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

1A) remains limited to the "mistakes apparent from records". Such mistakes cannot and do not include powers to revise or review/reappraise one's earlier order. We are of the view that in the present case, exercise of power under section 154 in so far as "depreciation

PITNEY BOWES INDIA (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, out of the five appeals of the assessee, the ITA Nos

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kant

section 143(3) of the Act on 09/12/2011 after disallowing depreciation on government approvals and rejecting the claim of depreciation on non-compete fee. In the appeal filed before the ld. CIT- (A), the assesee challenged validity of reassessment proceeding and contested disallowance made by the Assessing Officer. The assessee also raised additional ground seeking depreciation on goodwill

JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD.,HARYANA vs. DCIT, HISAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

1A to the Rules. This is, however, subject to the caveat introduced by Rule 5 of the Rules, which read as under: “5.Depreciation. (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-rule (2), the allowance under clause (ii) of sub-section(1) of section 32 in respect of depreciation

JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, HISAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

1A to the Rules. This is, however, subject to the caveat introduced by Rule 5 of the Rules, which read as under: “5.Depreciation. (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-rule (2), the allowance under clause (ii) of sub-section(1) of section 32 in respect of depreciation

ACIT, HISAR vs. M/S JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD., HISAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

1A to the Rules. This is, however, subject to the caveat introduced by Rule 5 of the Rules, which read as under: “5.Depreciation. (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-rule (2), the allowance under clause (ii) of sub-section(1) of section 32 in respect of depreciation

JINDAL STEEL & POWER LIMITED vs. ADDL. CIT,

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

1A to the Rules. This is, however, subject to the caveat introduced by Rule 5 of the Rules, which read as under: “5.Depreciation. (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-rule (2), the allowance under clause (ii) of sub-section(1) of section 32 in respect of depreciation

DCIT, HISAR vs. JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD., HISAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

1A to the Rules. This is, however, subject to the caveat introduced by Rule 5 of the Rules, which read as under: “5.Depreciation. (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-rule (2), the allowance under clause (ii) of sub-section(1) of section 32 in respect of depreciation

JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, HARYANA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

1A to the Rules. This is, however, subject to the caveat introduced by Rule 5 of the Rules, which read as under: “5.Depreciation. (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-rule (2), the allowance under clause (ii) of sub-section(1) of section 32 in respect of depreciation

ACIT, HISAR vs. JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD., HISAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

1A to the Rules. This is, however, subject to the caveat introduced by Rule 5 of the Rules, which read as under: “5.Depreciation. (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-rule (2), the allowance under clause (ii) of sub-section(1) of section 32 in respect of depreciation

DCIT, HISAR vs. JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD., HISAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

1A to the Rules. This is, however, subject to the caveat introduced by Rule 5 of the Rules, which read as under: “5.Depreciation. (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-rule (2), the allowance under clause (ii) of sub-section(1) of section 32 in respect of depreciation

ACIT, GURGAON vs. M/S. THE SCIENTIFIC & EDUCATIONAL ADVANCEMENT SOCIETY, GURGAON

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri L.P. Sahu, A.M.

depreciation was 14 ITA.No.4944 & 4430/Del./2012 The Scientific and Educational Advancement Society, Gurgaon. found allowable, which was allowed. The Ld. CIT(A), accordingly, granted benefit of Section 11(1) of the I.T. Act and deleted the addition of Rs.1,11,10,330/-. 3.4. The Ld. CIT(A), thereafter, considered the lands purchased by assessee-society and noted that sale

M/S. SCIENTIFIC AND EDUCATIONAL ADVANCEMENT SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, GURGAON

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri L.P. Sahu, A.M.

depreciation was 14 ITA.No.4944 & 4430/Del./2012 The Scientific and Educational Advancement Society, Gurgaon. found allowable, which was allowed. The Ld. CIT(A), accordingly, granted benefit of Section 11(1) of the I.T. Act and deleted the addition of Rs.1,11,10,330/-. 3.4. The Ld. CIT(A), thereafter, considered the lands purchased by assessee-society and noted that sale

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. ECE INDUSTRIES LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT

1A) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), where any person receives at any time during any previous year any money or other assets under an insurance from an insurer on account of damage to, or destruction of, any capital asset, as a result of - (i) Flood, typhoon, hurricane, cyclone, earthquake or other convulsion of nature; or (ii) Riot

PHI SEEDS PVT. LTD.,HYDERABAD vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-7, NEW DELHI

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

1A) r.w.s. 10(1) of the Act and treating it a business income by the AO. Ground nos.1 to 3 of the appeal are dismissed. 14.10. Further, regarding the additional ground filed by the assessee that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not giving directions to assess the total income of the assessee as per normal provisions

LOKESH KUMAR AGGARWAL,DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-45(5), DELHI

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

1A) r.w.s. 10(1) of the Act and treating it a business income by the AO. Ground nos.1 to 3 of the appeal are dismissed. 14.10. Further, regarding the additional ground filed by the assessee that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not giving directions to assess the total income of the assessee as per normal provisions

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. ECE Industries Limited

1A) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), where any person receives at any time during any previous year any money or other assets under an insurance from an insurer on account of damage to, or destruction of, any capital asset, as a result of - (i) Flood, typhoon, hurricane, cyclone, earthquake or other convulsion of nature; or (ii) Riot

PHI SEEDS PVT. LTD.,HYDERABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 7 , NEW DELHI

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

section 92B of the Act of the\nexpression \"receivables\" does not mean that dehors the context\nevery item of \"receivables\" appearing in the accounts of an\n61\nITA Nos.1575, 7375/Del/2018\nITA No.9205/Del/2019\nentity, which may have dealings with foreign associated\nenterprises would automatically be characterised as an\ninternational transaction. There may be a delay in collection of\nmonies for supplies

PHI SEEDS PVT. LTD.,HYDERABAD vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-7, NEW DELHI

section 92B of the Act of the\nexpression \"receivables\" does not mean that dehors the context\nevery item of \"receivables\" appearing in the accounts of an\nentity, which may have dealings with foreign associated\nenterprises would automatically be characterised as an\ninternational transaction. There may be a delay in collection of\nmonies for supplies made, even beyond the agreed limit