M/S FASTWAY TRANSMISSION (P) LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH

In the result the captioned appeals of the assessee are

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

depreciation on assets under the provisions of the Income-tax Act. 3. The contents of this Circular may be brought to the notice of all concerned. [F.No. 225/86/2000/ITA-II—From Central Board of Direct Taxes]” SOURCE : (2001) 165 CTR (St) 25 23. Moreover, a perusal of the said AS-19 reveals that the same in fact talks of a loan agreement

A.B. SUGARS LIMITED,PUNJAB vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

26,089/- relating to the power division, the assessee company had added back book depreciation of Rs. 5,20,25,050/- and claim tax depreciation of Rs 43,16,890/- as per Income tax rules to arrive at the eligible taxable profit of Rs 23,94,34,249/- for deduction under section

A.B. SUGARS LIMITED,PUNJAB vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

26,089/- relating to the power division, the assessee company had added back book depreciation of Rs. 5,20,25,050/- and claim tax depreciation of Rs 43,16,890/- as per Income tax rules to arrive at the eligible taxable profit of Rs 23,94,34,249/- for deduction under section

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)

depreciation. 26. Being aggrieved by the impugned order the assessee is before us, in second appeal under section 253 of the Act and has interalia

ITO, W-5(3), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S FRED ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed

section 56 shall be the value, on the valuation date, of such unquoted equity shares as determined in the following manner under clause (a) or clause (b), at the option of the assessee, namely:— ITA -1379/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2015-16 Page 19 of 26 (A–L) (a) the fair market value of unquoted equity shares × (PV), = (PE) where, A = book

M/S MSJ BATH FITTINGS & ACCESSORIES PVT. LTD.,MANIMAJRA vs. ACIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing Of Appeal, With The Permission Of The Hon'Ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh.” 3. The Above Grounds Are General In Nature & Needs No Adjudication.

26(e) reflect value of total WDV of plant and machinery used in business, as on 31.03.2010, to be Rs. 9,47,15,967/- and does not reflect any such assets eligible for additional depreciation. Thus the claim of additional depreciation u/s 32(ia) is not substantiated with either of the certificates. It is not clear whether the condition laid

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)

26. The first part of Section 147 (1) of the Act requires the AO to have "reasons to believe" that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. It is thus formation of reason to believe that is subject matter of examination. The AO being a quasi judicial authority is expected to arrive at a subjective satisfaction independently

M/S IOL CHEMICALS AND PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ADDL. CIT, R-I, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

26,81,157/- was made under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act which was worked out @13% on Rs. 2,06,24,284/- 5. Being aggrieved the assessee carried the matter to the Ld. CIT(A) and submitted as under: GROUND No. 1 Disallowance of interest u/s 36(1)(iii) Regarding the disallowance of interest

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

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

SH. DHARAM PAL AGGARWAL,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, LUDHIANA

In the result appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Sainiassessment Year: 2012-13

26,635/- out of car expenses, depreciation, telephone and travelling expenses on account of estimated personal use thereof. 3. Vide ground no. 1 the grievance of the assessee relates to the sustenance of disallowance of Rs. 13,77,730/- made by the Assessing Officer by invoking the provisions of Section

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)

26,09,538 is already brought to the PnL account by the appellant. In the case of K.M. Sugar Mills Ltd. (373 ITR 42, 2015) Supreme court has held that once the assessee has proved ownership of assets and income generated from use of those assets is treated as business income, the assessee was entitled to depreciation under section

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)

26,09,538 is already brought to the PnL account by the appellant. In the case of K.M. Sugar Mills Ltd. (373 ITR 42, 2015) Supreme court has held that once the assessee has proved ownership of assets and income generated from use of those assets is treated as business income, the assessee was entitled to depreciation under section

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)

26,09,538 is already brought to the PnL account by the appellant. In the case of K.M. Sugar Mills Ltd. (373 ITR 42, 2015) Supreme court has held that once the assessee has proved ownership of assets and income generated from use of those assets is treated as business income, the assessee was entitled to depreciation under section

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)

26,09,538 is already brought to the PnL account by the appellant. In the case of K.M. Sugar Mills Ltd. (373 ITR 42, 2015) Supreme court has held that once the assessee has proved ownership of assets and income generated from use of those assets is treated as business income, the assessee was entitled to depreciation under section

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)

26,09,538 is already brought to the PnL account by the appellant. In the case of K.M. Sugar Mills Ltd. (373 ITR 42, 2015) Supreme court has held that once the assessee has proved ownership of assets and income generated from use of those assets is treated as business income, the assessee was entitled to depreciation under section

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)

26,09,538 is already brought to the PnL account by the appellant. In the case of K.M. Sugar Mills Ltd. (373 ITR 42, 2015) Supreme court has held that once the assessee has proved ownership of assets and income generated from use of those assets is treated as business income, the assessee was entitled to depreciation under section