DCIT, HISAR vs. M/S SYNERGY WASTE MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD.,, HISAR

In the result, all the five captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

801A since AY 2009-10 and has been filing its ITR(s) well on time to claim the same. However, in the present appeal the assessee company filed its ITR for AY 2012-13 on 28.09.2012 through a tax practitioner but due to some technical error the acknowledgment of the return could not be generated. As a result the return

DCIT, HISAR vs. M/S SYNERGY WASTE MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD.,, HISAR

In the result, all the five captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

801A since AY 2009-10 and has been filing its ITR(s) well on time to claim the same. However, in the present appeal the assessee company filed its ITR for AY 2012-13 on 28.09.2012 through a tax practitioner but due to some technical error the acknowledgment of the return could not be generated. As a result the return

DCIT, HISAR vs. M/S SYNERGY WASTE MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD.,, HISAR

In the result, all the five captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

801A since AY 2009-10 and has been filing its ITR(s) well on time to claim the same. However, in the present appeal the assessee company filed its ITR for AY 2012-13 on 28.09.2012 through a tax practitioner but due to some technical error the acknowledgment of the return could not be generated. As a result the return

DCIT, HISAR vs. M/S SYNERGY WASTE MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD.,, HISAR

In the result, all the five captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

801A since AY 2009-10 and has been filing its ITR(s) well on time to claim the same. However, in the present appeal the assessee company filed its ITR for AY 2012-13 on 28.09.2012 through a tax practitioner but due to some technical error the acknowledgment of the return could not be generated. As a result the return

B R HOSPITAL AND RESARCH INSTITUTE,NEW DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-EXEMPTION 1(3), DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

4-12 of case law compilation) CIT v. Xavier Kelavani Mandal (P.) Ltd. [2012 (9) TMI 1049 Gujarat High Court] "29. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and have perused the material on record of the case. The issue regarding allowability of deduction under section 801B on account of delay in submission of filing of the audit

ERADICATUS INFECTUS PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Brief facts of the case are, assessee-company was incorporated on 04. 12. 2019 to carry on the business of Healthcare & Lifesciences Industry & Medical Devices/ Bio Medical Sector. After incorporation, the assessee company started the business of Biomedical and Medical Devices and producing Covid Testing Kits and has duly

DCM SHRIIRAM LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. NEAC, NEW DELHI

section 80 IA of the Act, the\nassessee has also made application for submission of following additional\nevidences under Rule 29 of ITAT:\n\na) Detailed working of enhanced deduction u/s 80-IA of the Act.\nb) Chartered engineer's certificate computing the equivalent value of\nsteam.\nc) Supplementary Form 10CCBs along with power accounts of all the\neligible plants

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. DCM SHRIRAM LTD, NEW DELHI

section 80 IA of the Act, the\nassessee has also made application for submission of following additional\nevidences under Rule 29 of ITAT:\n\na) Detailed working of enhanced deduction u/s 80-IA of the Act.\nb) Chartered engineer's certificate computing the equivalent value of\nsteam.\nc) Supplementary Form 10CCBs along with power accounts of all the\neligible plants

DCM SHRIRAM LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, DELHI

section 80 IA of the Act, the\nassessee has also made application for submission of following additional\nevidences under Rule 29 of ITAT:\na) Detailed working of enhanced deduction u/s 80-IA of the Act.\nb) Chartered engineer's certificate computing the equivalent value of\nsteam.\nc) Supplementary Form 10CCBs along with power accounts of all the\neligible plants

DCM SHRIRAM LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-7(1), NEW DELHI

section 80 IA of the Act, the\nassessee has also made application for submission of following additional\nevidence under Rule 29 of ITAT:\na) Detailed working of enhanced deduction u/s 80-IA of the Act.\nb) Chartered engineer's certificate computing the equivalent value of\nsteam.\nc) Supplementary Form 10CCBs along with power accounts of all the\neligible plants

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PRAVEEN INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed whereas the appeal filed by assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.K. Yadav. Shri B.P. Jainand

condoned the delay in filing of return and observed in the order as under: “In Exercise of the powers conferred upon it by section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961( The Act) , the central Board of direct taxes hereby authorizes the assessing Officer to admit the return of income for Assessment Year 2009-10 filed

M/S PRAVEEN INDUSTRIES LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed whereas the appeal filed by assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.K. Yadav. Shri B.P. Jainand

condoned the delay in filing of return and observed in the order as under: “In Exercise of the powers conferred upon it by section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961( The Act) , the central Board of direct taxes hereby authorizes the assessing Officer to admit the return of income for Assessment Year 2009-10 filed