BATLIBOI LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm M/S. Batliboi Limited Vs. Dy. Cit, Circle 2(1) Bharat House, Aayakar Bhavan 5Th Floor, 104 5Th Floor, Mumbai-400001 Mumbai Samachar Marg Fort, Mumbai -400 001 Pan/Gir No. Aaacb4408L (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

68 Taxman 145 (SC) to drive home the point that even if a receipt does not fall within the ambit of any of the sub-clauses of section 2(24) of the Act, it may still be income if it partakes the nature of income. Based on these observations, the ld AO brought

ACIT-6(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ALOK INDUSTRIES LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

68,844/- under the provisions of section 115JB of the Act. The assessee’s case was selected for scrutiny and assessment order u/s. 143(3) of the Act was passed on 29.12.2018, determining total income at Rs. 1,96,69,150/-, where the learned Assessing Officer (‘ld. AO’ for short) made certain addition/disallowance to the total income

DCIT 5(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S SERCO BPO PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shir Pavan Kumar Gadaledcit – 5(3)(1) Vs. M/S Serco Bpo Pvt Room No. 573, Ltd.(As Successor Of Aayakar Bhavan, Intelnet Global Service Mumbai – 400 020. Pvtltd),Teleperformance Tower, Plot Cst No. 1406-A/28, Mindspace, Goregaon (W), Mumbai -400104. Pan/Gir No. : Aabcv2572L Appellant .. Respondent Co No. 136/Mum/2022 [Arising Out Of 2354/Mum/2022] (A.Y: 2009-10) Teleperformance Global Vs. Dcit – 5(3)(1) Service Pvt Ltd(Earlier Room No. 573, Serco Bpo Pvt Ltd), Aayakar Bhavan, Teleperformance Tower, Mumbai – 400020. Plot Cst No. 1406-A/28, Mindspace, Goregaon(W) Mumbai- 400104. Pan/Gir No. : Aabcv2572L Appellant .. Respondent

68 of the Act, is absolutely erroneous and the same deserves to be deleted on this ground, itself. V. Further, the AO could not re-compute the profits in profit and loss account by adding the impugned share premium of Rs.32,21,48,679, for the determination of book profit under section 115JB

ACIT-6(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ALOK INDUSTRIES LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

68,844/- under the provisions of section 115JB\nof the Act. The assessee's case was selected for scrutiny and assessment order u/s.\n143(3) of the Act was passed on 29.12.2018, determining total income at Rs.\n1,96,69,150/-, where the learned Assessing Officer (‘ld. AO' for short) made certain\naddition/disallowance to the total income

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

In the result, the ITA No

115J, does not apply in terms of section 115JB, we cannot be at liberty to be guided by the coordinate bench decision implying otherwise. The very foundation of deviation by the coordinate bench does not, therefore, hold good in law. In any event, this issue is decided on merits in favour of the assessee by Hon‟ble Calcutta High

RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT , MUMBAI

In the result, the ITA No

115J, does not apply in terms of section 115JB, we cannot be at liberty to be guided by the coordinate bench decision implying otherwise. The very foundation of deviation by the coordinate bench does not, therefore, hold good in law. In any event, this issue is decided on merits in favour of the assessee by Hon‟ble Calcutta High

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

In the result, the ITA No

115J, does not apply in terms of section 115JB, we cannot be at liberty to be guided by the coordinate bench decision implying otherwise. The very foundation of deviation by the coordinate bench does not, therefore, hold good in law. In any event, this issue is decided on merits in favour of the assessee by Hon‟ble Calcutta High

ACIT-6(1)(1), MUMBI, MUMBAI vs. ALOK INDUSTRIES LTD., MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

68,844/- under the provisions of section 115JB of the Act. The assessee's case was selected for scrutiny and assessment order u/s. 143(3) of the Act was passed on 29.12.2018, determining total income at Rs. 1,96,69,150/-, where the learned Assessing Officer (‘ld. AO' for short) made certain addition/disallowance to the total income

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

115J.‖ 23. In view of the above, once assessee’s accounts have been maintained in accordance with Companies Act and the same have also been scrutinised and audited by the statutory auditor, in absence of any material to negate these facts, the AO has limited power under section 115 JB of the Act to make adjustment to book profit

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

115J.‖ 23. In view of the above, once assessee’s accounts have been maintained in accordance with Companies Act and the same have also been scrutinised and audited by the statutory auditor, in absence of any material to negate these facts, the AO has limited power under section 115 JB of the Act to make adjustment to book profit

DCIT- 3(4) , MUMBAI vs. M/S RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

115J.” 23. In view of the above, once assessee’s accounts have been maintained in accordance with Companies Act and the same have also been scrutinised and audited by the statutory auditor, in absence of any material to negate these facts, the AO has limited power under section 115 JB of the Act to make adjustment to book profit

RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(4), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

115J.” 23. In view of the above, once assessee’s accounts have been maintained in accordance with Companies Act and the same have also been scrutinised and audited by the statutory auditor, in absence of any material to negate these facts, the AO has limited power under section 115 JB of the Act to make adjustment to book profit

DCIT-3(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

115J.” 23. In view of the above, once assessee’s accounts have been maintained in accordance with Companies Act and the same have also been scrutinised and audited by the statutory auditor, in absence of any material to negate these facts, the AO has limited power under section 115 JB of the Act to make adjustment to book profit

RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 3(4), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

115J.” 23. In view of the above, once assessee’s accounts have been maintained in accordance with Companies Act and the same have also been scrutinised and audited by the statutory auditor, in absence of any material to negate these facts, the AO has limited power under section 115 JB of the Act to make adjustment to book profit

BHUPATI INVESTMENTS & FINANCE P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 5(1)(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri C.N. Prasadbhupati Investments & Finances Pvt Ltd V. Income Tax Officer B-34/35, 3Rd Floor 5(1)(2) Paragon Condominium Aayakar Bhavan P.B. Marg, Room No.525/570 Worli M.K.Road Mumbai 400 001 Mumbai 400 020 Pan : Aaacb 0441 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Bhupati Investments & Finances Pvt Ltd V. Acit – 5(1) B-34/35, 3Rd Floor Room No.525/570 Paragon Condominium Aayakar Bhavan P.B. Marg, M.K.Road Worli Mumbai 400 020 Mumbai 400 001 Pan : Aaacb 0441 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Nitesh Joshi

68,95,500/- from sale of its rights in the immovable property which had not been shown in the P&L Account but had been taken directly to the balance sheet. He referred to the sub- clause (xi) of clause-3 of Part-II of Schedule- VI as per which the assessee is required to show the amount of income

WADINAR POWER COMPANY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 5(3), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainm/S. Vadinar Power Company Ltd. Additional Cit-5(3) 5Th Floor, Tower-Ii, Equinox Aayakar Bhavan Business Park, Off Bandra Kurla Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai 400020 Complex, Lbs Marg, Kurla (W) Mumbai 400070 Pan - Aaacv5226C Appellant Respondent

68,000/- In coming to this view, the AO placed reliance on the decisions of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Veekaylal Investment Company Pvt. Ltd. reported in 249 ITR 597 and of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Kopran Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (119 ITD 355) (ITAT, Mumbai) to hold that these

DCIT, CIRCLE-1 ,, THANE vs. EVEREST INDUSTRIES LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the In the result, the assessee and Revenue are are educated as under:

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Everest Industries Limited, Dcit, Circle-1, D-206, Sector-63, Noida- Ashar I.T. Park, 6Th Floor, B- 201301, Vs. Wing, 16-Z, Wagle Industrial Uttar Pradesh Estate, Thane(W)- 400 604. Pan No. Aaace 7550 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14

68,23,521/- for the purpose of for the purpose of section 115JB of the section 115JB of the Act. The said return of income was revised on . The said return of income was revised on 31/03/2010 declaring loss at Rs.37,97,34, /03/2010 declaring loss at Rs.37,97,34,102/-under the normal under the normal provisions

EVEREST INDUSTRIES LTD, NOIDA vs. DY CIT CIRLCE-1 , THANE

In the result, the In the result, the assessee and Revenue are are educated as under:

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Everest Industries Limited, Dcit, Circle-1, D-206, Sector-63, Noida- Ashar I.T. Park, 6Th Floor, B- 201301, Vs. Wing, 16-Z, Wagle Industrial Uttar Pradesh Estate, Thane(W)- 400 604. Pan No. Aaace 7550 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14

68,23,521/- for the purpose of for the purpose of section 115JB of the section 115JB of the Act. The said return of income was revised on . The said return of income was revised on 31/03/2010 declaring loss at Rs.37,97,34, /03/2010 declaring loss at Rs.37,97,34,102/-under the normal under the normal provisions