INDIAN RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 10(1), DELHI, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

income no disallowance was required. Thus, the issue in corresponding grounds in AY: 2017-18 & 2018-19 raised by the assessee deserves to be sustained. Issue No. 5 19. The issue arises out depreciation of building disallowed during the assessment year 2010-11, the assessee claimed depreciation of Rs.6,89,411 in respect of building viz., residential flat at Jangpura

DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1), DELHI vs. INDIAN RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

income no disallowance was required. Thus, the issue in corresponding grounds in AY: 2017-18 & 2018-19 raised by the assessee deserves to be sustained. Issue No. 5 19. The issue arises out depreciation of building disallowed during the assessment year 2010-11, the assessee claimed depreciation of Rs.6,89,411 in respect of building viz., residential flat at Jangpura

INDIAN RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 10(1), DELHI, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

income no disallowance was required. Thus, the issue in corresponding grounds in AY: 2017-18 & 2018-19 raised by the assessee deserves to be sustained. Issue No. 5 19. The issue arises out depreciation of building disallowed during the assessment year 2010-11, the assessee claimed depreciation of Rs.6,89,411 in respect of building viz., residential flat at Jangpura

DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1), DELHI vs. INDIAN RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

income no disallowance was required. Thus, the issue in corresponding grounds in AY: 2017-18 & 2018-19 raised by the assessee deserves to be sustained. Issue No. 5 19. The issue arises out depreciation of building disallowed during the assessment year 2010-11, the assessee claimed depreciation of Rs.6,89,411 in respect of building viz., residential flat at Jangpura

DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1), DELHI vs. INDIAN RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

income no disallowance was required. Thus, the issue in corresponding grounds in AY: 2017-18 & 2018-19 raised by the assessee deserves to be sustained. Issue No. 5 19. The issue arises out depreciation of building disallowed during the assessment year 2010-11, the assessee claimed depreciation of Rs.6,89,411 in respect of building viz., residential flat at Jangpura

INDIAN RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10(1), DELHI, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

income no disallowance was required. Thus, the issue in corresponding grounds in AY: 2017-18 & 2018-19 raised by the assessee deserves to be sustained. Issue No. 5 19. The issue arises out depreciation of building disallowed during the assessment year 2010-11, the assessee claimed depreciation of Rs.6,89,411 in respect of building viz., residential flat at Jangpura

INDIAN RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 10(1), DELHI, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

income no disallowance was required. Thus, the issue in corresponding grounds in AY: 2017-18 & 2018-19 raised by the assessee deserves to be sustained. Issue No. 5 19. The issue arises out depreciation of building disallowed during the assessment year 2010-11, the assessee claimed depreciation of Rs.6,89,411 in respect of building viz., residential flat at Jangpura

INDIAN RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 10(1), DELHI, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

income no disallowance was required. Thus, the issue in corresponding grounds in AY: 2017-18 & 2018-19 raised by the assessee deserves to be sustained. Issue No. 5 19. The issue arises out depreciation of building disallowed during the assessment year 2010-11, the assessee claimed depreciation of Rs.6,89,411 in respect of building viz., residential flat at Jangpura

INDIAN RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 10(1), DELHI, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

income no disallowance was required. Thus, the issue in corresponding grounds in AY: 2017-18 & 2018-19 raised by the assessee deserves to be sustained. Issue No. 5 19. The issue arises out depreciation of building disallowed during the assessment year 2010-11, the assessee claimed depreciation of Rs.6,89,411 in respect of building viz., residential flat at Jangpura

DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1), DELHI vs. INDIAN RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

income no disallowance was required. Thus, the issue in corresponding grounds in AY: 2017-18 & 2018-19 raised by the assessee deserves to be sustained. Issue No. 5 19. The issue arises out depreciation of building disallowed during the assessment year 2010-11, the assessee claimed depreciation of Rs.6,89,411 in respect of building viz., residential flat at Jangpura

DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1), DELHI vs. INDIAN RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

income no disallowance was required. Thus, the issue in corresponding grounds in AY: 2017-18 & 2018-19 raised by the assessee deserves to be sustained. Issue No. 5 19. The issue arises out depreciation of building disallowed during the assessment year 2010-11, the assessee claimed depreciation of Rs.6,89,411 in respect of building viz., residential flat at Jangpura

DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1), DELHI vs. INDIAN RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

income no disallowance was required. Thus, the issue in corresponding grounds in AY: 2017-18 & 2018-19 raised by the assessee deserves to be sustained. Issue No. 5 19. The issue arises out depreciation of building disallowed during the assessment year 2010-11, the assessee claimed depreciation of Rs.6,89,411 in respect of building viz., residential flat at Jangpura

DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1), DELHI vs. INDIAN RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

income no disallowance was required. Thus, the issue in corresponding grounds in AY: 2017-18 & 2018-19 raised by the assessee deserves to be sustained. Issue No. 5 19. The issue arises out depreciation of building disallowed during the assessment year 2010-11, the assessee claimed depreciation of Rs.6,89,411 in respect of building viz., residential flat at Jangpura

INDIAN RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 10(1), DELHI, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

income no disallowance was required. Thus, the issue in corresponding grounds in AY: 2017-18 & 2018-19 raised by the assessee deserves to be sustained. Issue No. 5 19. The issue arises out depreciation of building disallowed during the assessment year 2010-11, the assessee claimed depreciation of Rs.6,89,411 in respect of building viz., residential flat at Jangpura

DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1), DELHI vs. INDIAN RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

income no disallowance was required. Thus, the issue in corresponding grounds in AY: 2017-18 & 2018-19 raised by the assessee deserves to be sustained. Issue No. 5 19. The issue arises out depreciation of building disallowed during the assessment year 2010-11, the assessee claimed depreciation of Rs.6,89,411 in respect of building viz., residential flat at Jangpura

INDIAN RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10(1), DELHI, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

income no disallowance was required. Thus, the issue in corresponding grounds in AY: 2017-18 & 2018-19 raised by the assessee deserves to be sustained. Issue No. 5 19. The issue arises out depreciation of building disallowed during the assessment year 2010-11, the assessee claimed depreciation of Rs.6,89,411 in respect of building viz., residential flat at Jangpura

HARI KISHAN RATHI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-14 , NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

income no disallowance was required. Thus, the issue in corresponding grounds in AY: 2017-18 & 2018-19 raised by the assessee deserves to be sustained. Issue No. 5 19. The issue arises out depreciation of building disallowed during the assessment year 2010-11, the assessee claimed depreciation of Rs.6,89,411 in respect of building viz., residential flat at Jangpura

CORONET HOTEL SERVICES & SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-6(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri N. K. Choudhry, Jm

TDS under section 194 (1) of the Act which deals with the rental income and thus goes to show that the Assessee has earned rental income from House Property and therefore, no interference is warranted in the decision of the authorities below in treating the revenue receipts as ‘rental income from house property’. 8. We have heard the parties