Jay Engg. Works Ltd. v. CIT

166 Taxmann 115High Court2008#9671 most cited
11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2024.

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Jay Engg. Works Ltd. v. CIT

IHHR HOSPITALITY PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 04, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3109/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usm/S. Ihhr Hospitality Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Addl. Cit, 32/7, Samalka, Nh 8, Range – 04, New Delhi – 110 037. New Delhi. (Pan : Aaaci9385B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ranjan Chopra, Ca Revenue By : Shri Javed Akhtar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 30.05.2024 Date Of Order : 04.06.2024 Order Per Shamim Yahya: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (Appeals)-35, New Delhi Dated 13.02.2018 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Taken By The Assessee Read As Under :- “1. That The Revenue Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Making Disallowance Of ‘Project Pending Capitalization Written Off’ Expenses, Amounting To Rs.7,71,40,000/- & Treating These Expenses To Be Of Capital Nature. 2. That The Revenue Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Disallowing Interest Of Rs.5,40,62,940/- U/S 36(1)(Iii) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. (Revised Ground). 3. That The Revenue Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Disallowing A Sum Of Rs.9,61,305/- On Account Of Claim Of Roc Fee Under Section 35D Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2 .”

For Appellant: Shri Ranjan Chopra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT DR
Section 35DSection 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’ : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s. IHHR Hospitality Pvt. Ltd., vs. Addl. CIT, 32/7, Samalka, NH 8, Range – 04, New Delhi – 110 037. New Delhi. (PAN : AAACI9385B) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Ranjan Chopra, CA REVENUE BY : Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 30.05.2024 Date of Order : 04.06.2024 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. CIT (Appeals)-35, New Delhi dated 13.02.2018 for the assessment yea…

M/S GE T&D INDIA LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT LARGE TAX PAYER UNIT 1, CHENNAI

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

ITA 725/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 725/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010 - 11 Ge T&D India Ltd., The Dcit, 19/1, Ioc Building, Gst Road, Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit-1, Pallavaram, Chennai Chennai – 600 043. Pan: Aaacg 2115R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Sriram Seshadhri, C.A ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Marudhu Pandian, Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 17.11.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Sriram Seshadhri, C.A ""For Respondent: Shri S. Marudhu Pandian, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

…Unit-1 considered this objection and opposed the same by nature providing enduring benefit to the assessee. The AO considered the following decisions in favour of assessee- a) CIT Vs. Rane Madras 2007 TIOL 551 (HC Madras) b) Jay Engineering Works Vs CIT 2008 166 Taxmann 115 (HC Delhi) c) JCIT Vs Modi Revlon Pvt Ltd 2006 TIOL 131 (ITAT Delhi) d) CIT Vs. Bimetal Bearings 215 ITR 675 (HC Mad) 6.2 The ld.AR further drew our attention to audit objection in regard to software development charges, computer stationery, IST Expenses SLE, EDP Consumable, PC Software, Data processing charges vide ‘11/IIA Incorrect Computa…