DCIT v. Royal Jordanians Airlines (ITAT, Del-SB)

98 ITD 1Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2006#14578 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2022.

Judgments citing DCIT v. Royal Jordanians Airlines (ITAT, Del-SB)

AIR CONTRAL INDIA PVT. LTD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), PUNE

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 1538/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jun 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri B. B. ManeFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 32Section 32(1)(iia)

…business of generation of power. During the year two windmills were acquired and installed. Assessee claimed additional depreciation of Rs.2,19,29,891/- u/s.32(1)(iia). Assessing Officer disallowed same by relying of the decision of Tamilnadu Chlorates [2006] 98 ITD 1 (Chennai) (Trib.). CIT(A) upheld the disallowance by relying upon the explanatory notes (memorandum) to amendments as inserted by Fiance Act, 2012. The stand of assessee has been that ITAT Chennai Bench in Tamilnadu Chlorates (suupra) has been relied upon by Assessing Officer was not relevant to current scenario as dealt with the provisions of Secti…

AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5163/DEL/2012[2011-12 (F.Y. 2010-11)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2021

Bench: Sh. K. N. Charydr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 5162/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 5163/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Airports Authority Of India, Vs Income Tax Officer(Tds), Rajiv Gandhi Bhavan, Safdarjung Ward-1(1), Airport, New Delhi-110003 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaca6412D Assessee By : Sh. Ashish Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Sohail Malik, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.02.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.05.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sohail Malik, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(6)(ii)Section 115A

…tion cannot be made applicable to any entity which is not exempted under Income tax act. No general immunity from tax has been provided to a foreign sovereign in Indian IT Act, 1961. It has been held in case of DCIT vs Royal Jordanians Airlines (ITAT, Del-SB) 98 ITD 1 that no immunity from tax is available to a sovereign unless it has been specifically granted. In section 10 of the Act, which deals with various incomes which are exempted from tax, certain incomes accruing to foreign govt. has been made exempt. For ITA No. 5162 & 5163/Del/2012 12 Airport Authority of India example, section 10(15A) exempts any pay…

AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5162/DEL/2012[2010-11 (F.Y. 2009-10)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2021

Bench: Sh. K. N. Charydr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 5162/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 5163/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Airports Authority Of India, Vs Income Tax Officer(Tds), Rajiv Gandhi Bhavan, Safdarjung Ward-1(1), Airport, New Delhi-110003 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaca6412D Assessee By : Sh. Ashish Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Sohail Malik, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.02.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.05.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sohail Malik, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(6)(ii)Section 115A

…tion cannot be made applicable to any entity which is not exempted under Income tax act. No general immunity from tax has been provided to a foreign sovereign in Indian IT Act, 1961. It has been held in case of DCIT vs Royal Jordanians Airlines (ITAT, Del-SB) 98 ITD 1 that no immunity from tax is available to a sovereign unless it has been specifically granted. In section 10 of the Act, which deals with various incomes which are exempted from tax, certain incomes accruing to foreign govt. has been made exempt. For ITA No. 5162 & 5163/Del/2012 12 Airport Authority of India example, section 10(15A) exempts any pay…

ACIT CIR 27(1), NAVI MUMBAI vs. DEEPALI ATUL GANATRA, MUMBAI

ITA 7251/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2018AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Aditya Ajgaonkar -ARFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari-Sr.AR-CIT
Section 143(3)Section 32Section 32(1)(iia)Section 80H

…business of generation of power. During the year two windmills were acquired and installed. Assessee claimed additional depreciation of Rs.2,19,29,891/- u/s.32(1)(iia). Assessing Officer disallowed same by relying of the decision of Tamilnadu Chlorates [2006] 98 ITD 1 (Chennai) (Trib.). CIT(A) upheld the disallowance by relying upon the explanatory notes (memorandum) to amendments as inserted by Finance Act, 2012. The stand of assessee has been that ITAT Chennai Bench in Tamilnadu Chlorates (supra) has been relied upon by Assessing Officer was not relevant to current scenario as dealt with the provisions of Secti…

ITO, MEERUT vs. M/S. GUPTA KHANDSARI WORKS, MEERUT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1990/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. S.C. Bansal, Advocate
Section 143(2)Section 145(3)

…assessment year is a separate unit and principal of res judicata is not applicable in Income Tax proceedings . Reliance is placed on the following:- i. CIT Vs Syed Saddique Imam and Others (Patna) 111 ITR 475. ii. Tamilnadu Chlorates Vs JCIT (ITAT, Chennai) 98 ITD 1. iii. New Jahangir Vakil Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT(SC) 49 ITR 137. iv. Kotak Mahindra Finance Ltd. Vs. DCIT(Bom) 265 ITR 114. v. K. Bhaskaran Nair Vs CIT (Kerla) 177 Taxman 478. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the manufacturing of Gur, Rab, Khandsari and Gur-raskat from crushing of sugarcane. The assessee filed its re…

ATUL SHIVDAS GANATRA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 22(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 4899/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

For Appellant: Shri K. Shivaram, A.RFor Respondent: A. Ramachandran, D.R
Section 32(1)(iia)Section 80

…business of generation of power. During the year two windmills were acquired and installed. Assessee claimed additional depreciation of Rs.2,19,29,891/- u/s.32(1)(iia). Assessing Officer disallowed same by relying of the decision of Tamilnadu Chlorates [2006] 98 ITD 1 (Chennai) (Trib.). CIT(A) upheld the disallowance by relying upon the explanatory notes (memorandum) to amendments as inserted by Fiance Act, 2012. The stand of assessee has been that ITAT Chennai Bench in Tamilnadu Chlorates (suupra) has been relied upon by Assessing Officer was not relevant to current scenario as dealt with the provisions of Secti…

NALWA STEEL & POWER LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT,, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 2707/DEL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Nov 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Tulsiyan, CAFor Respondent: Shri P. Dam Kanunjna, Senior DR
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘E’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI A.T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.2707/Del./2009 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06) M/s. Nalwa Steel & Power Limited, vs. Addl.CIT, Range 13, (Earlier known as Nalwa Sponge Iron Ltd.) New Delhi. 28, Najafgarh Road, New Delhi – 110 015. (PAN : AABCN3209L) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri V.K. Tulsiyan, CA REVENUE BY : Shri P. Dam Kanunjna, Senior DR Date of Hearing : 02.09.2015 Date of Pronouncement : 18.11.2015 O R D E R PER A.T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER : This appeal, at the instance of the…

DCIT v. Royal Jordanians Airlines (ITAT, Del-SB) (98 ITD 1) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax