REC LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT-10 (OSD), DELHI, NEW DELHI

iii) of\nthe relevant Finance Act.\"\n2.8.5 Further reliance is placed another landmark judgment in the case of\nS.R. Koshti 276 ITR 165 (Guj) in which relief was granted to\nassessee with following observations:\n•\n“The authorities under the Act are under an obligation to act in\naccordance with law. Tax can be collected only as provided under\nthe

JCIT(OSD), RANGE-10, NEW DELHI , CR BUILDING ITO vs. RURAL ELECTRIFICATION CORPORATION LTD. , KASTURBA NAGAR

iii) of\nthe relevant Finance Act.\"\n2.8.5 Further reliance is placed another landmark judgment in the case of\nS.R. Koshti 276 ITR 165 (Guj) in which relief was granted to\nassessee with following observations:\n\"The authorities under the Act are under an obligation to act in\naccordance with law. Tax can be collected only as provided under\nthe

TERADATA INDIA P.LTD,GURUGRAM vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-3(1), GURUGRAM

Appeal of the revenue is allowed for AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

5. That once working capital adjustment is granted no separate adjustment on account of outstanding receivables is maintainable. Part II-Corporate Tax Grounds 6. Denial of deduction under Section 80G. 6.1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned AO has erred in disallowing the deduction of INR 21,47.646/- claimed under section 80G

ACIT-CIRCLE-3(1), GURGAON vs. TERADATA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, GURGAON

Appeal of the revenue is allowed for AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

5. That once working capital adjustment is granted no separate adjustment on account of outstanding receivables is maintainable. Part II-Corporate Tax Grounds 6. Denial of deduction under Section 80G. 6.1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned AO has erred in disallowing the deduction of INR 21,47.646/- claimed under section 80G

TERADATA INDIA PVT LTD,GRUGRAM vs. DCIT CIRCLE-3(1), GURUGRAM

Appeal of the revenue is allowed for AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

5. That once working capital adjustment is granted no separate adjustment on account of outstanding receivables is maintainable. Part II-Corporate Tax Grounds 6. Denial of deduction under Section 80G. 6.1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned AO has erred in disallowing the deduction of INR 21,47.646/- claimed under section 80G

JCIT(OSD), RANGE-10, NEW DELHI , C.R. BUILDING ITO vs. RURAL ELECTRIFICATION CORPORATION LTD., KASTURBA NAGAR

iii) of\nthe relevant Finance Act.\"\n2.8.5 Further reliance is placed another landmark judgment in the case of\nS.R. Koshti 276 ITR 165 (Guj) in which relief was granted to\nassessee with following observations:\n“The authorities under the Act are under an obligation to act in\naccordance with law. Tax can be collected only as provided under\nthe

JCIT(OSD), RANGE-10, NEW DELHI , C.R. BUILDING ITO vs. RURAL ELECTRIFICATION CORPORATION LTD. , KASTURBA NAGAR

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in the AY 2020-21 and AY\n2021-22 are dismissed

iii) of\nthe relevant Finance Act.\"\n2.8.5 Further reliance is placed another landmark judgment in the case of\nS.R. Koshti 276 ITR 165 (Guj) in which relief was granted to\nassessee with following observations:\n•\n“The authorities under the Act are under an obligation to act in\naccordance with law. Tax can be collected only as provided under\nthe

ACTION ALLIANCE FOR RECYCLING BEVERAGE CARTONS ('AARC'),NEW DELHI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. K. N. Chary

80G. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a society and filed an application in form 10A and 10G on 29th January, 2019 seeking registration u/s.12AA and exemption u/s.80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The Ld. CIT(E) issued a questionnaire dated 19.02.2019 requesting it to submit certain documents in support

ACTION ALLIANCE FOR RECYCLING BEVERAGE CARTONS ('AARC'),NEW DELHI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. K. N. Chary

80G. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a society and filed an application in form 10A and 10G on 29th January, 2019 seeking registration u/s.12AA and exemption u/s.80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The Ld. CIT(E) issued a questionnaire dated 19.02.2019 requesting it to submit certain documents in support

SUMITOMO CORPORATION INDIA PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-22(2), DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above and the stay application is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh, Accontant Member Assessment Year 2020-21 Sumitomo Corporation India Vs. Dcit Pvt. Ltd. Circle -22 (2) 501 & 502, 5Th Floor West Wing, World Mark 1, Asset No.11, Hospitality District Aerocity, New Delhi-110037 Pan No.Aabcs1887M Appellant Respondent It(Tp) Appeal No.14/Del/2025 Assessment Year 2021-22 Sumitomo Corporation India Vs. Dcit Pvt. Ltd. Circle -22 (2) 501 & 502, 5Th Floor Delhi West Wing, World Mark 1, Asset No.11, Hospitality District Aerocity, New Delhi-110037 Pan No.Aabcs1887M Appellant Respondent

80G of the Act amounting to INR 18,55,205/- has not been allowed to the Appellant (computation sheet at page 58-62 of paperbook part 2). After this deduction is allowed, the tax demand will be revised to INR 70,71,020 from INR 78,60,590/- after accounting for the revised interest. Ground no. 4-7: Nut pressed

HERO MOTOCORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 11(1), NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 115JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In the present Assessment Year also the facts are similar and are squarely covered with the decision of the Tribunal for A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14. Hence Ground Nos. 15 to 14.3 are allowed. 24. As regards Ground No. 16 to 16.2 is relating to Disallowance

HERO MOTOCORP LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Sh. I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Motocorp Limited, Jcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Range-1, New Delhi Vs. Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0812J (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Vs. New Delhi Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community

5 of the appeal of the assessee is against an addition of Rs. 3.02 lakhs by estimating the value of the scrap lying in stock as at the end of the relevant previous year on hypothetical and national basis. Ld. assessing officer on perusal of the significant accounting policies mentioned in scheduled 12 of the financial statements for the financial

PLANMAN CONSULTING (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Sh. Inturi Rama Rao & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

iii. Additions under Section 40(a)(ia) of Rs. 15,85,328/- iv. Excess claim made u/s 80G of the I.T. Act of 14,02,250/- 3 Being aggrieved from the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the learned CIT(A) who vide impugned order date 21.08.2013 partly allowed the appeal. Being aggrieved, the appellant is before

PLANMAN CONSULTING (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Sh. Inturi Rama Rao & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

iii. Additions under Section 40(a)(ia) of Rs. 15,85,328/- iv. Excess claim made u/s 80G of the I.T. Act of 14,02,250/- 3 Being aggrieved from the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the learned CIT(A) who vide impugned order date 21.08.2013 partly allowed the appeal. Being aggrieved, the appellant is before

NIIT FOUNDATION,NEW DELHI vs. CIT(E), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charyniit Foundation, Vs. Cit(E), Plot No. 8, Balaji Estate, New Delhi Sudarshan Munjal Marg, Kalkaji, New Delhi Pan: Aacan3951E (Appellant) (Respondent)

III, IV & V GROUND VI: ACTIVITY OF THE APPELLANT IS NOT IN THE NATURE OF BUSINESS 6.1 On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT erred in holding that the activity carried out by the Appellant is in the nature of trade, commerce or business and accordingly, it is hit by the proviso to section

EXL SERVICE.COM (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee as well as ofthe department are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 302/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit, Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda New Delhi District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita No. 615/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tower- Tax, Circle-1 (Ltu), New Delhi-110017 B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaace5174C Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Adv. Sh. Abhishek Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Piyush Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.01.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

TDS Office on the basis of disallowance of Rs. 2,69,241 being made in the draft assessment order. 14. The Ld. AO erred in law and on the facts and circumstances of the case by making an addition of Rs. 463 in respect of contribution to Employee State Insurance wrongly considering the date of payment to be beyond

DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. EXL SERVICE.COM (INDIA) PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee as well as ofthe department are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 302/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit, Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda New Delhi District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita No. 615/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tower- Tax, Circle-1 (Ltu), New Delhi-110017 B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaace5174C Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Adv. Sh. Abhishek Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Piyush Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.01.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

TDS Office on the basis of disallowance of Rs. 2,69,241 being made in the draft assessment order. 14. The Ld. AO erred in law and on the facts and circumstances of the case by making an addition of Rs. 463 in respect of contribution to Employee State Insurance wrongly considering the date of payment to be beyond

MMTC LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, ground No. 5 of the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Chary(Through Video Conferencing) Dcit, Vs. Mmtc Ltd, Circle-16(2), Core-1, Scope Complex-7, New Delhi Industrial Area, Lodhi Road, New Delhi Pan: Aaacm1433E (Appellant) (Respondent) Mmtc Ltd, Vs. Addl. Cit, Core-1, Scope Complex-7, Range-5, Industrial Area, Lodhi Road, New New Delhi Delhi Pan: Aaacm1433E (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 14A applying Rule 8D but confirmed the disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of Rs. 13,20,000/-with respect to administrative expenditure. The disallowances of Rs. 4,99,579/- u/s 80G on donation of Rs. 9,99,158/- was confirmed holding that the above expenditure is neither allowable u/s 35AC nor u/s 80G of the Act. With respect