DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S INDO RAMA SYNTHETICS (I) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

115B and over all general scheme of the I T Act, 1961 in mind, a conjoint reading of the section shows that the phrase 'as per books' in clause (iii) of explanation 1 after sub-section 2 of section 115JB simply denotes 'not as per the regular provisions of the I T Act, 1961'. However, it does not preclude

GREEN INFRA WIND FARM ASSET LTD.,GURUGRAM vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 10(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2016-17] Green Infra Wind Farm Asset Ltd., Vs Acit, 5Th Floor, Tower C, Building No.8, Circle-10(2), Dlf Cyber City, Gurugram, New Delhi. Haryana-122002. Pan-Aaecg4080H Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Vartik Chokshi, Ca & Shri Biren Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 23.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 04.07.2025 Order

depreciation is nil; or (iv)to (vi) [***] (vii)the amount of profits of sick industrial company for the assessment year commencing on and from the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the said company has become a sick industrial company under sub-section (1) of section 17 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions

LNG SECURITIES SERVICES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: : Shri C.M. Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

depreciation is nil; or (iv) to (vi) [***] 12 ITA No.3708/Del./2013 (vii) the amount of profits of sick industrial company for the assessment year commencing on and from the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the said company has become a sick industrial company under sub-section (1) of section 17 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special

BSES RAJDHANI POWER LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri Inturi Rama Rao Assessment Year : 2005-06 Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Vs. Assistant Cit, Bses Bhawan, Nehru Place, Circle-3(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Deputy Cit, Vs. Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Circle 3(1), Bses Bhavan, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2006-07 Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Vs. Assistant Cit, Bses Bhawan, Nehru Place, Circle-3(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Deputy Cit, Vs. Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Circle 3(1), Bses Bhavan, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 174 of the Electricity Act, 2003. 22.4 Thus, by virtue of Section 174 of the Electricity Act, 2003, the provisions of the said Act read along with the DERC regulations shall override the provisions of all other Acts, including the Companies Act, 1956. 22.5 Corresponding to the aforesaid, even the Companies Act, 1956 (section 616) and the Companies

SAMPARK HOTELS (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conference)

115B was made w.e.f. 01.07.2007 and relied upon the decisions of coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in Aakruti Investments Ltd. vs. ITO in ITA No.7385/Mum/2014 dated 03.11.2017, ITO vs. Sitashri Trading & Finance Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.2295/Del/2015 dated 01.10.2018 & decision of Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in Anoopgarh Kraya Vikraya Sahakari Samiti Ltd. vs. ACIT

M/S. FIXOPAN MACHINES (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Bhavnesh Sainiassessment Year: 2006-07 Vs Fixopan Machines (P) Ltd., Acit S-35, Greater Kailash-1, Cc-Vii New Delhi. New Delhi.

section 143(3) of the Act dated 15.12.2009. The AO in the assessment order made an addition of Rs. 9,85,108/-. The AO on an examination of a return of income and submission of the assessee found that above amount was carried forward by the assessee in the return filed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, JHANDEWALAN vs. STERLING AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED , DELHI

In the result Appeal of the Revenue for Assessment Year 2018-

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shrimanish Agarwal

depreciation of the eligible unit. Hon'ble 2. Whether Delhi High the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in facts and in law by relying upon the judgment of provided relief Court in assessee's own case in which the Hon'ble High Court has to the assessee on the issue of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act without has appreciating been

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, JHANDEWALAN vs. STERLING AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED , DELHI

In the result Appeal of the Revenue for Assessment Year 2018-

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shrimanish Agarwal

depreciation of the eligible unit. Hon'ble 2. Whether Delhi High the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in facts and in law by relying upon the judgment of provided relief Court in assessee's own case in which the Hon'ble High Court has to the assessee on the issue of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act without has appreciating been

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, JHANDEWALAN vs. STERLING AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED , DELHI

In the result Appeal of the Revenue for Assessment Year 2018-

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shrimanish Agarwal

depreciation of the eligible unit. Hon'ble 2. Whether Delhi High the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in facts and in law by relying upon the judgment of provided relief Court in assessee's own case in which the Hon'ble High Court has to the assessee on the issue of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act without has appreciating been