DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. R.J. CORP LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee on this ground is allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act but would also be applicable to all banks/commercial banks, to which Banking Regulation Act, 1949 applies. 38. From this, Punjab and Haryana High Court pointed out that this circular carves out a distinction between 'stock-in-trade' and 'investment' and provides that if the motive behind purchase and sale of shares

M/S. RJ CORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee on this ground is allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act but would also be applicable to all banks/commercial banks, to which Banking Regulation Act, 1949 applies. 38. From this, Punjab and Haryana High Court pointed out that this circular carves out a distinction between 'stock-in-trade' and 'investment' and provides that if the motive behind purchase and sale of shares

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. R.J. CORP LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee on this ground is allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act but would also be applicable to all banks/commercial banks, to which Banking Regulation Act, 1949 applies. 38. From this, Punjab and Haryana High Court pointed out that this circular carves out a distinction between 'stock-in-trade' and 'investment' and provides that if the motive behind purchase and sale of shares

M/S THE ORIENTAL INSSURANCE CO.LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Anubhav Sharmam/S. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd, Vs. The Dcit, A 25/27, Asaf Ali Road, Ltu, New Delhi New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaact0627R

80P(2)(a)(i), to pay income-tax thereon. The placement of such funds being imperative for the purposes of carrying on the banking business, the income derived therefrom would be income from the assessee's business." 41. In the AY in question, the AO did not accept the case of the Assessee that the income earned on the sale/redemption

M/S. RELIGARE SECURITIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed in terms of our directions contained in the preceding

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaasstt. Year: 2008-09

l)(vii) of the Act on account of bad debts written off on the ground that corresponding debt was not accounted as income in the books of accounts earlier. 3.1 That the Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in not appreciating that necessary conditions stipulated under section 36(1)(vii) read with section 36(2

THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1, LTU, NEW DELHI

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh.Anubhav Sharmaita No. 1952/Del/2018, A.Y. 2013-14 M/S. The Oriental Insurance Co. Vs. Dcit, Ltd. Circle-1, Ltu, A-25/27, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi New Delhi- 110002 Pan :Aaact0627R

80P(2)(a)(i), to pay income-tax thereon. The placement of such funds being imperative for the purposes of carrying on the banking business, the income derived therefrom would be income from the assessee's business." 41. In the AY in question, the AO did not accept the case of the Assessee that the income earned on the sale/redemption

DCIT, CIRCLE- 1, LTU, NEW DELHI vs. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh.Anubhav Sharmaita No. 1952/Del/2018, A.Y. 2013-14 M/S. The Oriental Insurance Co. Vs. Dcit, Ltd. Circle-1, Ltu, A-25/27, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi New Delhi- 110002 Pan :Aaact0627R

80P(2)(a)(i), to pay income-tax thereon. The placement of such funds being imperative for the purposes of carrying on the banking business, the income derived therefrom would be income from the assessee's business." 41. In the AY in question, the AO did not accept the case of the Assessee that the income earned on the sale/redemption

SHIVALIK PRINTS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE-8, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessees’ appeals in ITA nos

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraassessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13

capital receipt and cannot be included in the taxable income. Though this ground raised by the assessee before the CIT(A) has been recorded in the order, the CIT(A) did not take a decision on the same. Similar ground was raised by the assessee before the Tribunal, which was not considered by the Tribunal, though the Tribunal refers

M/S. SHIVALIK PRINTS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessees’ appeals in ITA nos

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraassessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13

capital receipt and cannot be included in the taxable income. Though this ground raised by the assessee before the CIT(A) has been recorded in the order, the CIT(A) did not take a decision on the same. Similar ground was raised by the assessee before the Tribunal, which was not considered by the Tribunal, though the Tribunal refers

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. CENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORP., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue, i

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant, Accountantmember & Shri K.N. Chary[Through Video Conferencing]

l)(xii) while appellant fulfills all the conditions laid down in this section and accordingly eligible for deduction. 3. Original ground no. 6 to 8:- a. It is contended that the Assessing Officer has wrongly invoked sec 14A r/w Rule 8D in the instant case. The Assessing Officer has wrongly computed the amount allocable

M/S. CENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue, i

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant, Accountantmember & Shri K.N. Chary[Through Video Conferencing]

l)(xii) while appellant fulfills all the conditions laid down in this section and accordingly eligible for deduction. 3. Original ground no. 6 to 8:- a. It is contended that the Assessing Officer has wrongly invoked sec 14A r/w Rule 8D in the instant case. The Assessing Officer has wrongly computed the amount allocable

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. CENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORP., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue, i

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant, Accountantmember & Shri K.N. Chary[Through Video Conferencing]

l)(xii) while appellant fulfills all the conditions laid down in this section and accordingly eligible for deduction. 3. Original ground no. 6 to 8:- a. It is contended that the Assessing Officer has wrongly invoked sec 14A r/w Rule 8D in the instant case. The Assessing Officer has wrongly computed the amount allocable

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. CENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORPORATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue, i

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant, Accountantmember & Shri K.N. Chary[Through Video Conferencing]

l)(xii) while appellant fulfills all the conditions laid down in this section and accordingly eligible for deduction. 3. Original ground no. 6 to 8:- a. It is contended that the Assessing Officer has wrongly invoked sec 14A r/w Rule 8D in the instant case. The Assessing Officer has wrongly computed the amount allocable

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. CENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORP., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue, i

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant, Accountantmember & Shri K.N. Chary[Through Video Conferencing]

l)(xii) while appellant fulfills all the conditions laid down in this section and accordingly eligible for deduction. 3. Original ground no. 6 to 8:- a. It is contended that the Assessing Officer has wrongly invoked sec 14A r/w Rule 8D in the instant case. The Assessing Officer has wrongly computed the amount allocable

CENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue, i

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant, Accountantmember & Shri K.N. Chary[Through Video Conferencing]

l)(xii) while appellant fulfills all the conditions laid down in this section and accordingly eligible for deduction. 3. Original ground no. 6 to 8:- a. It is contended that the Assessing Officer has wrongly invoked sec 14A r/w Rule 8D in the instant case. The Assessing Officer has wrongly computed the amount allocable

M/S. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshm/S. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd, Vs. The Acit, A 25/27, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi- Circle-16(1), 110003 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaact0627R Assessee By : Shri Tarandeep Singh, Adv Revenue By: Shri Mahesh Kumar, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing 19/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14/08/2025

gains of non-life insurance business is taken to be profits disclosed in the annual account, copies of which are required under the Insurance act, 1938 (4 of 1938), to be furnished to the Controller of Insurance, subject to adjustments for unexpired risk and disallowances under Section 30 to Section 43B. The Insurance Act, 1938 was amended

PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 2954/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Dcit, Vs M/S Punjab National Bank, Circle-20(1), Ho: Finance Division, 5, Sansad New Delhi Marg, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacp0165G

l)(viii) of the Act. We further observe that for and from A.Y. 1996-97, a financial corporation engaged in providing long-term finance for development of infrastructure facility in India has also become eligible assessee and for computing deduction under section 36(1)(viii) of the Act in the hands of all eligible assesses, only the income derived from

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 2954/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Dcit, Vs M/S Punjab National Bank, Circle-20(1), Ho: Finance Division, 5, Sansad New Delhi Marg, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacp0165G

l)(viii) of the Act. We further observe that for and from A.Y. 1996-97, a financial corporation engaged in providing long-term finance for development of infrastructure facility in India has also become eligible assessee and for computing deduction under section 36(1)(viii) of the Act in the hands of all eligible assesses, only the income derived from