CHINA SHIPPING CONTAINER LINES ( HONG KONG) CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (IT) RG 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Ram Lal Negi M/S. China Shipping Container Dy. Director Of Income Tax Lines (Hong Kong) Co. Ltd. (Intl. Taxation) Range-1(2) Dynasty Business Park Room No. 119, 1St Floor Vs. Unit Nos. 608-611, Andheri- Scindia House, Ballard Pier Kurla Road, Andheri (E) Mumbai 400038 Mumbai 400059 Pan – Aaccc5161B Appellant Respondent

271(1)(c) of the Act. The Appellant humbly prays that the DDIT be directed to drop the penalty proceedings.” 2.2 Hearings were fixed on a number of occasions, but neither did anyone appear on behalf of the assessee nor was any adjournment sought on its behalf. Even notices issued by RPAD did not elicit any response from the assessee

J.RAY MC DERMOTT EASTERN HEMISPHERE LTD. vs. THE JDIT (IT) 4,

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 1998-99 Adit (It) 1(2), M/S. J. Ray Mc Dermott Eastern Aayakar Bhavan, Hemisphere Ltd., बनाम/ M.K. Road, C/O. Price Waterhouse & Co. Cas Vs. Mumbai-400020 Trade World, ‘C’ Wing, 8Th Floor, Kamla Mills Compound, Lower Parel, Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai- 400013 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No. Aabcm1087F

u/s 147/148 of the act. Since we have decided the grounds on merits, therefore, accepting the request of the parties we treat this ground as infructuous at this stage. 19. As a result this appeal may be treated as partly allowed. Now, we shall take up assessee’s appeal in ITA No.8717/Mum/2010 for A.Y. 2005-06 involving following grounds: Ground

J. RAY MC DERMOTT EASTERN HEMISPHERE LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADIT (IT)-3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 1998-99 Adit (It) 1(2), M/S. J. Ray Mc Dermott Eastern Aayakar Bhavan, Hemisphere Ltd., बनाम/ M.K. Road, C/O. Price Waterhouse & Co. Cas Vs. Mumbai-400020 Trade World, ‘C’ Wing, 8Th Floor, Kamla Mills Compound, Lower Parel, Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai- 400013 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No. Aabcm1087F

u/s 147/148 of the act. Since we have decided the grounds on merits, therefore, accepting the request of the parties we treat this ground as infructuous at this stage. 19. As a result this appeal may be treated as partly allowed. Now, we shall take up assessee’s appeal in ITA No.8717/Mum/2010 for A.Y. 2005-06 involving following grounds: Ground

MC DERMOTT EASTERN HEMISPHERE TD ( FORMELRY KNOWN AS J. RAY MC DERMOTT EASTERN HEMISPHERE LTD),MUMBAI vs. DDIT (IT) 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 1998-99 Adit (It) 1(2), M/S. J. Ray Mc Dermott Eastern Aayakar Bhavan, Hemisphere Ltd., बनाम/ M.K. Road, C/O. Price Waterhouse & Co. Cas Vs. Mumbai-400020 Trade World, ‘C’ Wing, 8Th Floor, Kamla Mills Compound, Lower Parel, Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai- 400013 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No. Aabcm1087F

u/s 147/148 of the act. Since we have decided the grounds on merits, therefore, accepting the request of the parties we treat this ground as infructuous at this stage. 19. As a result this appeal may be treated as partly allowed. Now, we shall take up assessee’s appeal in ITA No.8717/Mum/2010 for A.Y. 2005-06 involving following grounds: Ground

J RAY MCDERMOTT EASTRN HEMISPHERE LTD,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (IT) 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 1998-99 Adit (It) 1(2), M/S. J. Ray Mc Dermott Eastern Aayakar Bhavan, Hemisphere Ltd., बनाम/ M.K. Road, C/O. Price Waterhouse & Co. Cas Vs. Mumbai-400020 Trade World, ‘C’ Wing, 8Th Floor, Kamla Mills Compound, Lower Parel, Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai- 400013 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No. Aabcm1087F

u/s 147/148 of the act. Since we have decided the grounds on merits, therefore, accepting the request of the parties we treat this ground as infructuous at this stage. 19. As a result this appeal may be treated as partly allowed. Now, we shall take up assessee’s appeal in ITA No.8717/Mum/2010 for A.Y. 2005-06 involving following grounds: Ground

J RAY MCDERMOTT EASTRN HEMISPHERE LTD,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (IT), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 1998-99 Adit (It) 1(2), M/S. J. Ray Mc Dermott Eastern Aayakar Bhavan, Hemisphere Ltd., बनाम/ M.K. Road, C/O. Price Waterhouse & Co. Cas Vs. Mumbai-400020 Trade World, ‘C’ Wing, 8Th Floor, Kamla Mills Compound, Lower Parel, Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai- 400013 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No. Aabcm1087F

u/s 147/148 of the act. Since we have decided the grounds on merits, therefore, accepting the request of the parties we treat this ground as infructuous at this stage. 19. As a result this appeal may be treated as partly allowed. Now, we shall take up assessee’s appeal in ITA No.8717/Mum/2010 for A.Y. 2005-06 involving following grounds: Ground

M/S. J. RAY MC DERMOTT EASTERN HEMISPHERE LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT IT 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 1998-99 Adit (It) 1(2), M/S. J. Ray Mc Dermott Eastern Aayakar Bhavan, Hemisphere Ltd., बनाम/ M.K. Road, C/O. Price Waterhouse & Co. Cas Vs. Mumbai-400020 Trade World, ‘C’ Wing, 8Th Floor, Kamla Mills Compound, Lower Parel, Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai- 400013 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No. Aabcm1087F

u/s 147/148 of the act. Since we have decided the grounds on merits, therefore, accepting the request of the parties we treat this ground as infructuous at this stage. 19. As a result this appeal may be treated as partly allowed. Now, we shall take up assessee’s appeal in ITA No.8717/Mum/2010 for A.Y. 2005-06 involving following grounds: Ground

J RAY MCDERMOTT EASTERN HEMISPHERE LTD,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (IT) 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 1998-99 Adit (It) 1(2), M/S. J. Ray Mc Dermott Eastern Aayakar Bhavan, Hemisphere Ltd., बनाम/ M.K. Road, C/O. Price Waterhouse & Co. Cas Vs. Mumbai-400020 Trade World, ‘C’ Wing, 8Th Floor, Kamla Mills Compound, Lower Parel, Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai- 400013 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No. Aabcm1087F

u/s 147/148 of the act. Since we have decided the grounds on merits, therefore, accepting the request of the parties we treat this ground as infructuous at this stage. 19. As a result this appeal may be treated as partly allowed. Now, we shall take up assessee’s appeal in ITA No.8717/Mum/2010 for A.Y. 2005-06 involving following grounds: Ground

J. RAY MC DERMOTT EASTERN HEMISPHERE LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADIT (IT)-3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 1998-99 Adit (It) 1(2), M/S. J. Ray Mc Dermott Eastern Aayakar Bhavan, Hemisphere Ltd., बनाम/ M.K. Road, C/O. Price Waterhouse & Co. Cas Vs. Mumbai-400020 Trade World, ‘C’ Wing, 8Th Floor, Kamla Mills Compound, Lower Parel, Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai- 400013 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No. Aabcm1087F

u/s 147/148 of the act. Since we have decided the grounds on merits, therefore, accepting the request of the parties we treat this ground as infructuous at this stage. 19. As a result this appeal may be treated as partly allowed. Now, we shall take up assessee’s appeal in ITA No.8717/Mum/2010 for A.Y. 2005-06 involving following grounds: Ground

ACIT-3(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. M/S LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blelife Insurance Corporation Of India V. Dcit – 3(2)(1) Central Office, F&A Department Room No. 608 3Rd Floor, West Wing Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road “Yogakshema” Jeevan Bima Marg Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400021 Pan: Aaacl0582H Appellant Respondent Acit – 3(2)(1) V. M/S. Life Insurance Corporation Of India Central Office Room No. 674, 6Th Floor “Yogakshema” Jeevan Bima Marg Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaacl0582H Appellant Respondent

penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, since this ground is premature in nature, we are not adjudicating this ground at this stage. 29. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as stated above. ITA.No. 1710/MUM/2022 (A.Y. 2013-14) 30. Coming to the appeal of the Revenue for the A.Y. 2013-14, revenue has raised

LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blelife Insurance Corporation Of India V. Dcit – 3(2)(1) Central Office, F&A Department Room No. 608 3Rd Floor, West Wing Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road “Yogakshema” Jeevan Bima Marg Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400021 Pan: Aaacl0582H Appellant Respondent Acit – 3(2)(1) V. M/S. Life Insurance Corporation Of India Central Office Room No. 674, 6Th Floor “Yogakshema” Jeevan Bima Marg Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaacl0582H Appellant Respondent

penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, since this ground is premature in nature, we are not adjudicating this ground at this stage. 29. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as stated above. ITA.No. 1710/MUM/2022 (A.Y. 2013-14) 30. Coming to the appeal of the Revenue for the A.Y. 2013-14, revenue has raised

LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, since this ground is premature in nature, we are not adjudicating this ground at this stage. 30. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as stated above. ITA.No. 1716/MUM/2022 (A.Y. 2016-17) ITA.No. 1717/MUM/2022 (A.Y. 2017-18) 31. Coming to the assessee’s appeals relating to A.Ys

LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, since this ground is premature in nature, we are not adjudicating this ground at this stage. 30. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as stated above. ITA.No. 1716/MUM/2022 (A.Y. 2016-17) ITA.No. 1717/MUM/2022 (A.Y. 2017-18) 31. Coming to the assessee’s appeals relating to A.Ys

LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, since this ground is premature in nature, we are not adjudicating this ground at this stage. 30. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as stated above. ITA.No. 1716/MUM/2022 (A.Y. 2016-17) ITA.No. 1717/MUM/2022 (A.Y. 2017-18) 31. Coming to the assessee’s appeals relating to A.Ys

M/S LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,MUMBAI-400021 vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3(2)(1), MUMBAI

Appeal is disposed off as being partly allowed

penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act and is, therefore, being disposed off as being premature nature. 41. Ground No. 8 The Learned CIT(A) erred in his interpretation of the Act, the Insurance Act 1938, the IRDAI Act (Preparation of Financial Statements and Auditor‘s Report of Insurance Companies) Regulations 2002, and the IRDAI (Assets, Liabilities

DCIT, CC-7(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S. PATANJALI FOODS LTD.,( FORMERLY KNOWN AS RUCHI SOYA INDUSTRIES LTD,, MUMBAI

u/s 115JB\nof the Act.\n12.3 Heard both the parties. We note that on identical set of facts, the\nHon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Mangalore Refinery\nand Petrochemicals Pvt Ltd (ITA No.875 & 1237 of 2017) dated\n17.03.2020 was inter alia seized with the following question of law:\n\"2. Whether on the facts

M/S. PATANJALI FOODS LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS RUCHI SOYA INDUSTRIES LTD),MUMBAI vs. DY COMM OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL CIRCLE-7(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal and cross objections of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 1172/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 1175/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 1176/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

u/s 115JB of the Act, as already held in Paras 8.6 & 8.7 above, since these subsidies have been held to be in the nature of capital receipt, the same cannot be added to arrive at the book profit u/s 115JB of the Act. Following the ratio laid down in the decisions of Harinagar Sugar Mills Ltd (supra) and Ankit Metal

DCIT, CC-7(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S. PATANJALI FOODS LTD.,( FORMERLY KNOWN AS RUCHI SOYA INDUSTRIES LTD,, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal and cross objections of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 1172/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 1175/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 1176/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

u/s 115JB of the Act, as already held in Paras 8.6 & 8.7 above, since these subsidies have been held to be in the nature of capital receipt, the same cannot be added to arrive at the book profit u/s 115JB of the Act. Following the ratio laid down in the decisions of Harinagar Sugar Mills Ltd (supra) and Ankit Metal