M.B. PETROLEUM SERVICES LLC,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

deduction of TDS. 7. Without prejudice to above and in law and circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO has erred in denying the claim of depreciation

ITO, HARIDWAR vs. M/S. PRITY JAIN PROP., HARIDWAR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasada N D Shrim. Balaganesh

depreciation into account. If such substantial expansion is completed, then, for the purpose of this section, the Assessment Year relevant to the P.Y. in which such substantial expansion is completed becomes the initial assessment year. Once it becomes the initial Assessment Year consequently under sub section (3) the assessee would be entitled to 100% deduction

SAMSUNG HEAVY INDUSTRIES CO. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

deductible based on the commercial accounting principle in computing the said business profits chargeable to Indian Income-tax. The AO observed that Profit & Loss A/c of the Mumbai Project office as showing the gross income of Rs. 23,73,083/- against which the assessee had claimed the expenses of Rs. 24,34,70,741/-. The contract revenue

DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), DEHRADUN vs. M/S. SAMSUNG HEAVY INDUSTRIES CO. LTD., GURGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

deductible based on the commercial accounting principle in computing the said business profits chargeable to Indian Income-tax. The AO observed that Profit & Loss A/c of the Mumbai Project office as showing the gross income of Rs. 23,73,083/- against which the assessee had claimed the expenses of Rs. 24,34,70,741/-. The contract revenue

MB PETROLEUM SERVICES LLC,MUMBAI vs. DDIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshmb Petroleum Services Llc, Vs. Ddit, Kirtane & Pandit, H-16, Circle-1, Saraswati Colony, Sitaldevi International Taxation, Temple Road, Mahim, Dehradun Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaecm2604H

depreciation to the Appellant under section 32 of the Act in accordance with law.” 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. At the outset, we find that the additional ground of appeal raised by the assessee is a legal issue and does not require verification of any facts. Hence, it is admitted

M/S UJVN LIMITED ,UTTARAKHAND vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, UTTARAKHAND

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

depreciation claimed by the assessee.\n5.\nAs the facts in present case are identical to the facts existed in other years\nas has been admitted by the Revenue also and Ld. CIT(A) also followed the order\nof the Tribunal of preceding years, therefore, by respectfully following the said\norder, we hold that the assessee is eligible for deprecation

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), SUBHASH ROAD vs. UJVN LIMITED, GMS ROAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

depreciation claimed by the assessee.\n5. As the facts in present case are identical to the facts existed in other years\nas has been admitted by the Revenue also and Ld. CIT(A) also followed the order\nof the Tribunal of preceding years, therefore, by respectfully following the said\norder, we hold that the assessee is eligible for deprecation

KEVIN INTERNATIONAL,HARIDWAR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE HARIDWAR, HARIDWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us(Through Video Conferencing) M/S. Kevin International, Vs. Dy. Cit, C/O. Balesh Bhargava-Adv, Circle, Haridwar 56, Niranajani Akhara, Mayapur, Haridwar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aajfk4514C

deduction u/s 80IC of the L.T. Act 1961 of Rs. 2,82,25,584/- and the confirming the same while the appellant has complied with all the conditions of section 80IC of the I.T. Act 1961 and produced all the relevant documents in support of its claim. 4. That Ld. Authorities below are not justified in disallowing the claim

DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION),CIRCLE-I, DEHRADUN vs. HALLIBURTON OFFSHORE SERVICES INC., DEHRADUN

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganesh

depreciation on capital assets to the extent of 90% of gross revenue. (ix) Whether the CIT (A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that the amount received by the assessee on account of equipment lost in hole’ is infact the reimbursement of expenses and hence includible in the gross revenue for the purpose of computation of profits

HALLIBURTON OFFSHORE SERVICES INC.,NOIDA vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-1, DEHRADUN

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganesh

depreciation on capital assets to the extent of 90% of gross revenue. (ix) Whether the CIT (A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that the amount received by the assessee on account of equipment lost in hole’ is infact the reimbursement of expenses and hence includible in the gross revenue for the purpose of computation of profits

DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION),CIRCLE-I, DEHRADUN vs. HALLIBURTON OFFSHORE SERVICES INC., DEHRADUN

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganesh

depreciation on capital assets to the extent of 90% of gross revenue. (ix) Whether the CIT (A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that the amount received by the assessee on account of equipment lost in hole’ is infact the reimbursement of expenses and hence includible in the gross revenue for the purpose of computation of profits