BABA HIRA SINGH BHATTAL INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY,LEHRAGAGA vs. DCIT, (E), C-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

depreciation was also dealt with accordingly. 14.3 Further, in case the AO, after passing of the order, felt it so necessary, he would have invoked the provisions of Section 154 in order to rectify, if he so felt it necessary to do so. 15. Still further, it was only and only the AO passing the order originally who could have

WINSOME TEXTILE INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the A.Y. concerned". A bare perusal of the above provisions the AO has power to extend his enquiry beyond reasons recorded on the issue which came to his knowledge during the course of pending proceedings. During the course of pending proceedings it came to the notice

ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SML ISUZU LTD., CHANDIGARH

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year): Provided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 or this section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall

M/S PAGRO FROZEN FOODS PVT. LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO, W-2(3), CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 13. The Ld. AO in the assessment order dt. 26/12/2016 has stated that return declaring income of profit of business is of Rs. 31,54,889/- filed on 29/11/2014 and same is set off against depreciation of 2012-13. The balance depreciation is as under: A.Y Amount of brought forward Amount

KHANNA INFRABUILD PRIVATE LIMITED ,LUDHIANA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE)-2 LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

In the result, the ground of appeal is allowed

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

section 35AD, it is very much clear that the deduction is allowable of the expenditure, which is capitalized in the books of accounts and the same is allowable in the previous year, in which the commencement of business takes place and ‘hotel’ is one of the ‘specified category'. Further, if the assessee claims such deduction," then no depreciation is allowed

KHANNA INFRABUILD PRIVATE LIMITED ,LUDHIANA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE)-2, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

In the result, the ground of appeal is allowed

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

section 35AD, it is very much clear that the deduction is allowable of the expenditure, which is capitalized in the books of accounts and the same is allowable in the previous year, in which the commencement of business takes place and ‘hotel’ is one of the ‘specified category'. Further, if the assessee claims such deduction," then no depreciation is allowed

KHANNA INFRABUILD PRIVATE LIMITED 2000-1A, SUKHDEV NAGAR FEROZEPUR ROAD, LUDHIANA,LUDHIANA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

In the result, the ground of appeal is allowed

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

section 35AD, it is very much clear that the deduction is allowable of the expenditure, which is capitalized in the books of accounts and the same is allowable in the previous year, in which the commencement of business takes place and ‘hotel’ is one of the ‘specified category'. Further, if the assessee claims such deduction," then no depreciation is allowed

S.P. SINGLA CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this Section and in sections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year) : Provided that where an assessment under Sub-section (3) of Section 143 or this Section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall

KAKA SINGH ALIAS GULJAR SINGH,PATIALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , PATIALA

section 57.\nThe said provision reads thus:\n\"57. Deductions.-The income chargeable under the head 'Income from other\nsources' shall be computed after making the following deductions, namely :.\n(iv) in the case of income of the nature referred to in clause (viii) of sub-\nsection (2) of section 56, a deduction of a sum equal to fifty

ITO, WARD-6(1), MOHALI vs. QUARKCITY INDIA PVT. LTD., MPHALI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

22%). It was noticed from the books of account of the assessee that the % applied was not in ratio to the expenditure incurred on CWIP viz a viz PWIP. These facts were confronted to the assessee as why the percentage rate may not be increased to 50%> of the expenses. The assessee did not furnish anything contrary to the above

ITO, WARD-6(1), MOHALI vs. QUARKCITY INDIA PVT. LTD., MPHALI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

22%). It was noticed from the books of account of the assessee that the % applied was not in ratio to the expenditure incurred on CWIP viz a viz PWIP. These facts were confronted to the assessee as why the percentage rate may not be increased to 50%> of the expenses. The assessee did not furnish anything contrary to the above

ITO, WARD-6(1), MOHALI vs. QUARKCITY INDIA PVT. LTD., MOHALI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

22%). It was noticed from the books of account of the assessee that the % applied was not in ratio to the expenditure incurred on CWIP viz a viz PWIP. These facts were confronted to the assessee as why the percentage rate may not be increased to 50%> of the expenses. The assessee did not furnish anything contrary to the above

ITO, WARD-6(1), MOHALI vs. QUARKCITY INDIA PVT. LTD., MOHALI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

22%). It was noticed from the books of account of the assessee that the % applied was not in ratio to the expenditure incurred on CWIP viz a viz PWIP. These facts were confronted to the assessee as why the percentage rate may not be increased to 50%> of the expenses. The assessee did not furnish anything contrary to the above

ITO, WARD-6(1), MOHALI vs. QUARKCITY INDIA PVT. LTD., MPHALI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

22%). It was noticed from the books of account of the assessee that the % applied was not in ratio to the expenditure incurred on CWIP viz a viz PWIP. These facts were confronted to the assessee as why the percentage rate may not be increased to 50%> of the expenses. The assessee did not furnish anything contrary to the above

ITO, WARD-6(1), MOHALI vs. QUARKCITY INDIA PVT. LTD., MOHALI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

22%). It was noticed from the books of account of the assessee that the % applied was not in ratio to the expenditure incurred on CWIP viz a viz PWIP. These facts were confronted to the assessee as why the percentage rate may not be increased to 50%> of the expenses. The assessee did not furnish anything contrary to the above

ITO, WARD-6(1), MOHALI vs. QUARKCITY INDIA PVT. LTD., MPHALI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

22%). It was noticed from the books of account of the assessee that the % applied was not in ratio to the expenditure incurred on CWIP viz a viz PWIP. These facts were confronted to the assessee as why the percentage rate may not be increased to 50%> of the expenses. The assessee did not furnish anything contrary to the above

ITO, WARD-6(1), MOHALI vs. QUARKCITY INDIA PVT. LTD., MOHALI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

22%). It was noticed from the books of account of the assessee that the % applied was not in ratio to the expenditure incurred on CWIP viz a viz PWIP. These facts were confronted to the assessee as why the percentage rate may not be increased to 50%> of the expenses. The assessee did not furnish anything contrary to the above

ITO, WARD-6(1), MOHALI vs. QUARKCITY INDIA PVT. LTD., MOHALI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

22%). It was noticed from the books of account of the assessee that the % applied was not in ratio to the expenditure incurred on CWIP viz a viz PWIP. These facts were confronted to the assessee as why the percentage rate may not be increased to 50%> of the expenses. The assessee did not furnish anything contrary to the above