DEUTSCHE INDIA PVT. LTD.(EARLIER KNOWN AS 'DBOI GLOBAL SERVICES PVT. LTD.),MUMBAI vs. ACIT-1(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for 16

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

iii) of the Rules for the differences in risk profile of the Appellant vis-à-vis alleged comparable companies selected by the TPO. g. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. TPO / the Ld. AO and Hon'ble DRP erred in not demonstrating that the motive of the Appellant was to shift

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) 2(1), MUMBAI vs. SHREE SAI BABA SANSTHAN TRUST (SHIRDI), MUMBAI

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

iii) to perform such other functions and festivals as may be decided by the Board of Management. 25 A.Ys. 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 Shri Sai Baba Sansthan Trust (Shirdi). iv) to give aids to the poor and deserving at Shirdi provided donations are received" Specifically in that behalf (and for no other purpose) and also to give necessary

SHREE SAI BABA SANSTHAN TRUST (SHIRDI),MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) 2(1), MUMBAI

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

iii) to perform such other functions and festivals as may be decided by the Board of Management. 25 A.Ys. 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 Shri Sai Baba Sansthan Trust (Shirdi). iv) to give aids to the poor and deserving at Shirdi provided donations are received" Specifically in that behalf (and for no other purpose) and also to give necessary

DY. COMMISSIONER O INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI vs. SHREE SAI BABA SANSTHAN TRUST(SHIRDI), MUMBAI

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

iii) to perform such other functions and festivals as may be decided by the Board of Management. 25 A.Ys. 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 Shri Sai Baba Sansthan Trust (Shirdi). iv) to give aids to the poor and deserving at Shirdi provided donations are received" Specifically in that behalf (and for no other purpose) and also to give necessary

DY. COMMISSIONER O INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI vs. SHREE SAI BABA SANSTHAN TRUST(SHIRDI), MUMBAI

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

iii) to perform such other functions and festivals as may be decided by the Board of Management. 25 A.Ys. 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 Shri Sai Baba Sansthan Trust (Shirdi). iv) to give aids to the poor and deserving at Shirdi provided donations are received" Specifically in that behalf (and for no other purpose) and also to give necessary

THE RUBY MILLS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PCIT (CENTRAL) - 8, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Prabhash Shankar(Physical Hearing) The Ruby Mills Limited Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax 11Th Floor, Ruby House A, Vs (Central)-5, Aayakar Bhawan, J.K. Sawant Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai – 400028. [Pan No. Aaact0220G] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

68 and addition under head income from business and profession. The assessment was revised, ld. Pr. CIT by exercising jurisdiction under section 263 on 10.03.2025. Before passing the order under section 263, the ld. Pr. CIT issued show cause notice dated 28.02.2025. In the show cause notice, the ld. Pr. CIT noted that on perusal of assessment record

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE RETAIL LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed, whereas the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (Vice President), SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR (Accountant Member)

80G to meet Corporate Social Responsibility. Additional claim of foreign tax credit not granted: Rs. 78,67,620 5. Erred in disallowing the additional claim of foreign tax credit of Rs. 78,67,620 on the ground that the Appellant did not file the Form 67 before the due date of filing the Return of Income (‘ROI’); 6. Erred

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

5,26,845/- consequentially on the alleged ground that no refund is due on regular assessment. 2. The Appellant submits that the interest u/s 234D of the Act ought to be deleted. 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

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

5,26,845/- consequentially on the alleged ground that no refund is due on regular assessment. 2. The Appellant submits that the interest u/s 234D of the Act ought to be deleted. 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

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

Accordingly, this ground is allowed

5,26,845/- consequentially on the alleged ground that no refund is due on regular assessment. 2. The Appellant submits that the interest u/s 234D of the Act ought to be deleted. 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

SOLA HAKIM MEDICAL RESEARCH TRUST, MUMBAI vs. DIT (E), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm Sola Hakim Medical Vs. The Director Of Income- Research Trust Tax(Exemption), Mumbai 9, Hamton Court Colaba, Mumbai – 400 005 Pan/Gir No.Aacts2195J (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

iii)The amount of consideration of Rs. 68,00,000/- (Rupees Sixty Eight Lakhs only) shall be kept intact as a corpus in the form of investment permissible under Section 35(1) of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 and it should not be withdrawn without prior permission of this Authority. iv)The interest accrued on the investments shall

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

Accordingly, this ground is allowed

5,26,845/- consequentially on the alleged ground that no refund is due on regular assessment. 2. The Appellant submits that the interest u/s 234D of the Act ought to be deleted. 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

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

68. Ground No. 4 pertains to deduction of INR 10,00,00,000/- claimed under 80G of the Act. 69. In view of paragraph 28 to 31 above, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by CIT(A) and confirm the order of the Assessing Officer to the extent the Assessing Officer held that

RELIANCE RETAIL LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 8(1)(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

80G to meet Corporate Social Responsibility. Additional claim of foreign tax credit not granted: Rs. 78,67,620 5. Erred in disallowing the additional claim of foreign tax credit of Rs. 78,67,620 on the ground that the Appellant did not file the Form 67 before the due date of filing the Return of Income (‘ROI’); 6. Erred

DCIT-13(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S.SHUBHAM MOTIWALA & JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Bledcit – 13(2)(2) V. M/S. Shubham Motiwala & Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., Shop No. 5, Unity Heights, Chincholi Jn, 1St Floor, Room No. 146 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Sv Road, Malad, Mumbai – 400064 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aahcs1597A

80G and 80GGB of Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short “Act”) and the return was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act. The case was selected for scrutiny and notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) were issued and served on the assessee. In response, Authorised Representative attended and filed relevant information as called for. 3. Assessee is engaged

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

80G of the Act. M/s Piramal Enterprises Ltd. 7 WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUND I, WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUND I, II, III AND VI AS II, III AND VI AS MENTIONED ABOVE: MENTIONED ABOVE: GROUND NO. VIII: DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION SOGGB GROUND NO. VIII: DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION SOGGB GROUND NO. VIII: DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION SOGGB

MARTIN AND HARRIS LABORATORIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (PCIT), AAYKAR BHAWAN,MUMBAI-400020

In the result, the present appeal by the Assessee is allowed

68,54,840/- after claiming accounting MAT Credit brought forward from earlier years. The case of the Appellant was selected for scrutiny and assessment was completed on 16.12.2019 under Section 143(3) of the Act determining the total income at INR 30,25,86,600/- after making the addition/disallowance on account of advertisement and promotion expenses

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)

5) Retail Scan Management Services P Ltd (6) Turner & Townsend P Ltd (7) Laurent and benon Management Consultants Ltd (8) Right Management India P Ltd (9) Fleet Management Services Ltd (10) HDFC Capital Advisors Ltd. The median margin of above set of comparables was 22.55%. Accordingly, the TPO proposed transfer pricing adjustment of Rs.1