BARCLAYS BANK PLC,MUMBAI vs. CIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-RANGE-1, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

Pricing Officer (TPO). The TPO vide order under section 92CA of the IT Act 1961, has not proposed any adjustments. Thereafter, assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s I44C(13) of the I.T. Act was passed by the AO on 27.09.2017 on total income of Rs 1,396051,319/-. 5. On these background, Ld. CIT observed as under :- “On examination

PRUDENTIAL PROCESS MANAGEMENT SERVICES INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 10(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purpose and the Revenue’s appeal and cross objection by the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1274/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & Co No. 102/Mum/2014 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 2131/Mum/2014) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Prudential Process Management The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Services India Private Limited, Tax, Range-10(3), बनाम/ Prudential Centre Avenue, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Vs. Hiranandani Business Park, Mumbai-400 020 Powai, Mumbai-400 076 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaccp 7204 Q (Assessee) (Revenue) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2131/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Prudential Process Management Tax, Range-10(3), Services India Private Limited, बनाम/ Room No. 451, 4Th Floor, Prudential Centre Avenue, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Hiranandani Business Park, Mumbai-400 020 Powai, Mumbai-400 076 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaccp 7204 Q (Revenue) : (Assessee) : Shri Percy J. Pardiwala/ Assessee By Shri Madhur Agrawal Revenue By : Shri Jayant Kumar/ Shri V. Jenardhanan सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 21.12.2017 & 23.03.2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 13.04.2018 Date Of Pronouncement

transfer pricing addition made by the TPO, an adjustment of Rs.1,040,350,000 can be alternatively made under the provisions of Section 50B of the Act. It is prayed that no adjustment can be alternatively made under the provisions of Section 50B of the Act. Provision of Information Technology enabled Services (ITeS) - Adjustment of Rs.14

THERMO FISHER SCIENTIFIC INDIA P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 15(3)(1), MUMBAI

50B in the hand of seller.\nWhereas the according the Assessing officer the acquisitions are in the nature\nof amalgamation. Before us, the learned counsel has referred to various\nclauses of business transfer agreement (BTA) in respect of units acquired from\nGSK and CTPL respectively. On perusal of relevant clauses referred, we find\nthat transaction in both the cases

CYFAST ENTERPRISES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 10(3), MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year:2011-12 Cyfast Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Afl House, Circle-10(3), बनाम/ Lok Bharati Complex, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Marol Maroshi Road, M.K. Road, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400059 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaacu4945K "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Nitesh Joshi & Shri Sunil Jhunjhunwala राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By Shri Anandi Verma-Cit-Dr

1) of section 45 provides that any profits or gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year shall, save as otherwise provided in certain sections allowing exemptions, be chargeable to income-tax under the head “Capital gains”, and shall be deemed to be the income of the previous year in which the transfer took

THERMO FISHER SCIENTIFIC INDIA P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 15(3)(1), MUMBAI

50B in the hand of seller.\nWhereas the according the Assessing officer the acquisitions are in the nature\nof amalgamation. Before us, the learned counsel has referred to various\nclauses of business transfer agreement (BTA) in respect of units acquired from\nGSK and CTPL respectively. On perusal of relevant clauses referred, we find\nthat transaction in both the cases

THERMO FISHER SCIENTIFIC INDIA P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 15(3)(1), MUMBAI

50B in the hand of seller.\nWhereas the according the Assessing officer the acquisitions are in the nature\nof amalgamation. Before us, the learned counsel has referred to various\nclauses of business transfer agreement (BTA) in respect of units acquired from\nGSK and CTPL respectively. On perusal of relevant clauses referred, we find\nthat transaction in both the cases

THERMO FISHER SCIENFTIFIC INDIA P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 15(3)(1), MUMBAI

50B in the hand of seller.\nWhereas the according the Assessing officer the acquisitions are in the nature\nof amalgamation. Before us, the learned counsel has referred to various\nclauses of business transfer agreement (BTA) in respect of units acquired from\nGSK and CTPL respectively. On perusal of relevant clauses referred, we find\nthat transaction in both the cases

THERMO FISHER SCIENTIFIC INDIA P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 15(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

50B in the hand of seller.\nWhereas the according the Assessing officer the acquisitions are in the nature\nof amalgamation. Before us, the learned counsel has referred to various\nclauses of business transfer agreement (BTA) in respect of units acquired from\nGSK and CTPL respectively. On perusal of relevant clauses referred, we find\nthat transaction in both the cases

DCIT CEN CIR 1(4), MUMBAI vs. GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

1 April 2021, the statutory scheme covered only transfers by way of sale. In the present case, the transfer was pursuant to the Scheme of Arrangement, which operates in rem and not merely between the contracting parties. Thus, the essential attributes of a “sale” are absent. Respectfully following the binding ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court

STRIDES ARCOLAB LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 15(3)(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

1 to section 50B of the Act and also on the relevant provisions of The Companies Act and Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act to submit that the revaluation reserve ought to 26 ITA 1903/Mum/2015 M/s Strides Arcolab Limited be excluded while arriving at the price at which the transaction is to take place and accordingly the same is within

NELCO LTD.,MUMBAI vs. A.C.I.T. RG. 15(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range 15(2)(1) Nelco Limited Room No.357, 2Nd Floor, El-6, Electronic Zone, Mahape, Navi Mumbai-400710 Vs. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaact1983C

50B of the Act 5.4.1 The appellant submitted that Sundry Creditors amounting to Rs. 1,30,41,920/- were not taken over by CGL as the same were old outstanding debts and legal proceedings were going on and hence, not transferred. The liabilities aggregating to Rs. 1,94,17,656/- were Nelco Ltd; A.Y. 2011-12; also not transferred

DUN & BRADSTREET INFORMATION SERVICES INDIA P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT 8, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm Dun & Bradstreet Information Vs. The Commissioner Of Services India Pvt. Ltd., Icc Income Tax, Chambers, 98, Saki Vihar Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Powai, Mumbai 400 072 M. K. Road, Mumbai Pan: Aaacd P Appellant .. Respondent

1 September 2002, i.e. for half year). (j) The proviso to section 32, provides for allowance of depreciation to the “acquirer”of the asset, based on the criteria of usage of the asset for more or less than 180 days. Hence, the claim of depreciation for more or less than 180 days shall apply only to the assets acquired during

ORICON ENTERPRISES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 3(3), MUMBAI

Bench: S/Sh. Rajendra & Pawan Singh

1),that the above admitted fact remained so even when the return was filed in response to notice u/s.148, that subsequent to the reassessment proceedings the dispute or the grievance of the assessee was confined to the computation as per section 50B of the Act, that the transaction in question was a 6 ITA/2913/Mum/2015; M/s. Oricon Enterprises Limited slump sale

GRASIM INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC-1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue and the assessee are partly allowed,\nand the additional ground of the assessee is dismissed

1 April 2021, the statutory scheme covered only transfers by way of\nsale. In the present case, the transfer was pursuant to the Scheme of Arrangement,\nwhich operates in rem and not merely between the contracting parties. Thus, the\nessential attributes of a “sale” are absent. Respectfully following the binding ratio\nlaid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court

ISC SPECIALITY CHEMICALS LLP ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 19(1)(5), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

50B ought to have been invoked and since the undertaking has been transferred at book value, the book net worth would be the fair value of consideration and the cost of acquisition resulting in NIL income. 9. The assessment order dated 16.04.2021 is bad in law and without jurisdiction having passed under section which is no longer in existence

M/S. BANK OF AMERICAN , N.A,MUMBAI vs. THE JT DIT (I.T)3, MUMBAI

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

transfer of the business as a whole. The assessee submitted that it has\nconsidered the capital gains arising to it on account of several assets as short-\nterm or long-term capital gains based on the nature of the asset and the\nperiod for which it was held.\n40.\nThe AO, vide assessment order passed under section

THE DY DIT (I.T) 1(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. BANK OF AMERICA N.A., MUMBAI

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

transfer of the business as a whole. The assessee submitted that it has\nconsidered the capital gains arising to it on account of several assets as short-\nterm or long-term capital gains based on the nature of the asset and the\nperiod for which it was held.\n40.\nThe AO, vide assessment order passed under section

ADITYA BIRLA TELECOM LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMM OF INCOME TAX 10(1), MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

50B of the Act; Ground no. 6 - Amortization of telecom license fees under Section 35ABB(2) of the Act 17. erred in disallowing the amortization of telecom license fees of Rs 9,47,36,842 claimed by the Appellant under Section 35ABB(2) of the Act; Ground no. 7 - Levy of interest under Section 234B of the Act 18. erred