NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,,ANAND vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ANAND CIRCLE,, ANAND

In the result, Ground No. 7 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

viii). It is submitted that appellant has satisfied necessary conditions and Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have allowed the deduction as claimed. It is submitted that it be so held now. 3. The Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 2,36,90,077/- under section 14A following the appellate

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX.,ANAND CIRCLE,, ANAND vs. NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD, ANAND

In the result, Ground No. 7 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

viii). It is submitted that appellant has satisfied necessary conditions and Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have allowed the deduction as claimed. It is submitted that it be so held now. 3. The Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 2,36,90,077/- under section 14A following the appellate

NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,ANAND vs. THE DY.CIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

68,11,434/ on the ground that expenditure under VRS eligible under Section 35DDA cannot be claimed under Section 37(1) without appreciating that this expenditure was not eligible under Section 35DDA being post retirement monthly payment to the employees made out of the provision made in AY 2011-12 and disallowed in that year

ACIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND, ANAND vs. NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD, ANAND

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

68,11,434/ on the ground that expenditure under VRS eligible under Section 35DDA cannot be claimed under Section 37(1) without appreciating that this expenditure was not eligible under Section 35DDA being post retirement monthly payment to the employees made out of the provision made in AY 2011-12 and disallowed in that year

NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,ANAND vs. THE DY.CIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

68,11,434/ on the ground that expenditure under VRS eligible under Section 35DDA cannot be claimed under Section 37(1) without appreciating that this expenditure was not eligible under Section 35DDA being post retirement monthly payment to the employees made out of the provision made in AY 2011-12 and disallowed in that year

NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,ANAND vs. THE DY.CIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

68,11,434/ on the ground that expenditure under VRS eligible under Section 35DDA cannot be claimed under Section 37(1) without appreciating that this expenditure was not eligible under Section 35DDA being post retirement monthly payment to the employees made out of the provision made in AY 2011-12 and disallowed in that year

ACIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND, ANAND vs. NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD, ANAND

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

68,11,434/ on the ground that expenditure under VRS eligible under Section 35DDA cannot be claimed under Section 37(1) without appreciating that this expenditure was not eligible under Section 35DDA being post retirement monthly payment to the employees made out of the provision made in AY 2011-12 and disallowed in that year

ACIT,ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND, ANAND vs. NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD, ANAND

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

68,11,434/ on the ground that expenditure under VRS eligible under Section 35DDA cannot be claimed under Section 37(1) without appreciating that this expenditure was not eligible under Section 35DDA being post retirement monthly payment to the employees made out of the provision made in AY 2011-12 and disallowed in that year

ACIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND, ANAND vs. NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD, ANAND

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

68,11,434/ on the ground that expenditure under VRS eligible under Section 35DDA cannot be claimed under Section 37(1) without appreciating that this expenditure was not eligible under Section 35DDA being post retirement monthly payment to the employees made out of the provision made in AY 2011-12 and disallowed in that year

NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,ANAND vs. THE DY.CIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

68,11,434/ on the ground that expenditure under VRS eligible under Section 35DDA cannot be claimed under Section 37(1) without appreciating that this expenditure was not eligible under Section 35DDA being post retirement monthly payment to the employees made out of the provision made in AY 2011-12 and disallowed in that year

NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,ANAND vs. THE DY.CIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

68,11,434/ on the ground that expenditure under VRS eligible under Section 35DDA cannot be claimed under Section 37(1) without appreciating that this expenditure was not eligible under Section 35DDA being post retirement monthly payment to the employees made out of the provision made in AY 2011-12 and disallowed in that year

NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,ANAND vs. THE DY.CIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar, Vice President\nAnd Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

68,11,434/ on the ground that expenditure under VRS eligible under Section 35DDA cannot be claimed under Section 37(1) without appreciating that this expenditure was not eligible under Section 35DDA being post retirement monthly payment to the employees made out of the provision made in AY 2011-12 and disallowed in that year

ACIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND, ANAND vs. NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD, ANAND

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar, Vice President\nAnd Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

68,11,434/ on the ground that expenditure under VRS\neligible under Section 35DDA cannot be claimed under Section 37(1)\nwithout appreciating that this expenditure was not eligible under Section\n35DDA being post retirement monthly payment to the employees made out\nof the provision made in AY 2011-12 and disallowed in that year

ACIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND, ANAND vs. NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD, ANAND

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar, Vice President\nAnd Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

68,11,434/ on the ground that expenditure under VRS\neligible under Section 35DDA cannot be claimed under Section 37(1)\nwithout appreciating that this expenditure was not eligible under Section\n35DDA being post retirement monthly payment to the employees made out\nof the provision made in AY 2011-12 and disallowed in that year

NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,ANAND vs. THE DY.CIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

68,11,434/ on the ground that expenditure under VRS\neligible under Section 35DDA cannot be claimed under Section 37(1)\nwithout appreciating that this expenditure was not eligible under Section\n35DDA being post retirement monthly payment to the employees made out\nof the provision made in AY 2011-12 and disallowed in that year

ACIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND, ANAND vs. NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD, ANAND

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar, Vice President\nAnd Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

68,11,434/ on the ground that expenditure under VRS\neligible under Section 35DDA cannot be claimed under Section 37(1)\nwithout appreciating that this expenditure was not eligible under Section\n35DDA being post retirement monthly payment to the employees made out\nof the provision made in AY 2011-12 and disallowed in that year

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA, VADODARA vs. HK ISPAT PVT LTD, GODHRA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2014–15 to 2021–

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamblesn

viii) The appellant has also claimed that loans take during the year are repaid in current year or subsequent period hence such loans cannot be subject matter of addition u/s 68 of the Act. The appellant has also relied upon various judicial pronouncements in support of its contentions. 6.4 I have carefully considered the relevant facts on record, observation

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA, VADODARA vs. HK ISPAT PVT LTD, GODHRA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2014–15 to 2021–

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamblesn

viii) The appellant has also claimed that loans take during the year are repaid in current year or subsequent period hence such loans cannot be subject matter of addition u/s 68 of the Act. The appellant has also relied upon various judicial pronouncements in support of its contentions. 6.4 I have carefully considered the relevant facts on record, observation