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

33. The Assessing Officer has allowed the depreciation @ 15%, whereas, the contention of the counsel for the assessee is that STBs were classifiable under the head "Computers including Computer Software" as provided under Item-Ill (5) of the table of rates of depreciation in Appendix 1 to the Income- tax Rules, 1962 and were eligible for depreciation

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)

Depreciation and Amortization Expenses 4,54,86,758 Other Expenses 3,68,07,307 Total 11,53,61,815 Expenditure (B) Profit from COGEN Division (A-B) 25,88,20,248 (37,41,82,063-11,53,61,815) For clarification of Doubt, we are enclosing Segment-wise copies of statement of Profit & Loss Account

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)

Depreciation and Amortization Expenses 4,54,86,758 Other Expenses 3,68,07,307 Total 11,53,61,815 Expenditure (B) Profit from COGEN Division (A-B) 25,88,20,248 (37,41,82,063-11,53,61,815) For clarification of Doubt, we are enclosing Segment-wise copies of statement of Profit & Loss Account

JCIT(OSD), C-1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S KUANTUM PAPERS LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptathe D.C.I.T., Vs. M/S Kuantum Papers Ltd., Circle-1(1), Sco 18-19, 1St Floor, Sector 8-C, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. Pan: Aadca2231K (Appellant) (Respondent)

33,55,272/- claimed by the assessee. Therefore, the net disallowable depreciation comes to Rs.17,06,892/-. In view of the above, depreciation of Rs.17,06,982/- is disallowed and added to the income of the assessee. The assessee furnished inaccurate particulars of income and therefore, provisions of section

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 as application of income. ITA 870/CHD/2019 A.Y. 2015-16 33 33. The ld. DR on the other hand has placed reliance on the CIT(A)’s order in this regard also. 34. As noted above, while dealing with Ground No.3, order (supra) dated 21.10.2016 stands passed by this Bench in the assessee's case for assessment years

PUNJAB BEVERAGES PVT. LTD.,PATIALA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, PATIALA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt.Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.438/Chd/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2001-02

33(4) (section 254 of the 1961 Act). It was observed: "...The Income-tax Officer's duty to assess the total income of the assessee and to determine the sum payable by him on the basis of the return under section 23 of the Act is the whole process of assessment which may end with his order

DCIT, CIRCLE, PATIALA vs. M/S PUNJAB BEVERAGES PVT. LTD., PATIALA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt.Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.438/Chd/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2001-02

33(4) (section 254 of the 1961 Act). It was observed: "...The Income-tax Officer's duty to assess the total income of the assessee and to determine the sum payable by him on the basis of the return under section 23 of the Act is the whole process of assessment which may end with his order

M/S APEX BUILDERS, LUDHIANA vs. ITO, W-2(1), LUDHIANA

The appeal is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member)

section 40A(3) of the Act. The total amount of such purchases aggregated to Rs . 16,33,037/-. No satisfactory explanation for seeking the deduction and falling under the exception mentioned in Rule 6DD was provided by the assessee. Therefore, the Assessing Officer had disallowed the entire amount of Rs. 16,33,037/-. 4.3 Additionally, the AO observed another

UMESH KUMAR,MANDI vs. ITO, BILASPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Diva Singhassessment Year: 2008-09

section 50 of the Act ,which treats capital gains earned in case of depreciable assets as short term capital gains, the capital asset should form block of capital assets on which depreciation has been “allowed” under the Act. The contention of the Ld.Counsel is that since no return has been filed by the assessee, the assessee has not claimed depreciation

DUSHYANT,MANDI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Diva Singhassessment Year: 2008-09 Dushyant Vs. The Ito S/O Sh. Viptu Ram R/O Vpo Sunder Nagar Tata Pani Distt, Mandi Distt- Mandi, H.P. Pan No. Apfpd0262D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Inder Mohan Revenue By : Shri Manjit Singh

section 50 of the Act ,which treats capital gains earned in case of depreciable assets as short term capital gains, the capital asset should form block of capital assets on which depreciation has been “allowed” under the Act. The contention of the Ld.Counsel is that since no return has been filed by the assessee, the assessee has not claimed depreciation

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

33 of\n2009 have been elaborated in the following portion of the departmental\ncircular No. 5/2010, dated 3.6.2010, as follows:\n\"Rationalizing the provisions for taxation of interest received on delayed\ncompensation or on enhanced compensation.-\n46.1 The existing provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961, provide that income chargeable\nunder the head \"Profits and gains of business or profession

JCIT(OSD), C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. THE SIKH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, PATIALA

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Against Assessment Order Dt. 30/03/2013 Which Was Passed By Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patiala Range, Patiala, Punjab Which Order Is Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao’S Order”.

section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 18. Upon application of the assessee on 03/04/2013 following rectification order was passed : 7. Keeping in view of the above discussion, the addition on account of depreciation on building under construction is required to be made at Rs. 72,33

THE SIKH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,PATIALA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE, PATIALA

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Against Assessment Order Dt. 30/03/2013 Which Was Passed By Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patiala Range, Patiala, Punjab Which Order Is Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao’S Order”.

section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 18. Upon application of the assessee on 03/04/2013 following rectification order was passed : 7. Keeping in view of the above discussion, the addition on account of depreciation on building under construction is required to be made at Rs. 72,33

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 under the Act has been computed. [Para 5] In the instant case, after the service of the notice under section 148, the assessee had filed its objections for reopening the assessment to the effect that in the light of the binding decision of High Court and the decision of the Tribunal there

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)

33,03,064/- minus 1,26,978/-) is capitalized and added to the returned loss. The amount of capitalization under CWIP is also increased to the extent. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 for furnishing inaccurate particular leading to concealment of the income. The appellant has submitted that, "In this regard it is respectfully submitted that

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)

33,03,064/- minus 1,26,978/-) is capitalized and added to the returned loss. The amount of capitalization under CWIP is also increased to the extent. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 for furnishing inaccurate particular leading to concealment of the income. The appellant has submitted that, "In this regard it is respectfully submitted that

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)

33,03,064/- minus 1,26,978/-) is capitalized and added to the returned loss. The amount of capitalization under CWIP is also increased to the extent. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 for furnishing inaccurate particular leading to concealment of the income. The appellant has submitted that, "In this regard it is respectfully submitted that

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)

33,03,064/- minus 1,26,978/-) is capitalized and added to the returned loss. The amount of capitalization under CWIP is also increased to the extent. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 for furnishing inaccurate particular leading to concealment of the income. The appellant has submitted that, "In this regard it is respectfully submitted that