DCIT, GHAZIABAD vs. M/S. SUPREME CEREMICS LTD., GHAZIABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[Assessment Year: 2011-12] The D.C.I.T Vs. M/S Supreme Ceramics Ltd Circle 2 C – 154, B.S. Road, Ghaziabad Bulandshahar Road, Industrial Area Ghaziabad Pan : Aaccs 6095 C [Assessment Year: 2011-12] M/S Supreme Ceramics Ltd Vs. The D.C.I.T C – 154, B.S. Road, Circle 2 Bulandshahar Road, Ghaziabad Industrial Area Ghaziabad Pan : Aaccs 6095 C [Appellant] [Respondent] Date Of Hearing : 06.11.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.11.2017 Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Tanena, Adv Shri Acrhit Rehan, Adv

depreciation has not been granted. There appears to be omission on the part of AO in this regard. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play we remit the issue back to the file of AO to consider the claim of the assessee in proper manner and pass a speaking order on allow ability or otherwise of this claim

M/S. SUPREME CERAMICS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, GHAZIABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[Assessment Year: 2011-12] The D.C.I.T Vs. M/S Supreme Ceramics Ltd Circle 2 C – 154, B.S. Road, Ghaziabad Bulandshahar Road, Industrial Area Ghaziabad Pan : Aaccs 6095 C [Assessment Year: 2011-12] M/S Supreme Ceramics Ltd Vs. The D.C.I.T C – 154, B.S. Road, Circle 2 Bulandshahar Road, Ghaziabad Industrial Area Ghaziabad Pan : Aaccs 6095 C [Appellant] [Respondent] Date Of Hearing : 06.11.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.11.2017 Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Tanena, Adv Shri Acrhit Rehan, Adv

depreciation has not been granted. There appears to be omission on the part of AO in this regard. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play we remit the issue back to the file of AO to consider the claim of the assessee in proper manner and pass a speaking order on allow ability or otherwise of this claim

DE LA RUE CASH SYSTEMS INDIA P, LTD(PRESENTLY KNOWN AS - DE LA RUE CASH PROCESSING SOLUTINS P.LTD,GURGAON vs. ITO 1(1)(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 145A as well as in the light of the provisions of given under the Income Tax Act and decide this issue afresh. Needless to say, the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following principles of natural justice. Thus, Ground No. 3 and 3.1 are partly allowed for statistical purpose. 19. As regards additional Ground regarding addition of Countervailing

DE LA RUE CASH PROCESSING SOLUTION PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, GURGAON

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 145A as well as in the light of the provisions of given under the Income Tax Act and decide this issue afresh. Needless to say, the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following principles of natural justice. Thus, Ground No. 3 and 3.1 are partly allowed for statistical purpose. 19. As regards additional Ground regarding addition of Countervailing

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No. 467/Del/2014 (A.Y 2009-10)

section 145A were not applicable as the assessment year under consideration was 1995-96. In view of the detailed discussion supra with reference to the applicability of section 145A to the year in question, there can be no escape from valuation of purchase, sale and inventories under the inclusive method. We, therefore, direct the AO to recast Profit and loss

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

depreciation could be used to set off against any head of income except salary. 56. The claim was denied by the Assessing Officer placing reliance on pre-amended provision of section 32 of the Act. 57. We are of the considered view that the Assessing Officer should consider the set off as per the amended provisions

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-16(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. New Delhi. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2010-11] Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-16(1), Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi. Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv., Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. & Ms. Tejasvi Jain & Ms. Somya Jain, Ca Respondent By Shri G.C.Srivastava, Adv., Shri Kalrav Mehrotra, Adv. & Shri Mayank Patawari, Ca Date Of Hearing 11.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09.02.2023

145A does not in any manner dilute or nullify the effect of provisions of section 43B of the Act. Ld. Sr. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that the issue is also covered by the decision of Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-16(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. New Delhi. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2010-11] Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-16(1), Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi. Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv., Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. & Ms. Tejasvi Jain & Ms. Somya Jain, Ca Respondent By Shri G.C.Srivastava, Adv., Shri Kalrav Mehrotra, Adv. & Shri Mayank Patawari, Ca Date Of Hearing 11.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09.02.2023

145A does not in any manner dilute or nullify the effect of provisions of section 43B of the Act. Ld. Sr. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that the issue is also covered by the decision of Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case

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)

145A. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in section 145,— (a) the valuation of purchase and sale of goods and inventory for the purposes of determining the income chargeable under the head “Profits and gains of business or profession” shall be— (i) in accordance with the method of accounting regularly employed by the assessee; and (ii) further adjusted to include

M/S. DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Sh. Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Dharampal Satyapal Ltd. Acit, 1711, S. P. Mukherjee Marg, Vs Central Circle – 29, Delhi-110006 New Delhi Pan No. Aaacd0132H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. R. S. Singhavi, Ca Sh. Satyajeet Goel, Ca Respondent By Sh. Sanjay I. Bara, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 28/08/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 07/10/2020 Order

depreciation in plant and machinery, factory building, factory management, administration costs and other indirect costs incurred for conversion of stock in trade. Therefore, learned assessing officer noted that valuation of work in progress in form of semi finished goods and unpacked finished goods resulting in under valuation of inventory is of INR 31639765/- resulting in understatement of income to that

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL LTD.,, DELHI

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

depreciation in plant and machinery, factory building, factory management, administration costs and other indirect costs incurred for conversion of stock in trade. Therefore, learned assessing officer noted that valuation of work in progress in form of semi finished goods and unpacked finished goods resulting in under valuation of inventory is of INR 31639765/- resulting in understatement of income to that

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

SECTION 45, READ WITH SECTION 28(i), OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 - CAPITAL GAINS, CHARGEABLE AS - ISSUE OF TAXABILITY OF SURPLUS ON SALE OF SHARES AND SECURITIES - CAPITAL GAINS OR BUSINESS INCOME - INSTRUCTIONS IN ORDER TO REDUCE LITIGATION CIRCULAR NO.6/2016 [F.NO.225/12/2016-ITA-II], DATED 29-2-2016 1. Sub-section (14) of section 2 of the Income

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

SECTION 45, READ WITH SECTION 28(i), OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 - CAPITAL GAINS, CHARGEABLE AS - ISSUE OF TAXABILITY OF SURPLUS ON SALE OF SHARES AND SECURITIES - CAPITAL GAINS OR BUSINESS INCOME - INSTRUCTIONS IN ORDER TO REDUCE LITIGATION CIRCULAR NO.6/2016 [F.NO.225/12/2016-ITA-II], DATED 29-2-2016 1. Sub-section (14) of section 2 of the Income

DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI vs. M/S WHIRLPOOL OF INDIA LTD., GURGAON

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 145A of the Act. For the Assessment Years 1997-98 1998-99 & 1999-2000. The assessee had not claimed depreciation

DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI vs. M/S WHIRLPOOL OF INDIA LTD.,, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 145A of the Act. For the Assessment Years 1997-98 1998-99 & 1999-2000. The assessee had not claimed depreciation

M/S. ORIENT TEXFABS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result both the grounds of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri. H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

145A of the act. 2) That the Ld. Commissioner of income tax appeals has wrongly arbitrarily and against the law and facts of the case, confirmed the order of rejection of application made under section 154 of the act by the Ld. assessing officer and confirmed addition of Rs. 394604/- on account of excess claim of depreciation

HERO MOTOCROP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 11(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2015-16

145A of the Act. 4.1 That on facts and circumstances of the case, the assessing officer failed to appreciate that the aforesaid costs were abnormal in nature and, therefore, in accordance with the consistent, regular and accepted method of accounting, was not considered for the purpose of valuation of closing inventory. 5. That the assessing officer erred on facts

ACIT, MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. M/S TIKAULA SUGAR MILLS LTD., MUZAFFARNAGAR

Bench: Shri R. S. Syal & Smt Suchitra Kamble

Section 145A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and down observations in Para 4.4 of the appellate order “that the assessee should have included the Excise duty in the value of closing stock of alcohol by calculating the same on the basis of Excise duty paid on sales during the year.” 2. That the Ld.CIT(A) has erred