CONNAUGHT PLAZA RESTAURANTS PVT LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-73(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ravish Sood

201(3) of the Act. 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in holding that tax on Common Area Maintenance Charges (‘CAM charges’), paid by the appellant to the lessor, was liable to be deducted under section 194I as against tax deducted under section 194C

NOKIA INDIA SALES P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-6, , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 7244/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Nokia India Sales Pvt. Ltd., Vs Addl. Cit, 807, New Delhi House, Special Range-6, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccn9141L Assessee By : Sh. Nageshwar Rao, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Surenderpal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 29.07.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.10.2021

depreciation on the written down value of the FOC phones treated as capital assets in the case of NEPL in earlier AYs, where in the impugned assessment order, the Ld. AO has himself stated that the issues examined in the case of NEPL shall continue to be applicable in the Appellant’s case as well, purportedly being the successor

BEST BULL STOCK TRADING PVT LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-18, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Sh. C.N. Prasad & Sh. M. Balaganesh

1) the Income-tax Officer must have reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, and (ii) he must have reason to believe that such income has escaped assessment by reason of the omission or failure on the part of the assessee (a) to make a return under section 139 for the assessment year to the Income

BEST BULL STOCK TRADING PVT LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-18, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Sh. C.N. Prasad & Sh. M. Balaganesh

1) the Income-tax Officer must have reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, and (ii) he must have reason to believe that such income has escaped assessment by reason of the omission or failure on the part of the assessee (a) to make a return under section 139 for the assessment year to the Income

M/S CONTINENTAL DEVICE INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri A.T. Varkey

section 43(1) defining the actual cost for the purpose of bloc of assets, he observed that it was, therefore, necessary to look into whether the main purpose of the transfer of assets directly or indirectly to the assessee was for the reduction of liability to Income tax (by claiming depreciation with reference to an enhanced cost

M/S. CONTINENTAL DEVICE INDIA LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri A.T. Varkey

section 43(1) defining the actual cost for the purpose of bloc of assets, he observed that it was, therefore, necessary to look into whether the main purpose of the transfer of assets directly or indirectly to the assessee was for the reduction of liability to Income tax (by claiming depreciation with reference to an enhanced cost

M/S CONTINENTAL DEVICE INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri A.T. Varkey

section 43(1) defining the actual cost for the purpose of bloc of assets, he observed that it was, therefore, necessary to look into whether the main purpose of the transfer of assets directly or indirectly to the assessee was for the reduction of liability to Income tax (by claiming depreciation with reference to an enhanced cost

M/S CONTINENTAL DEVICE INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri A.T. Varkey

section 43(1) defining the actual cost for the purpose of bloc of assets, he observed that it was, therefore, necessary to look into whether the main purpose of the transfer of assets directly or indirectly to the assessee was for the reduction of liability to Income tax (by claiming depreciation with reference to an enhanced cost

B4S SOLUTION P.LTD,GHAZIABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

201 002. (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AABCB4705D (APPELLANT) Assessee by : Shri Abhishek Agarwal, Advocate; Department by: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. D.R.; Date of Hearing 23.01.2023 Date of Pronouncement 06 .02.2023 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JM This appeal is filed by the assessee for assessment year 2018-19 against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

M/S. OIL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

1)(c) of the Act at the rate of 100% of the tax sought to be evaded amounting to Rs.1,76,04,180/-, Rs.1,85,13,000/- and Rs.1,39,60,754/- for assessment years 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08 respectively 3.4 On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the penalty in all the three assessment years

M/S. OIL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

1)(c) of the Act at the rate of 100% of the tax sought to be evaded amounting to Rs.1,76,04,180/-, Rs.1,85,13,000/- and Rs.1,39,60,754/- for assessment years 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08 respectively 3.4 On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the penalty in all the three assessment years

M/S. OIL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

1)(c) of the Act at the rate of 100% of the tax sought to be evaded amounting to Rs.1,76,04,180/-, Rs.1,85,13,000/- and Rs.1,39,60,754/- for assessment years 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08 respectively 3.4 On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the penalty in all the three assessment years

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI vs. AL AMMAR FROZEN FOODS EXPORTS PVT. LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and cross\nobjection filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

201 ITR 325. In that\ndecision, the provisions of section 80J(6A) were\nconsidered. The wording of section 80J(6A) is similar to\nthat of section 80-IA(7) which is in issue in the present\nappeal. The Gujarat High Court took the view that the\nword \"shall\" which occurs in section 80J(6A) be read

SHARDA EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,GREATER NOIDA vs. ITO (TDS), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NOIDA

In the result, ITA.No.3377/Del

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Anubhav Sharma

201(1A) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 10. We find the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the A.O. by holding that the services provided by the foreign firms to the assessee falls under the category of fees for technical services under section 9(1)(vii) of the I.T. Act, 1961. The observation

SHARDA EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,GREATER NOIDA vs. ITO (TDS), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NOIDA

In the result, ITA.No.3377/Del

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Anubhav Sharma

201(1A) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 10. We find the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the A.O. by holding that the services provided by the foreign firms to the assessee falls under the category of fees for technical services under section 9(1)(vii) of the I.T. Act, 1961. The observation

SHARDA EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,GREATER NOIDA vs. ITO (TDS), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NOIDA

In the result, ITA.No.3377/Del

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Anubhav Sharma

201(1A) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 10. We find the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the A.O. by holding that the services provided by the foreign firms to the assessee falls under the category of fees for technical services under section 9(1)(vii) of the I.T. Act, 1961. The observation

SHARDA EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,GREATER NOIDA vs. ITO (TDS), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NOIDA

In the result, ITA.No.3377/Del

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Anubhav Sharma

201(1A) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 10. We find the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the A.O. by holding that the services provided by the foreign firms to the assessee falls under the category of fees for technical services under section 9(1)(vii) of the I.T. Act, 1961. The observation

SHARDA EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,GREATER NOIDA vs. ITO (TDS), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NOIDA

In the result, ITA.No.3377/Del

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Anubhav Sharma

201(1A) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 10. We find the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the A.O. by holding that the services provided by the foreign firms to the assessee falls under the category of fees for technical services under section 9(1)(vii) of the I.T. Act, 1961. The observation

SHARDA EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,GREATER NOIDA vs. ITO (TDS), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NOIDA

In the result, ITA.No.3377/Del

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Anubhav Sharma

201(1A) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 10. We find the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the A.O. by holding that the services provided by the foreign firms to the assessee falls under the category of fees for technical services under section 9(1)(vii) of the I.T. Act, 1961. The observation