BG EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DDIT/ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE -1, DEHRADUN

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

depreciation and depletion on capitalised portion is subsequently disallowed, the amount capitalised by the appellant should be allowed as deduction

BG EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DDIT/ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION ) CIRCLE-1, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri V.P. Raoassessment Years: 2016-17

depreciation and depletion on capitalised portion is subsequently disallowed, the amount capitalised by the appellant should be allowed as deduction

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

GAUTAM RESIDENCY HOTEL & BANQUET,DELHI vs. ITO, RISHIKESH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 546/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Gautam Residency Hotel & Banquet, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/O Rajiv Saxena & Co., Adv. & Solicitors, Ward-1(4)(1), 318, Pocket-D, Mayur Vihar-Ii, Rishikesh New Delhi-110091 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaifg0458J Assessee By : Sh. Rajiv Saxena, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. N. C. Upadhyay, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.09.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.09.2021

deduction u/s 80IC of the Act in respect of pickup receipts and interest income. 3. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), Dehradun, has erred in law as well as on facts in confirming the disallowance of Rs.1,05,000/- out of the claim of depreciation

M/S. RASAYANA HOTEL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, UTTRAKHAND

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: The Ld. Cit (A) Was Partly

depreciation was not warranted. The Ld. CIT (A), however, upheld the disallowance of assessee’s claim u/s 80IC of the Act. The Ld. CIT (A) also upheld the action of the Assessing Officer in making the assessment disallowing the assessee’s claim of deduction

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

G & T RESOURCES (EUROPE) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 5553/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year: 2004-05 G&T Resources (Europe) Ltd., Vs Adit, C/O F-04 & 05, Triveni Commercial International Taxation, Complex, Sheikh Sarai, Phase-I, Dehradun New Delhi-110017 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcg9877F Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. T. S. Mapwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2022 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ao U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 23.11.2006. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Revised Grounds Of Appeal: “1. That, On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Ao Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Initiating Proceedings Under Section 148 Read Together With Section 147 Of The Income 1Ax Act, 1961. 2. That In The Absence Of Any New Facts, Other Than The Ones Already On Record Based On Which The Assessment Order Was Passed, Initiating Proceedings Under Section 148 After Expiry Of Four Years Are Bad In Law & Void Abinitio. 3. That, The Learned Ao Having Considered The Facts, Applied The Spirit Of The Boards Instructions As Contained In Notification 1767 In A Speaking Assessment Order Erred In Initiating Proceedings Under Section 148 After The Expiry Of Four Years Merely Because In A Subsequent

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

B G EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, DDIT/ ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-1, DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar

depreciation claim on Global IT & T expenditure was allowable as held by the Hon’ble ITAT in Appellant’s own case for AYs 2010-11 to 2014- 15. 11.3 The learned AO / DRP erred in not appreciating that this difference is on account of difference in opening written down value of assets on first day of the captioned assessment year

B G EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, DDIT/ ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-1, DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN, UTTARAKHAND

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar

depreciation claim on Global IT & T expenditure was allowable as held by the Hon’ble ITAT in Appellant’s own case for AYs 2010-11 to 2014- 15. 11.3 The learned AO / DRP erred in not appreciating that this difference is on account of difference in opening written down value of assets on first day of the captioned assessment year

ACIT, CIRCLE- 2, DEHRADUN vs. UTTARANCHAL JAL VIDYUT NIGAM LTD., DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukladr. B.R.R. Kumar

depreciation on de-merger cannot be a forgone benefit owing to de-merger, which is the result of state reorganization. Hence, we decline to interfere with the reasoned order of the Ld. CIT (A). Prior Period expenses: 7. Heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. We find in all the years

ACIT, CIRCLE- 2, DEHRADUN vs. UTTARANCHAL JAL VIDYUT NIGAM LTD., DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukladr. B.R.R. Kumar

depreciation on de-merger cannot be a forgone benefit owing to de-merger, which is the result of state reorganization. Hence, we decline to interfere with the reasoned order of the Ld. CIT (A). Prior Period expenses: 7. Heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. We find in all the years

ACIT, CIRCLE-2, DEHRADUN vs. M/S. UTTARANCHAL JAL VIDYUT NIGAM LTD., DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukladr. B.R.R. Kumar

depreciation on de-merger cannot be a forgone benefit owing to de-merger, which is the result of state reorganization. Hence, we decline to interfere with the reasoned order of the Ld. CIT (A). Prior Period expenses: 7. Heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. We find in all the years

ACIT, CIRCLE-2, DEHRADUN vs. M/S. UTTARANCHAL JAL VIDYUT NIGAM LTD., DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukladr. B.R.R. Kumar

depreciation on de-merger cannot be a forgone benefit owing to de-merger, which is the result of state reorganization. Hence, we decline to interfere with the reasoned order of the Ld. CIT (A). Prior Period expenses: 7. Heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. We find in all the years

ACIT, CIRCLE- 2, DEHRADUN vs. UTTARANCHAL JAL VIDYUT NIGAM LTD., DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukladr. B.R.R. Kumar

depreciation on de-merger cannot be a forgone benefit owing to de-merger, which is the result of state reorganization. Hence, we decline to interfere with the reasoned order of the Ld. CIT (A). Prior Period expenses: 7. Heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. We find in all the years

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

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

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

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