ASST CIT CIR 2, THANE vs. SALASAR DEVELOPERS, THANE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

11A) [***] (12) [***] [(13) The provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), relating to searches and seizure shall apply, so far as may be, to searches and seizure under sub-section (1) or sub-section (1A).] (14) The Board may make rules in relation to any search or seizure under this section ; in particular, and without prejudice

SHREE PUSHKAR CHEMICALS & FERTILISERS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 7(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.5388/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2010-11) बिाम/ Shree Puskhar Chemicals Dcit 7(2) & Fertilisers Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, 202-A Wing, Mumbai V. Building No. 3, Rahul Mittal Industrial Estate, Sir M V Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400059 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaacs9372E (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri. V. K. Chaturvedi (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 09.04.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.05.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Assessee, Being Ita No. 5388/Mum/2016, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 28.06.2016 In Appeal No. Cit(A)-14/It-108/2012-13, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-14, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called ―The Cit(A)‖), For Assessment Year 2010-11, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From Assessment Order Dated 09.01.2013 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called ―The Ao‖) U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ―The Act‖) For Ay 2010-11. I.T.A. No.5388/Mum/2016

11A and 13 of the said Act by the Central Government and are covered by the provisions of paragraphs (1) and (2) above relating to the ancillary or small scale industrial undertaking, may be registered, at the discretion of the owner, as such, within a period of one hundred and eighty days from the date of publication of this notification

ACIT-2(2)(1), MMUMBAI vs. M/S. JICS LOGISTIC LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 &

1 and Annexure-A2, were annexed to the audit report. to the audit report. The Annexure:A-1 represented 1 represented working of depreciation as per Act working of depreciation as per Act on the WDV of M/c Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior

ACIT-2(2)(1), MMUMBAI vs. M/S. JICS LOGISTIC LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 &

1 and Annexure-A2, were annexed to the audit report. to the audit report. The Annexure:A-1 represented 1 represented working of depreciation as per Act working of depreciation as per Act on the WDV of M/c Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior

ACIT-2(2)(1), MMUMBAI vs. M/S. JICS LOGISTIC LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 &

1 and Annexure-A2, were annexed to the audit report. to the audit report. The Annexure:A-1 represented 1 represented working of depreciation as per Act working of depreciation as per Act on the WDV of M/c Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior

ACIT-2(2)(1), MMUMBAI vs. M/S. JICS LOGISTIC LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 &

1 and Annexure-A2, were annexed to the audit report. to the audit report. The Annexure:A-1 represented 1 represented working of depreciation as per Act working of depreciation as per Act on the WDV of M/c Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior

ACIT-2(2)(1), MMUMBAI vs. M/S. JICS LOGISTIC LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 &

1 and Annexure-A2, were annexed to the audit report. to the audit report. The Annexure:A-1 represented 1 represented working of depreciation as per Act working of depreciation as per Act on the WDV of M/c Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior

ACIT-2(2)(1), MMUMBAI vs. M/S. JICS LOGISTIC LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 &

1 and Annexure-A2, were annexed to the audit report. to the audit report. The Annexure:A-1 represented 1 represented working of depreciation as per Act working of depreciation as per Act on the WDV of M/c Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior

ACIT-2(2)(1), MMUMBAI vs. M/S. JICS LOGISTIC LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 &

1 and Annexure-A2, were annexed to the audit report. to the audit report. The Annexure:A-1 represented 1 represented working of depreciation as per Act working of depreciation as per Act on the WDV of M/c Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior

ACIT-2(2)(1), MMUMBAI vs. M/S. JICS LOGISTIC LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 &

1 and Annexure-A2, were annexed to the audit report. to the audit report. The Annexure:A-1 represented 1 represented working of depreciation as per Act working of depreciation as per Act on the WDV of M/c Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior

ADDL CIT R G 7(1), MUMBAI vs. NOVARTIS INDIA LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS HINDUSTAN CIBA GIEGY LTD. ), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Novartis India Limited V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income –Tax - 7(2)(2) {Earlier Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} 6Th& 7Th Floor 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Inspire Bkc M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 “G” Block, Bkc Main Road Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400051 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1) V. M/S. Novartis India Limited Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No.190/Mum/2011 [Arising Out Of Ita No.6772/Mum/2010 (A.Y. 2002-03)] M/S. Novartis India Limited V. Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 143(2) proceeding and was treated as such by the assessee preclude it from urging lack of jurisdiction." (emphasis supplied) (3) There is no interplay of section 127 as held in para 8, in the following words- "8. As far as the section 127 goes, we are of the opinion that having regard to the findings rendered, that question

ACIT CIR 7(1), MUMBAI vs. NOVARTIS INDIA ( FORMELRY KNOWN AS HINDUSTAN CIBA GIEGY LTD), MUMBAI

In the result, (i) the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose (ii) the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and (iii) the Cross Objections filed by the assessee ...

Bench: Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawal & Co 76/Mum/2013 (A.Y 2003-04) Novartis India Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income–Tax–14(1)(1) Inspire Bkc, 7Th Floor, Room No 432, Bandra Kurla Complex, Aaykar Bhawan, Bandra (E) M.K. Marg, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400020. Pan/Gir No. Aaach2914F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Deputy Commissioner Vs. Novartis India Limited Of Income–Tax–14(1)(1) Inspire Bkc, 7Th Floor, Room No 432, Bandra Kurla Complex, Aaykar Bhawan, Bandra (E) M.K. Marg, Mumbai-400051 Mumbai-400020 Pan/Gir No. Aaach2914F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant (""यथ"/Respondent)

1) of Expln. (baa). 11A. Counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue submitted that the insurance claim has no element of export turnover and that consequently it must sustain a reduction of ninety per cent under Expln. (baa). Now it is necessary to note that Expln. (baa) in terms does not refer to export turnover. Sub- section (1) of section

TATA CHEMICALS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

11A) and (11B) (such business being hereinafter referred to as the eligible business), there shall, in accordance (1) with and subject to the provisions of this section, be allowed, in computing the total income of the assessee, a deduction from such profits and gains of an amount equal to such percentage and for such number of assessment years as specified

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

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

11A) and (11B) (such business being hereinafter referred to as the eligible business), there shall, in accordance (1) with and subject to the provisions of this section, be allowed, in computing the total income of the assessee, a deduction from such profits and gains of an amount equal to such percentage and for such number of assessment years as specified

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

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

11A) and (11B) (such business being hereinafter referred to as the eligible business), there shall, in accordance (1) with and subject to the provisions of this section, be allowed, in computing the total income of the assessee, a deduction from such profits and gains of an amount equal to such percentage and for such number of assessment years as specified

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

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

11A) and (11B) (such business being hereinafter referred to as the eligible business), there shall, in accordance (1) with and subject to the provisions of this section, be allowed, in computing the total income of the assessee, a deduction from such profits and gains of an amount equal to such percentage and for such number of assessment years as specified

VODAFONE INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 7(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

1) wherein the Hon‟ble Supreme Court observed as under:- ‘’A. Evolution of the Hutchison structure and the Transaction 3. The Hutchison Group, Hong Kong (HK) first invested into the telecom business in India in 1992 when the said Group invested in an Indian joint venture vehicle by the name Hutchison Max Telecom Limited (HMTL) - later renamed

INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. SOHNI DEPAK TANNA, MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the learned assessing officer and cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm C.O.No. 135/Mum/2022 (Assessment Year 2014-15) Sohni Dipak Tanna Ito 1(1)(1), Mumbai 2Nd Floor, Tanna House, 11A, 534, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Nathlal Parekh Marg, M. K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Acept3611J Sohni Dipak Tanna Ito 1(1)(1), Mumbai 2Nd Floor, Tanna House, 11A, 534, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Nathlal Parekh Marg, M. K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Acept3611J Assessee By : Shri. Madhur Agrawal & Pankaj Jain Revenue By : Shri. Kishor Dhule Date Of Hearing: 03.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.10.2023

11A, 534, 5th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Nathlal Parekh Marg, M. K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400001 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. ACEPT3611J Assessee by : Shri. Madhur Agrawal & Pankaj Jain Revenue by : Shri. Kishor Dhule Date of hearing: 03.10.2023 Date of pronouncement : 30.10.2023 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM: 01. This appeal is filed by the income