DABUR INDIA LIMITED vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: We Consider The Submissions Made In Support Of The Appeal The Following Facts Require To Be Noted:- 2.1 The Assessee Is In The Business Of Manufacturing Herbal Products & Cosmetics. On 30.11.2000 Assessee Filed Its Return For Assessment Year 2000-01 Wherein, It Declared An Income Of Rs 12,15,25,093/-. On 10.5.2001 The Return Was Processed Under Section 143(1)(A) Of The Act As The Returned Income. However, Notices Were Issued Under Section 143(2) Of The Act. 2.2 In Response To The Aforesaid Notices, Hearing Was Attended By An Authorized Representative Before The Assessing Officer. 2008:Dhc:2521

Capital gains (F)- Income from other sources. 9.4 In the instant case, we are concerned with “profits and gains of business or profession”. Section 28 of the Act provides that, amongst others, income from “profits and gains of business or profession” which was carried on by the assessee during the previous year will be chargeable to income tax under

ADIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. FORTUNE SOCIETY FOR DEVELOPMENT AND PROMOTION OF INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 2

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiadit(E), Vs. Fortune Society For Tc-Ii, New Delhi Development & Promotion Of International Business, G-4, Community Centre, Naraina Vihar, New Delhi Pan:Aaatf0849L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 2(45) of the Act and that the word "income" is a wider term than the expression "profits and gains of business or profession". Reference was made to the nature of depreciation and it was pointed out that depreciation was nothing but decrease in the value of property through wear, deterioration or obsolescence. It was observed that depreciation

ACIT, MORADABAD vs. M/S. PRATHMA BANK, MORADABAD

In the result, appeal of the department is dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita No. 4090/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S Prathma Bank, Tax, Circle-1, Ramganga Vihar, Moradabad Moradabad (U.P.) (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaajp0988Q Assessee By : Sh. Piyush Kaushik, Adv. Revenue By : Smt. Paramita Tripathy, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 20.06.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.07.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 17.04.2013 Of Ld. Cit(A), Bareilly.

capital gain had been disclosed at Rs.24,95,386/- and finally in column No. 14 losses of current year carried forward had been claimed at Rs.28,62,39,159/-. The AO noticed that the assessee vide revised return filed on 11.10.2010 had claimed deduction u/s 36(1)(viia) of the Act at Rs.105,69,80,000/- which

KARAN RAGHAV EXPORT P LTD

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT

gains of business or profession” is made in accordance with the provisions of Section 29. Section 29 provides that deduction eligible u/s 30 to 43D is to be allowed while computing the business profits. The claim of depreciation on the building contributed by the assessee for the purpose of its business is to be considered u/s 32. Thus, whatever

M/S. FCML PROJECTS,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Rajpal Yadavassessment Year : 2009-10 Fcml Projects, Acit, Circle- 28(1), A-217, Vs. New Delhi. Okhla Indl. Area, Phase-1, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaff 1343 H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2010-11 Fcml Projects, Acit, Circle- 28(1), A-217, Vs. New Delhi. Okhla Indl. Area, Phase-1, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaff 1343 H (Appellant) (Respondent)

capitalization of goodwill. The submission of ld. counsel is that the interest paid is within the limit as prescribed u/s 40(b)(iv) and is in terms of the partnership deed, therefore, no disallowance could be made. Ld. counsel also submitted that the assessee’s claim is allowable u/s 37 and not u/s 36(1)(iii). Section 40 deals with

M/S FCML PROJECTS,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Rajpal Yadavassessment Year : 2009-10 Fcml Projects, Acit, Circle- 28(1), A-217, Vs. New Delhi. Okhla Indl. Area, Phase-1, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaff 1343 H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2010-11 Fcml Projects, Acit, Circle- 28(1), A-217, Vs. New Delhi. Okhla Indl. Area, Phase-1, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaff 1343 H (Appellant) (Respondent)

capitalization of goodwill. The submission of ld. counsel is that the interest paid is within the limit as prescribed u/s 40(b)(iv) and is in terms of the partnership deed, therefore, no disallowance could be made. Ld. counsel also submitted that the assessee’s claim is allowable u/s 37 and not u/s 36(1)(iii). Section 40 deals with

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. M/S INDRAPRASTHA CANCER SOCIETY

Section 2(45) of the Act and that the word “income” is a wider term than the expression “profits and gains of business or profession”. Reference was made to the nature of depreciation and it was pointed out that depreciation was nothing but decrease in the value of property through wear, deterioration or obsolescence. It was observed that depreciation

GE CAPITAL SERVICES INDIA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh[A.Y 2010-11] Ge Capital Services India Vs. The Dy. C.I.T 401& 402, 4Th Floor, Circle - 10(1) Aggarwal Millennium Tower, New Delhi E-1, 2, 3 Netaji Subhash Place, Pitampura, New Delhi Pan: Aaacg 0239 L [Appellant] [Respondent]

43D. Deductions in computing business income are not exhaustive: The assessee submits that deductions enumerated in chapter IV-D in computing business income are not exhaustive. The charge under section 28(i) is in respect of “Profits and gains'1. The term °Profits or Gains* has to be given its natural meaning and the said expression has to be understood

The Commissioner of Income Tax ¿¿¿ II vs. Jindal Equipments Leasing & Consultancy Services Ltd.

43D as is mandated by Section 29 of the Act Thus on this 2009:DHC:5669-DB made by the AO under Section 41(1) of the Act read with 28(i) of the Act, which does not create any separate charge. On the other hand, Section 28(iv) deals with altogether different aspect, viz.: “(iv) the value

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. COUNCIL OF SCIENTIFIC & INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

43D which includes depreciation under section 32, the assessee is entitled is the case pressed before us by the senior counsel appearing for the assessee. We have no doubt in our mind that business income of charitable trust also has to be computed in the same manner as provided under section 29 of the Income-tax Act. However, the issue

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX LAXMI NAGAR DELHI vs. TCI FOUNDATION 10 RAM BAGH AZAD MARKET ROHTAK ROAD NEW DELHI

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

43D which includes depreciation under section 32, the assessee is entitled is the case pressed before us by the senior counsel appearing for the assessee. We have no doubt in our mind that business income of charitable trust also has to be computed in the same manner as provided under section 29 of the Income-tax Act. However, the issue

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. INDIAN TRADE PROMOTION ORGANISATION

43D which includes depreciation under section 32, the assessee is entitled is the case pressed before us by the senior counsel appearing for the assessee. We have no doubt in our mind that business income of charitable trust also has to be computed in the same manner as provided under section 29 of the Income-tax Act. However, the issue

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ALTUS GROUP (INDIA) PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2012-13

gains’ properly so called. These principles were reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in Badridas Daga v CIT (34, ITR 10,15) and Calcutta Co. Ltd v CIT. ,(37 ITR 1,9)” 1.9 “Non -capital expenditure incurred for the purposes of business may fall to be deducted under the omnibus residuary s 37 of ITA 1961. But business losses, though they

ALTUS GROUP (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2012-13

gains’ properly so called. These principles were reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in Badridas Daga v CIT (34, ITR 10,15) and Calcutta Co. Ltd v CIT. ,(37 ITR 1,9)” 1.9 “Non -capital expenditure incurred for the purposes of business may fall to be deducted under the omnibus residuary s 37 of ITA 1961. But business losses, though they

CAREFOUR WC&C INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

43D relate to computation of business income, which is carried on by the assessee, it follows that the expenses during the pre- commencement period will not be deductable. Similarly loss incurred during the period cannot also be treated as business loss. It cannot, therefore, be carried forward. It has been so held in Liquidators of Pursa

RRB ENERGY LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Kuldip Singh

43D and that includes depreciation as well. The above table also shows that the assessee is not even debiting notional maintenance charges. It may be noted that the assessee company cannot reserve the right to claim the benefit u/s 80-IA as per either of the two versions" as mentioned above. The assessee's claim is of deduction

M/S C&S ELECTRIC LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT LTU, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed while appeal filed

Bench: Shri P.K.Bansal & Sh. Amit Shuklac & S Electric Ltd., Vs Dcit Ltu, (Formerly Known As Controls & Switchgear New Delhi. Co.Ltd.), 222, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase-Iii, New Delhi. Pan-Aaacc0909K (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit (Ltu), Vs C &S Electric Ltd., Nbcc Plaza, Pushp (Formerly Known As M/S. Control & Vihar, Sector-Iii, Switchgear Co. Ltd.), New Delhi-110017. 22, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi-110020. Pan-Aaacc0909K (Appellant) (Respondent)

gains computed under the head income from business of the eligible unit in accordance with the provision of section 30 to 43D of the Income Tax Act. This view has been taken by this Tribunal in the following cases:- (i) Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd. 194 Taxman 192 (Bombay) PB 981-988 (981, 983, 987); (ii) Sahasra Electronics Pvt.Ltd

DCIT(LTU), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. C&S ELECTRIC LTD,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed while appeal filed

Bench: Shri P.K.Bansal & Sh. Amit Shuklac & S Electric Ltd., Vs Dcit Ltu, (Formerly Known As Controls & Switchgear New Delhi. Co.Ltd.), 222, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase-Iii, New Delhi. Pan-Aaacc0909K (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit (Ltu), Vs C &S Electric Ltd., Nbcc Plaza, Pushp (Formerly Known As M/S. Control & Vihar, Sector-Iii, Switchgear Co. Ltd.), New Delhi-110017. 22, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi-110020. Pan-Aaacc0909K (Appellant) (Respondent)

gains computed under the head income from business of the eligible unit in accordance with the provision of section 30 to 43D of the Income Tax Act. This view has been taken by this Tribunal in the following cases:- (i) Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd. 194 Taxman 192 (Bombay) PB 981-988 (981, 983, 987); (ii) Sahasra Electronics Pvt.Ltd