CIT vs. GOETZE (INDIA) LTD

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

Section 115J showed loss of Rs.10.50 crores, but the Assessing Officer had calculated the book profits at a positive figure of Rs.2.15 crores. Thus, substantial addition was made to the book profits. Secondly, the Assessing Officer had observed that transfer from the valuation reserve was essentially an equalisation device meant to ensure that the depreciation

CIT vs. GOETZE (INDIA) LTD

Section 115J showed loss of Rs.10.50 crores, but the Assessing Officer had calculated the book profits at a positive figure of Rs.2.15 crores. Thus, substantial addition was made to the book profits. Secondly, the Assessing Officer had observed that transfer from the valuation reserve was essentially an equalisation device meant to ensure that the depreciation

M/S. PRAKASH INDUSTRIES LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, HISAR

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

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

Section 115J; and the amount of depreciation which is absorbed in a notional assessment under Section 143/144 for the relevant

CIT vs. FEDERAL-LOGUL GOETZE (INDIA) LTD

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

Section 115J showed loss of Rs. 10.50 crores, but the Assessing Officer had calculated the book profits at a positive figure of Rs.2.15 crores. Thus, substantial addition was made to the book profits. Secondly, the Assessing Officer had observed that transfer from the valuation reserve . was essentially an equalisation device meant to ensure that the depreciation

CIT vs. GOETZE INDIA LTD

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

Section 115J showed loss of Rs. 10.50 crores, but the Assessing Officer had calculated the book profits at a positive figure of Rs.2.15 crores. Thus, substantial addition was made to the book profits. Secondly, the Assessing Officer had observed that transfer from the valuation reserve . was essentially an equalisation device meant to ensure that the depreciation

CIT vs. FEDERAL MOGUL GOETZE INDIA LTD

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

Section 115J showed loss of Rs. 10.50 crores, but the Assessing Officer had calculated the book profits at a positive figure of Rs.2.15 crores. Thus, substantial addition was made to the book profits. Secondly, the Assessing Officer had observed that transfer from the valuation reserve . was essentially an equalisation device meant to ensure that the depreciation

CIT vs. FEDERAL MOGUL GOETZE INDIA LTD

Section 115J showed loss of Rs. 10.50 crores, but the Assessing Officer had calculated the book profits at a positive figure of Rs.2.15 crores. Thus, substantial addition was made to the book profits. Secondly, the Assessing Officer had observed that transfer from the valuation reserve . was essentially an equalisation device meant to ensure that the depreciation

CIT vs. FEDERAL-LOGUL GOETZE (INDIA) LTD

Section 115J showed loss of Rs. 10.50 crores, but the Assessing Officer had calculated the book profits at a positive figure of Rs.2.15 crores. Thus, substantial addition was made to the book profits. Secondly, the Assessing Officer had observed that transfer from the valuation reserve . was essentially an equalisation device meant to ensure that the depreciation

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:

Section 115J.”The Court declines to frame a question on the above issue.” 40. We, therefore, by keeping in view the ratio laid down in the aforesaid referred to case, direct the AO to exclude the amount of adjustment made u/s 14A of the Act r.w. Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 while computing the book profits

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:

Section 115J.”The Court declines to frame a question on the above issue.” 40. We, therefore, by keeping in view the ratio laid down in the aforesaid referred to case, direct the AO to exclude the amount of adjustment made u/s 14A of the Act r.w. Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 while computing the book profits

NHPC LTD.,FARIDABAD vs. ACIT, FARIDABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu, Judicialmember & Sh. Prashant Maharishi

depreciation' shall be same as have been adopted for the purpose of preparing such accounting including profit and loss account and laid before the company at its annual general meeting in accordance with the provisions of section 210 of the Companies Act. The account of the assessee company has been prepared as per the provision of Schedule

VEDANTA LTD ,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 26(2), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh[Assessment Year: 2014-15]

Section 37 of the act may be prospective, but at the same time, assessee had to justify the claim of expenditure being spent on CSR. Details mentioned hereinabove do not justify the claim of expenditure on account of commercial expediency. Considering the claim from all possible angles, we do not find any merit in such claim of expenditure. Disallowance

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- 9 vs. M/S TATA POWER DELHI DISTRIBUTION LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S NORTH DELHI POWER LIMITED)

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

115J; however, Circular No. 762, dated 18.02.1998, issued by the CBDT provided that the companies engaged in the business of generation and distribution of power were exempted from the levy of MAT. The Court held that the same could be inferred in respect of Section 115JB of the Act also, which was substantially similar to Section 115JA

DCIT, CIRCLE- 17(2), NEW DELHI vs. NALWA STEEL AND POWER LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, ITA No. 5548/Del/2017 of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Assessment Year: 2011-12

depreciation while calculating book profit under Section 115JB of the Act. 13. The learned Departmental Representative by relying on the findings and conclusions of the Assessing Officer, justified the orders of the lower Authorities. 14. Per contra, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that, the issue is also recurring in nature and the same has been decided in favour

NALWA STEEL POWER LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 13(3), NEW DELHI

In the result, ITA No. 5548/Del/2017 of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Assessment Year: 2011-12

depreciation while calculating book profit under Section 115JB of the Act. 13. The learned Departmental Representative by relying on the findings and conclusions of the Assessing Officer, justified the orders of the lower Authorities. 14. Per contra, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that, the issue is also recurring in nature and the same has been decided in favour

VODAFONE IDEA LTD. (EARLIER KNWON AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD.),MUMBAI vs. ACIT,. CIRCLE-26(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, all above said grounds are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shriyogesh Kumar U.S.Vodafone Idea Ltd Vs. Acit, (Earlier Known As Vodafone Circle-26(2), Mobile Services Ltd) New Delhi 10Th Floor, Birla Centurion, Century Mills Compound, Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Worli, Mumbai, Maharastra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacb2100P

depreciation @ 25% amounting to Rs. 197,89,03,703/- the remaining amount of Rs.5,93,67,11,109/- (i.e. 791,56,14,811/-less 197,89,03,703) is hereby disallowed and added to the income of the assessee. In addition to this amount, a deduction in respect of amounts similarly treated as capital expenditure in earlier years should

KUSUM SAHGAL,GURUGRAM vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-19(2), DELHI

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

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 Kusum Sahgal, Through Lr Shri Vs. Acit, Circle-19(2), Viney Sagar Sahgal, New Delhi Mg-2002, The Magnolias, Golf Course Road Dlf Phase-V, Gurugram, 122 002 Haryana Pan :Aatps3766J (Appellant) (Respondent)

depreciation thereon. So too 50% share in the property in the wealth tax proceedings is offered by the assessee and her husband. The note submitted to the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, City Circle 5(1), Madras, by the assessee discloses that the assessee owned 50% of the property in 828, Poonamallee High Road, Chennai, for use as residential property

M/S GUJARAT GUARDIAN LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT,, NEW DELHI

depreciation of Rs.2,55,61,332/- in the book profits of the assessee ignoring the purport of accounting standard 6 issued by the ICAI, which accounting standard provides that the audited accounts of an assessee cannot be altered with for the purpose of computation of book profit u/s 115JB of the Act.\n\n48. Counsel for the assessee also relied