BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

9 results for “section 68”+ Section 195Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Bangalore17Mumbai9Delhi7Pune4Kolkata3

Key Topics

Section 201(1)5Section 206A5Section 9(1)(vi)5Section 143(3)4Depreciation4Addition to Income4Section 115A3Double Taxation/DTAA3Transfer Pricing3Section 194A2Section 14A2Section 44B2

MAN INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT ,CENTRAL RANGE -7 (2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1490/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2022AY 2014-15
Section 195A

section 195A of the Act. He also expressed the view that the bond holder may also claim credit for the withholding tax as per the provisions of DTAA. Accordingly he confirmed the disallowance of depreciation made by the Assessing Officer in all the three years under consideration. 6. The learned AR submitted that the Assessing Officer has made

DCIT CC 7(2).MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MAN INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed

ITA 619/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2020-2021

For Respondent: Mr. K. Gopal
Section 14ASection 194ASection 40

68,96, ,338/- was claimed by the assesse. The AO during was claimed by the assesse. The AO during the assessment proceedings noted that depreciation on the the assessment proceedings noted that depreciation on the the assessment proceedings noted that depreciation on the excess payment made to FCCB holders can not be allowed and excess payment made to FCCB holders

ITO 15(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. KELLOGG INDIA P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee, is partly allowed

ITA 1906/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma & Shri Vikas Awasthy

For Appellant: S/Shri Hirali Desai & Karan MehtaFor Respondent: Ms. Nillu Jaggi
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 32Section 72Section 72(2)Section 92C

68,29,302/-. The ld.Authorized Representative of the assessee submitted that the issue raised in the appeal by the Revenue is squarely covered by the decision of Tribunal in assessee’s own case in ITA No.2866/Mum/2014 for assessment year 2009-10 decided on 19/07/2019, wherein the entire adjustment has been deleted on 7 ITA NO.2314/MUM/2017(A.Y.2012-13) the ground that there

KELLOGG INDIA PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO 15(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee, is partly allowed

ITA 2262/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma & Shri Vikas Awasthy

For Appellant: S/Shri Hirali Desai & Karan MehtaFor Respondent: Ms. Nillu Jaggi
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 32Section 72Section 72(2)Section 92C

68,29,302/-. The ld.Authorized Representative of the assessee submitted that the issue raised in the appeal by the Revenue is squarely covered by the decision of Tribunal in assessee’s own case in ITA No.2866/Mum/2014 for assessment year 2009-10 decided on 19/07/2019, wherein the entire adjustment has been deleted on 7 ITA NO.2314/MUM/2017(A.Y.2012-13) the ground that there

ATOMSTROYEXPORT ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (IT)CIRCLE -1(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 575/MUM/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 44B

68/[2012] 25 taxmann.com 225 and Delhi High in Linde AG, Linde Engg. Division, (supra) which, in turn, placed reliance on Apex Court's decision in Ishikawajma-Harima Heavy Industries Ltd. (supra). 14.16 Ld. DR has relied upon the decision in Roxar Maxmium Reservoir Performance WLL (supra), where the authority for advance rulings has held that a contract

ITO(IT)1(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. ATOS WORLDWIDE INDIA PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6424/MUM/2016[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 6424/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16) बिाम/ Ito(It)1(1)(2) Atos Worldwide India Pvt. R.No. 113, First Floor, Ltd. Scindia House, N.M. Road, 701, Interface-11, V. Ballard Estate, New Link Road, Mumbai- 400038 Malad(W), Mumbai-400064 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aaace2403J (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Rajat Mittal
Section 115ASection 2Section 201Section 201(1)Section 206ASection 90(2)Section 90A

195A, 206AA and 115A of the Act and came to the conclusion that assessee was required to deduct income-tax at source at the rate of 25.75% as provided u/s. 115A I.T.A. No. 6424/Mum/2016 and not @ 20% as specified u/s 206AA , which led to the framing of the order dated 23.03.2015 passed

KELLOGG INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 10(3), MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2866/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyand Shri N.K. Pradhan

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna a/wFor Respondent: Shri Rajneesh Yadav
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92B

68,29,302. The adjustment suggested by the Transfer Pricing Officer was added back to the income of the assessee while framing the draft assessment order. Though, the assessee raised objections against the draft assessment order before learned DRP, however, the adjustment made by the TPO was upheld. 4. The learned Authorised Representative submitted, the AMP expenditure incurred

DCIT (IT)-4(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S RELIANCE JIO INFOCOMM LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 2866/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2866/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Dcit(It)-4(1)(1) बिधम/ M/S. Reliance Jio Room No. 1712, 17Th Floor, Infocomm Ltd Vs. Air India Building, Nariman 3Rd Floor, Maker Point, Mumbai-400021. Chamber-Iv, 222, Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabci6363G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Nimesh Vora/Ms. Moksha Moksha Mehta Revenue By: None सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 24/02/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 26/04/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac, Mumbai Dated 08.09.2022 For The Ay 2019-20. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Of The Revenue Are As Under: - A. “Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Holding That Tax Was Not Required To Be Deducted At Source On The Payment Made By The Assessee To Reliance Jio Infocomm Uk (Rjiuk) For Availing Bandwidth Services As It Did Not Amount To Income Of The Payee By Way Of Royalty U/S 9(1)(Vi) Of The It Act, 1961 Read With Article 13 Of The India-Uk Dtaa. B. “Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld, Cit(A) Has Erred In Holding That Tax Was Not Required To Be Deducted At Source On The Payment Made By The Assessee To Reliance Jio Infocomm Uk (Rjiuk) For Availing Bandwidth Services As It Did Not Amount To Income Of The Payee

For Appellant: Shri Nimesh Vora/Ms. MokshaFor Respondent: None
Section 195Section 248Section 9Section 9(1)(vi)

68. On a final note, India's change in position to the OECD Commentary cannot be a fact that influences the interpretation of the words defining royalty as they stand today. The only manner in which such change in position can be relevant is if such change is incorporated into the agreement itself and not otherwise. A change in executive

DY CIT CC 7 (2), MUMBAI vs. M/S MAN GLOBAL LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and cross objections of the assessee in CO Nos

ITA 7440/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Sri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ Ita No. 7440/Mum/2019 अपील (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2011-12) आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ Ita No. 7533/Mum/2019 अपील (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2012-13) आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ Ita No. 7534/Mum/2019 अपील (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2013-14) आयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं./ Ita No. 7535/Mum/2019 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2014-15) आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ Ita No. 7536/Mum/2019 अपील (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2015-16)

section 37 of the Act which reads as under: 37. (1) Any expenditure (not being expenditure of the nature described In sections 30 to 36 [**] and not being in the nature of capital expenditure or personal expenses of the assessee), laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for - the purposes of the business or profession shall be allowed