ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

4. Issue of Disallowance of Bad Debts: A.Y. 2012-13: Ground No. 3 of Revenue’s appeal A.Y. 2013-14: Ground No. 3 of Revenue’s appeal 4.1 The Assessing Officer has disallowed bad debts of Rs. 4.78 Lacs( for the A.Y. 2012-13) claimed by the assessee on account of transactions with the distributors who in turn supply products

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

4. Issue of Disallowance of Bad Debts: A.Y. 2012-13: Ground No. 3 of Revenue’s appeal A.Y. 2013-14: Ground No. 3 of Revenue’s appeal 4.1 The Assessing Officer has disallowed bad debts of Rs. 4.78 Lacs( for the A.Y. 2012-13) claimed by the assessee on account of transactions with the distributors who in turn supply products

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

4. Issue of Disallowance of Bad Debts: A.Y. 2012-13: Ground No. 3 of Revenue’s appeal A.Y. 2013-14: Ground No. 3 of Revenue’s appeal 4.1 The Assessing Officer has disallowed bad debts of Rs. 4.78 Lacs( for the A.Y. 2012-13) claimed by the assessee on account of transactions with the distributors who in turn supply products

ACIT, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS. BECTORS FOOD SPECIALTIES PVT. LTD., LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

4. Issue of Disallowance of Bad Debts: A.Y. 2012-13: Ground No. 3 of Revenue’s appeal A.Y. 2013-14: Ground No. 3 of Revenue’s appeal 4.1 The Assessing Officer has disallowed bad debts of Rs. 4.78 Lacs( for the A.Y. 2012-13) claimed by the assessee on account of transactions with the distributors who in turn supply products

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

4. Issue of Disallowance of Bad Debts: A.Y. 2012-13: Ground No. 3 of Revenue’s appeal A.Y. 2013-14: Ground No. 3 of Revenue’s appeal 4.1 The Assessing Officer has disallowed bad debts of Rs. 4.78 Lacs( for the A.Y. 2012-13) claimed by the assessee on account of transactions with the distributors who in turn supply products

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

4. Issue of Disallowance of Bad Debts: A.Y. 2012-13: Ground No. 3 of Revenue’s appeal A.Y. 2013-14: Ground No. 3 of Revenue’s appeal 4.1 The Assessing Officer has disallowed bad debts of Rs. 4.78 Lacs( for the A.Y. 2012-13) claimed by the assessee on account of transactions with the distributors who in turn supply products

DCIT, C-1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. UNIPRO TECHNO INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

disallowance under section 14A of the Act is also covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Oil Industry Development Board followed by the Ld. CIT(A). 4. In his rival submissions the Ld. CIT(A) although supported the order of the A.O. but could not controvert the aforesaid contention

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATIALA vs. DSG PAPERS PVT. LTD., PATIALA

In the result, respective appeals are disposed off in light of aforesaid\ndirection

disallowed and further, argued that the detailed submissions were filed before the Ld. CIT(A) and the same is reproduced at page no. 57 of his order and all conditions of the deduction u/s 801A has been fulfilled and relied upon the order for AY 2017-18 of the Ld. CIT(A), which has been referred

DSG PAPERS PVT LTD #6, GREEN VIEW COLONY,PATIALA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE PATIALA, PATIALA

In the result, respective appeals are disposed off in light of aforesaid\ndirection

disallowed and further, argued that the detailed submissions were filed before the Ld. CIT(A) and the same is reproduced at page no. 57 of his order and all conditions of the deduction u/s 801A has been fulfilled and relied upon the order for AY 2017-18 of the Ld. CIT(A), which has been referred

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATIALA vs. DSG PAPERS PVT. LTD., PATIALA

In the result, respective appeals are disposed off in light of aforesaid direction

disallowed and further, argued that the detailed submissions were filed before the Ld. CIT(A) and the same is reproduced at page no. 57 of his order and all conditions of the deduction u/s 801A has been fulfilled and relied upon the order for AY 2017-18 of the Ld. CIT(A), which has been referred

ACIT, CIRCLE, SHIMLA vs. M/S SATLUJ JAL VIDYUT NIGAM LIMITED, SHIMLA

801A on these incomes. The appellant has to discharge the onus which rests on him to be eligible far the said deduction. Having failed to do so, the action of the A.O. is upheld and this ground of appeal is dismissed.” Disallowance of insurance receipts for repairs of Rs. 1,64,46,803 /-: A.Ys.2013-14 & 2014-15 The appellant

M/S SJVN LTD. ( FORMERLY SATLUJ JAL VIDYUT NIGAM LIMITED),SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, SHIMLA

801A on these incomes. The appellant has to discharge the onus which rests on him to be eligible far the said deduction. Having failed to do so, the action of the A.O. is upheld and this ground of appeal is dismissed.” Disallowance of insurance receipts for repairs of Rs. 1,64,46,803 /-: A.Ys.2013-14 & 2014-15 The appellant

M/S SJVN LTD. ( FORMERLY SATLUJ JAL VIDYUT NIGAM LIMITED),SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, SHIMLA

801A on these incomes. The appellant has to discharge the onus which rests on him to be eligible far the said deduction. Having failed to do so, the action of the A.O. is upheld and this ground of appeal is dismissed.” Disallowance of insurance receipts for repairs of Rs. 1,64,46,803 /-: A.Ys.2013-14 & 2014-15 The appellant

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATIALA vs. DSG PAPERS PVT. LTD., PATIALA

In the result, respective appeals are disposed off in light of aforesaid\ndirection

disallowed and further, argued that the detailed\nsubmissions were filed before the Ld. CIT(A) and the same is reproduced at\npage no. 57 of his order and all conditions of the deduction u/s 801A has\nbeen fulfilled and relied upon the order for AY 2017-18 of the Ld. CIT(A),\nwhich has been referred

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATIALA vs. DSG PAPERS PVT. LTD., PATIALA

In the result, respective appeals are disposed off in light of aforesaid\ndirection

disallowed and further, argued that the detailed\nsubmissions were filed before the Ld. CIT(A) and the same is reproduced at\npage no. 57 of his order and all conditions of the deduction u/s 801A has\nbeen fulfilled and relied upon the order for AY 2017-18 of the Ld. CIT(A),\nwhich has been referred

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PATIALA, PATIALA vs. DSG PAPERS PVT. LTD., PATIALA

In the result, respective appeals are disposed off in light of aforesaid\ndirection

disallowed and further, argued that the detailed\nsubmissions were filed before the Ld. CIT(A) and the same is reproduced at\npage no. 57 of his order and all conditions of the deduction u/s 801A has\nbeen fulfilled and relied upon the order for AY 2017-18 of the Ld. CIT(A),\nwhich has been referred

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATIALA vs. DSG PAPERS PVT. LTD., PATIALA

In the result, respective appeals are disposed off in light of aforesaid\ndirection

disallowed and further, argued that the detailed\nsubmissions were filed before the Ld. CIT(A) and the same is reproduced at\npage no. 57 of his order and all conditions of the deduction u/s 801A has\nbeen fulfilled and relied upon the order for AY 2017-18 of the Ld. CIT(A),\nwhich has been referred