3440 P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Vasanti Patel Advocate Revenue by Shri. Kiran Unavekar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 18/03/2025 Date of Pronouncement

M/S. UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD(NOW KNOWN AS UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD),MUMBAI vs. THE DCIT CEN CIR-38, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c)) ACIT, CC-38, Room no. M/s. United Phosphorous Ltd. 32(1), Ayakar Bhavan, Vs. Uniphos House, Madhu Park, 11th Road, Khar (W), Mumbai. Maharishi Karve Rd., Mumbai-400020. PAN: AAACU 3440 P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Vasanti Patel Advocate Revenue by Shri. Kiran Unavekar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 18/03/2025 Date of Pronouncement

THE ACIT CC-38, MUMBAI vs. M/S. UNITED PHOSPHOROUS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c)) ACIT, CC-38, Room no. M/s. United Phosphorous Ltd. 32(1), Ayakar Bhavan, Vs. Uniphos House, Madhu Park, 11th Road, Khar (W), Mumbai. Maharishi Karve Rd., Mumbai-400020. PAN: AAACU 3440 P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Vasanti Patel Advocate Revenue by Shri. Kiran Unavekar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 18/03/2025 Date of Pronouncement

UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT CEN RG IX, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c))\nACIT, CC-38, Room no.\nVs.\nM/s. United Phosphorous Ltd.\n32(1), Ayakar Bhavan,\nUniphos House, Madhu Park,\nMaharishi Karve Rd.,\n11th Road, Khar (W), Mumbai.\nMumbai-400020.\nPAN: AAACU 3440 P\n(Appellant)\n(Respondent)\nAssessee by\nMs. Vasanti Patel Advocate\nRevenue by\nShri. Kiran Unavekar, Sr. DR\nDate of Hearing\n18/03/2025\nDate

CREDIT GUARANTEE FUND TRUST FOR MICRO AND SMALL ENTERPRISES ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT EXEMPTION-1(1), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankarcredit Guarantee Fund Vs. Dcit(E) – 1(1) Trust Mumbai. 1St Floor, Sidbi Swavalaman Bhavan, Avenue – 3, Lane 2, G-Block, Bkc, Bandra (E) Pan/Gir No. Aaatc2613D (Applicant) (Respondent)

32,93,13,444/- as against Rs. 43,95,61,400/- claimed in the income tax return resulting in non-granting of TDS to the extent of Rs. 11,02,47,956/- and as such doing so is wrong and contrary to the provisions of the Act and Rules made thereunder. The appellant trust craves leave to add, amend, alter

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

section 234B, 234C & 234D. 10 Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) Revenue Ground No. Issues 1 to 4 Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act 5 Disallowance u/s 40(a)9ia) on year end provisions 6 Deleting the addition on account of CENVAT Credit ignoring the fact that the addition was made on net-basis and assessee, itself, withdrew its ground

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

section 234B, 234C & 234D. 10 Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) Revenue Ground No. Issues 1 to 4 Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act 5 Disallowance u/s 40(a)9ia) on year end provisions 6 Deleting the addition on account of CENVAT Credit ignoring the fact that the addition was made on net-basis and assessee, itself, withdrew its ground

NUCLEAR POWER CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT LTU, MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purpose

penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income by the assessee.” 7 Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited Against the above order assessee is in appeal before us. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. Learned Counsel of the assessee made following submissions : 4. The Ld. Counsel of the assessee reiterated the submissions

M/S ANIK INDUSTRIES LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DY. CIT CC 7 (2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya Accountantmember & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year: 2008-09 M/S Anik Industries Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner 610, Tulsiani Chambers, Nariman Of Income Tax Central Point, Mumbai-400021. Vs. Circle-7(2), 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road-400020. Pan No. Aaacm 2696 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Mr. Brajendra Kumar, Dr

section 32(1)(iia) of the Act and the eligibility criteria. Whereas the assessee has adopted one of the possible claims at that point of time in the financial statements.We are of the opinion that, the addition made in the assessment order cannot be the basis for levying the penalty and every addition made in the assessment proceedings cannot

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

RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT , MUMBAI

In the result, the ITA No

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars are initiated separately. 5.1.3 Further, during the assessment proceedings, it is also noted that has claimed depreciation under "Oil and Gas division" in respect of KG-D6 basin/Block of Rs 726,75,62,145/-. As has been discussed in detail under subsequent paragraphs (para 14.7) of this

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

In the result, the ITA No

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars are initiated separately. 5.1.3 Further, during the assessment proceedings, it is also noted that has claimed depreciation under "Oil and Gas division" in respect of KG-D6 basin/Block of Rs 726,75,62,145/-. As has been discussed in detail under subsequent paragraphs (para 14.7) of this

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

In the result, the ITA No

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars are initiated separately. 5.1.3 Further, during the assessment proceedings, it is also noted that has claimed depreciation under "Oil and Gas division" in respect of KG-D6 basin/Block of Rs 726,75,62,145/-. As has been discussed in detail under subsequent paragraphs (para 14.7) of this

GOLDMAN SACHS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 1 (1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm Goldman Sachs (India) Finance Private Dy. Cit-1(1)(2), Limited Mumbai 951 A, Rational House, Vs. Appasaheb Marathe Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai-400 025 Pan/Gir No. Aaacp 2448 J (Appellant) : (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Jahangir Mistri/Hiten Chande Respondent By : Shri Rakesh Garg Date Of Hearing : 03.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.05.2021

32,20,000/- i.e. total Rs.31,30,20,000/- is to be added back to Book Profits of the assessee. 5.8 Accordingly, the amount of Rs.31,30,20,000/- is added back to Book profit u/s. 115JB of the assessee. Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)© are initiated separately for concealing of income and/or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income

M/S. BAJAJ AUTO LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ADDL. CIT. RG. - 3(1), MUMBAI

271 9. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in holding that the appellant is not entitled to deduction in respect of DEPB as per the third proviso to section 80HHC(3)(c) of the Act. 10. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

DCIT 2(3), MUMBAI vs. THE SEKSARIA BISWAN SUGAR FACTORY, MUMBAI

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & C.N. Prasadवष" /Assessment Years: 2006-07 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/4428/Mum/2012,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Acit-2(3) M/S. The Seksaria Biswan Sugar Room No.552, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Factory Ltd.,5Th Floor, 139, Nagindas Vs. Bhavanmk Road, Master Rd.Fort, Mumbai-1. Mumbai-400 020. Pan:Aaact 1343 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) वष" /Assessment Years: 2006-07 Co/144/Mum/2013,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/S. The Seksaria Biswan Sugar Vs. Acit-2(3) Factory Ltd.Mumbai. Mumbai.

penalty levied by the AO u/s. 271(1)(c),amounting to Rs. 21.86 lakhs. During the assessment proceedings,the AO found that the assessee had claimed additional depreciation of Rs.43.72 lakhs u/s.32 (ii) r.w.s.32(iia) of the Act on the addition to the plant and machinery to the tune of Rs. 2.18 crores, that the new plant and machinery