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)

Section 32 of the Act and which has been claimed as an eligible deduction. Accordingly, to the reported book profits of Rs 19,17,26,089/- 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

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 rate of 60 % should not be allowed to assessee. 5. Further various submissions made by the assessee during the assessment proceedings are analyzed as under: • However, first of all it is observed that the order of Hon'ble ITAT in the case of CISCO System(India) Pvt. Limited is related to the Audit Video Conferencing devices and depreciation

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 rate of 60 % should not be allowed to assessee. 5. Further various submissions made by the assessee during the assessment proceedings are analyzed as under: • However, first of all it is observed that the order of Hon'ble ITAT in the case of CISCO System(India) Pvt. Limited is related to the Audit Video Conferencing devices and depreciation

M/S FASTWAY TRANSMISSION (P) LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, 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 rate of 60 % should not be allowed to assessee. 5. Further various submissions made by the assessee during the assessment proceedings are analyzed as under: • However, first of all it is observed that the order of Hon'ble ITAT in the case of CISCO System(India) Pvt. Limited is related to the Audit Video Conferencing devices and depreciation

SH. GURINDER MAKKAR,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-3, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

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

Section 43(1)do not apply in the instant case and depreciation on the said amount @ 5% of Rs. 14,00,000/- amounting

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 on the assets whose value has already been shown as written off. 8. While upholding the addition made by the AO, the ld. CIT(A) held, following the CIT(A)’s order for the earlier years, that in those years, the ld. CIT(A) had upheld a part of the assessee's submission, to the extent that the excess

ACIT, CHANDIGARH vs. THE PUNJABI UNIVERSITY, PATIALA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

depreciation of Rs.25,43,66,930/-. The AO was of the view that by Finance Act, 2015, sub-section (6) of Section

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

DCIT, SIRHIND vs. M/S SOOD PLASTICS PVT. LTD., RAJPURA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13

43(1) r.w. section 36(l)(iii) is bad in law and therefore prayed to be set-aside. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance of depreciation

M/S SOOD PLASTICS (P) LTD.,RAJPURA vs. DCIT, MANDI GOBINDGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13

43(1) r.w. section 36(l)(iii) is bad in law and therefore prayed to be set-aside. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance of depreciation

HARYANA AGRO INDUSTRIES CORPORATION,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, PANCHKULA

The appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 216/Chd/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Haryana Agro Industries The Dcit, Panchkula Circle, बनाम Corporation, Bay No.15-20, Panchkula Sector 4, Panchkula "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaach4686C अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

section 43-B of the Act are applicable to performance award and hence allowable on payment basis. 3. That the Learned CIT(Appeals) has erred in law and facts in upholding the addition of Rs. 72,03,620/- on account of 1% departmental charges on purchase of Gunny Bags (Bardana), considering the same as provision. 4. That the Learned

M/S GREATER MOHALI AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MOHALI vs. DCIT, C-6(1), MOHALI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year : 2009-10

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

DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S GLAXOSMITHKLINE CONSUMER PVT. LTD., NABHA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 121/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Dcit, M/S Glaxosmithkline Circle 1(1), बनाम Consumer Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh Patiala Road, Vs. Nabha. Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Aafcg8415R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Hybrid Mode ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate With Sh. Neeraj Jain, Advocate & Ms. Somya Jain, Ca (Virtual) राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06.08.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am:

depreciation at all on the assets transferred by way of slump sale inasmuch as in terms of provisions of sub-item (C) of 13 121-Chd-2023 M/s Glaxosmithkline Consumer Pvt. Ltd, Nabha item (i) of section 43

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)

43,22,535/- on which depreciation allowable for the year under consideration comes to Rs.2,16,48,380/- as against depreciation of Rs.2,33,55,272/- 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

M/S HARYANA WAREHOUSING CORPORATION,PANCHKULA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE , PANCHKULA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 891/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Haryana State Warehousing The Acit, Circle Panchkula, बनाम Corporation, Panchkula 134112 Bay No. 15-18, Sector 2, Panchkula- 134112 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaath7482H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

depreciation on block of asset of Building by bifurcating the operating written value of that block of assets which is wrong as per Section 32(1) explanation 2 read with Section 43

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)

Section 147 is attracted. The reasons to believe ought to also paraphrase any investigation report which may form the basis of the reasons and any enquiry conducted by the AO on the same and if so, the conclusions thereof; (iii) where the reasons make a reference to another document, whether as a letter or report, such document and/ or relevant

DHEERUMAL SHARMA,MANDI vs. ITO, SUNDERNAGAR

In the result, both the above appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2008-09 Shri. Het Ram Sharma Vs. The Ito Vill & P.O. Tattapani Sundernagar Tehsil Karsog Mandi, H.P. Mandi, H.P.

43,885/- 7,02,657/- 17,59,494/- 1/6th share Total 13,91,627/- 4,17,488/- 12,02,823/- 30,11,938/- 4.1 Taking note from the detail that one of the buildings acquired was a residential building on which Long Term Capital Gain (hereinafter referred to as “LTCG”) arises and further taking the cost of the property from

HET RAM SHARMA,MANDI vs. ITO, , SUNDERNAGAR

In the result, both the above appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2008-09 Shri. Het Ram Sharma Vs. The Ito Vill & P.O. Tattapani Sundernagar Tehsil Karsog Mandi, H.P. Mandi, H.P.

43,885/- 7,02,657/- 17,59,494/- 1/6th share Total 13,91,627/- 4,17,488/- 12,02,823/- 30,11,938/- 4.1 Taking note from the detail that one of the buildings acquired was a residential building on which Long Term Capital Gain (hereinafter referred to as “LTCG”) arises and further taking the cost of the property from