DCIT 6(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. CEAT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed, and departmental appeal is treated as infructuous

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Dcit-6(2)(1) M/S. Ceat Ltd. Room No.563, Aaykar Bhawan Rpg House, 463 M.K.Road, Churchgate Vs. Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 030

3) of such section, then the interest originally granted would be substituted by the reduced/increased amount, as the case may be. Thus, income on account of interest if assessed can be rectified under section 154. Therefore, interest on refund under section 244A(1) granted to the assessee in the proceedings under section 143(1)(a) would

ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE AMC LIMITED,MAHARASHTRA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CIRCLE 6(1)(1), MAHARASHTRA

244A of the Act. GENERAL The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, modify, rescind, supplement or alter any of the Grounds stated hereinabove, either before or at the time of hearing of this appeal. Α.Υ. 2023-24 (ITA No. 6703/Mum/2025) GROUND NO. I: SHORT-TERM CAPITAL GAINS U/S 111A OF THE ACT AMOUNTING

ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE AMC LIMITED,MAHARASHTRA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CIRCLE 6(1)(1), MAHARASHTRA

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar1. Ita No. 6663/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) 2. Ita No. 6701/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) 3. Ita No. 6702/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 4. Ita No. 6703/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2023-24) Aditya Birla Sun Life Dcitcircle-6(1)(1), Amc Limited, Room No. 502, 5Th 17Th Floor, One World Vs. Floor, Aayakar Centre Tower-1, Jupiter Bhavan, M. K. Mill Compount, 841, Road, Churchgate, Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai-400 020 Delisle Road, S.O. Mumbai-400 013 Pan/Gir No. Aaacb6134D (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ronak Doshi, Shri Shrey Agrawal & Shri Aadish Jain, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 27.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 06.02.2026

244A of the Act. GENERAL The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, modify, rescind, supplement or alter any of the Grounds stated hereinabove, either before or at the time of hearing of this appeal. A.Y. 2023–24 (ITA No. 6703/Mum/2025) GROUND NO. I: SHORT-TERM CAPITAL GAINS U/S 111A OF THE ACT AMOUNTING

ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE AMC LIMITED,MAHARASHTRA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 6(1)(1), MAHARASHTRA

Accordingly, this ground is allowed

244A of the Act. GENERAL The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, modify, rescind, supplement or alter any of the Grounds stated hereinabove, either before or at the time of hearing of this appeal. A.Y. 2023-24 (ITA No. 6703/Mum/2025) GROUND NO. I: SHORT-TERM CAPITAL GAINS U/S 111A OF THE ACT AMOUNTING

ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE AMC LIMITED,MAHARASHTRA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CIRCLE 6 (1)(1), MAHARASHTRA

Accordingly, this ground is allowed

244A of the Act. GENERAL The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, modify, rescind, supplement or alter any of the Grounds stated hereinabove, either before or at the time of hearing of this appeal. Α.Υ. 2023-24 (ITA No. 6703/Mum/2025) GROUND NO. I: SHORT-TERM CAPITAL GAINS U/S 111A OF THЕ АСТ AMOUNTING

M/S PIRAMAL ENTERPRISES LIMIITED ,MUMBSI vs. DY CIT(APPEAL)-RANGE-8(2)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S Piramal Enterprises Ltd., Dy. Cit, Mumbai-8(1)(2), Or Piramal Tower, Agastya National Facelss Assessment Vs. Corporate Park, Lbs Marg, Centre, Delhi, Kamani Junction, Kurla Room No. 624, 6Th Floor, (West), Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400070. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacn 4538 P Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Ronak Doshi : Revenue By Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Cit-Dr & Mr. Samuel Pitta, Dr : Date Of Hearing 17/11/2022 : Date Of Pronouncement 28/12/2022

244A of the Act. 2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the assessee Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the assessee Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the assessee-company was engaged in the business of manufacturing was engaged in the business of manufacturing of of pharmaceutical formulations as well as trading in pharmaceutical

TATA CHEMICALS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 2(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Ravish Soodtata Chemicals Limited Commissioner Of Income Tax-2 Bombay House, 24, 384, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Homi Mody, Street, Fort, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 001 Pan – Aaact4059M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Nitesh Joshi & Shri Atul Suraiya, A.Rs Respondent By: Shri R. Manjunatha Swami, Cit D.R Date Of Hearing: 18.09.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.09.2019

244A of the Act; 3. Any other relief which the Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit in the nature and circumstances of the case. The appellant craves leave of the Hon‟ble Tribunal to add, alter, amend or modify any of the above grounds of appeal.” P a g e | 3 ITA No.2495/Mum/2009 A.Y. 2004-05 Tata Chemicals Limited Vs. Commissioner

M/S CHEMET,MUMBAI vs. ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 19(2) , MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 1996-97 M/S. Chemet, Asst. Commissioner Of 2Nd Floor, Income Tax, Span Centre, 556, Circle-19(2), Vs. Ramkrishna Mission Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Santacruz (West), Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai – 400 054 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaafc0996P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri M. Subramanian, A.R. Revenue By : Shri B. Bagchi, D.R.

68,749/- interest u/s 244A of the act. 2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case & in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in not directing the granting of interest u/s 244A of the act on the refund of Self-Assessment tax payment. 2 M/s. Chemet 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

THE INDIAN HOTELS COMPANY LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR. 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

68,27,745/- as against transfer pricing adjustment of INR 179,61,83,140/- proposed in Draft Assessment Order. The Assessing Officer also made disallowance/addition of INR 8,55,98,057/- under Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules as proposed in the Draft Assessment Order. The DRP, however, deleted the disallowance

DCIT-2(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. THE INDIAN HOTELS COMPANY LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

68,27,745/- as against transfer pricing adjustment of INR 179,61,83,140/- proposed in Draft Assessment Order. The Assessing Officer also made disallowance/addition of INR 8,55,98,057/- under Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules as proposed in the Draft Assessment Order. The DRP, however, deleted the disallowance

ACIT- 3(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. MM/S SANOFI INDIA LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS AVENTIS PHARMA LTD)., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

244A(1) would be assessable in the year in which it is granted and not in the year in which proceedings under Section 143(1)(a) attain finality.” 55. Respectfully following the above said decision, this issue is decided in favour of the revenue. Accordingly, this ground is dismissed. 56. With regard to, Ground No. 10 which

M/S SANOFI INDIA LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS AVENTIS PHARMA LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT RG 8(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

244A(1) would be assessable in the year in which it is granted and not in the year in which proceedings under Section 143(1)(a) attain finality.” 55. Respectfully following the above said decision, this issue is decided in favour of the revenue. Accordingly, this ground is dismissed. 56. With regard to, Ground No. 10 which

TATA MOTORS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT LTU 2, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

68,40,27,967 70,55,000 70,55,00,000 32,90,44,20,857 44,38,13,92,393 31,53,10,17,212 1285,03,75,181 6.4. During the course of the assessment proceeding, after examination of the aforesaid details submitted vide letter dated 28.10.2015. the Ld. AO vide Order Sheet Entry, further called for evidences

BAJAJ HOLDINGS & INVESTMENT LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS BAJAJ AUTO LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT (LTU) 1, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumar

3) in which credit in respect of TDS was granted only to the extent of Rs.11,92,15,936/- thereby short granting of TDS to the tune of Rs.3,33,73,572/-. Thereafter, the assessee filed rectification application dated 12.08.2005 under section 154 of the Act for rectification of aforesaid mistake and simultaneously filed appeal before

UNION BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT LTU, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2008-09 Union Bank Of India, Acit Ltu, Central Accounts 29Th Floor, World बनाम/ Department, Vi Floor, 239 Trade Centre, Cuff Vs. Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Parade Nariman Point Mumbai -400 021 Mumbai-400005 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaacu0564G Assessee By Shri C. Naresh (Ar) Revenue By Shri G.M. Doss (Dr)

3. The solitary ground taken up before us was with regard to granting lesser amount of interest u/s 244A by the AO while computing refund arising as a result of passing impugned order for giving effect to CIT(A)’s order (i.e. appeal effect order) for Rs.64,53,58,824/- as against the correct amount of Rs.65

TATA MOTORS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT LTU 2, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 3424/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14)

244A 3 I.T.A. No. 3424/Mum/2019 Tata Motors Ltd already provided and MAT credit of Rs. 71,72,17,877/- also needed to be withdrawn. Accordingly, assessee was asked to submit the submission in this regard and in response, assessee filed a detail written submission on this matter and we are reproducing only relevant paragraphs:- 3. Exercise of powers

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

3 2007-08 - 3 15.1. On this issue, ld. Assessing Officer noted that assessee had withdrawn a sum of Rs.50 Crores from Special Reserve No. 1 towards “provisions for contingency” as reported in Schedule II of the balance sheet for the year under consideration. According to him, Section 36(1)(viii) speaks only of special reserve created under that

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

3 2007-08 - 3 15.1. On this issue, ld. Assessing Officer noted that assessee had withdrawn a sum of Rs.50 Crores from Special Reserve No. 1 towards “provisions for contingency” as reported in Schedule II of the balance sheet for the year under consideration. According to him, Section 36(1)(viii) speaks only of special reserve created under that