M/S LANDBASE INDIA LTD.,,GURGAON vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2011-12 is allowed

Bench: Smt Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 5 of the income tax act in case of either business income or u/s 28. Hence, according to us, the membership fee income of the assessee should be chargeable to tax in the year to which it pertains. Therefore, we reverse the finding of the learned CIT – A in holding that that a sum of INR 3 5288416 received

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. LANDBASE INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2011-12 is allowed

Bench: Smt Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 5 of the income tax act in case of either business income or u/s 28. Hence, according to us, the membership fee income of the assessee should be chargeable to tax in the year to which it pertains. Therefore, we reverse the finding of the learned CIT – A in holding that that a sum of INR 3 5288416 received

LANDBASE INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2011-12 is allowed

Bench: Smt Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 5 of the income tax act in case of either business income or u/s 28. Hence, according to us, the membership fee income of the assessee should be chargeable to tax in the year to which it pertains. Therefore, we reverse the finding of the learned CIT – A in holding that that a sum of INR 3 5288416 received

LANDBASE INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2011-12 is allowed

Bench: Smt Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 5 of the income tax act in case of either business income or u/s 28. Hence, according to us, the membership fee income of the assessee should be chargeable to tax in the year to which it pertains. Therefore, we reverse the finding of the learned CIT – A in holding that that a sum of INR 3 5288416 received

LANDBASE INDIA LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2011-12 is allowed

Bench: Smt Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 5 of the income tax act in case of either business income or u/s 28. Hence, according to us, the membership fee income of the assessee should be chargeable to tax in the year to which it pertains. Therefore, we reverse the finding of the learned CIT – A in holding that that a sum of INR 3 5288416 received

IFCI LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

depreciation. For similar reasons, because of the identical facts of the case agreed by both the parties, we dismiss ground number 1 of the appeal of the AO. 47. Ground number 2 is against the disallowance deleted u/s 14 A of the act. The fact shows that assessee has earned dividend income of ₹ 256,316,814. It has also earned

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S IFCI LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

depreciation. For similar reasons, because of the identical facts of the case agreed by both the parties, we dismiss ground number 1 of the appeal of the AO. 47. Ground number 2 is against the disallowance deleted u/s 14 A of the act. The fact shows that assessee has earned dividend income of ₹ 256,316,814. It has also earned

IFCI LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

depreciation. For similar reasons, because of the identical facts of the case agreed by both the parties, we dismiss ground number 1 of the appeal of the AO. 47. Ground number 2 is against the disallowance deleted u/s 14 A of the act. The fact shows that assessee has earned dividend income of ₹ 256,316,814. It has also earned

IFCI LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

depreciation. For similar reasons, because of the identical facts of the case agreed by both the parties, we dismiss ground number 1 of the appeal of the AO. 47. Ground number 2 is against the disallowance deleted u/s 14 A of the act. The fact shows that assessee has earned dividend income of ₹ 256,316,814. It has also earned

M/S. IFCI LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

depreciation. For similar reasons, because of the identical facts of the case agreed by both the parties, we dismiss ground number 1 of the appeal of the AO. 47. Ground number 2 is against the disallowance deleted u/s 14 A of the act. The fact shows that assessee has earned dividend income of ₹ 256,316,814. It has also earned

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S IFCI LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

depreciation. For similar reasons, because of the identical facts of the case agreed by both the parties, we dismiss ground number 1 of the appeal of the AO. 47. Ground number 2 is against the disallowance deleted u/s 14 A of the act. The fact shows that assessee has earned dividend income of ₹ 256,316,814. It has also earned

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S IFCI LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

depreciation. For similar reasons, because of the identical facts of the case agreed by both the parties, we dismiss ground number 1 of the appeal of the AO. 47. Ground number 2 is against the disallowance deleted u/s 14 A of the act. The fact shows that assessee has earned dividend income of ₹ 256,316,814. It has also earned

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. IFCI LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

depreciation. For similar reasons, because of the identical facts of the case agreed by both the parties, we dismiss ground number 1 of the appeal of the AO. 47. Ground number 2 is against the disallowance deleted u/s 14 A of the act. The fact shows that assessee has earned dividend income of ₹ 256,316,814. It has also earned

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SPLENDOR LANDBASE LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kanti.T.A. No.2461/Del/2016 A.Y. : 2010-11 Assistant Commissioner M/S Splendor Landbase Of Income, Central Vs. Limited, Circle-3, F-38/2, Splendor House, New Delhi Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-Ii, New Delhi (Pan: Aaeca3986E) (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No. 215/Del/2016 In I.T.A. No. 2461/Del/2016 A.Y. : 2010-11 M/S Splendor Landbase Assistant Commissioner Limited, Vs. Of Income, Central Circle- F-38/2, Splendor House, 3, Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi Phase-Ii, New Delhi (Pan: Aaeca3986E) (Appellant) (Respondent)

depreciation of Rs 40,35,877/- and allow set off in the next/subsequent years, which does not need any interference on our part, hence, we uphold the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue and accordingly reject the grounds raised by the Revenue. In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. ASSESSEE’S CROSS OBJECTION 8. Apropos

ITO(E), NEW DELHI vs. M/S CALOREX FOUNDATION,, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

Section 11 of the Act. The assessee had purchased some fixed assets in the earlier year and claimed it to be exempted u/s 11 as application of income for charitable purposes on the ground that the same was used for charitable purposes. During the year under assessment, the assessee has claimed an amount of Rs.2,07,88,207/- as depreciation

M/S. AT & T GLOBAL NETWORK SERVICES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiat & T Global Network Services Dcit, (India) Pvt Ltd., Circle-2(1), Vs. Vatika Lok-1, Block-A, Gurgaon New Delhi Pan:Aafca8810L (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, At & T Global Network Services Circle-2(1), (India) Pvt Ltd., Vs. New Delhi Vatika Lok-1, Block-A, Gurgaon Pan:Aafca8810L (Appellant) (Respondent)

depreciation on the amount of Rs. 77,76,975/- is concerned, the AO is directed to verify if the respective assets have been put to use during the year or not and proceed accordingly. However, if the claim is allowed, the AO shall clearly specify in the assessment order that the benefits so allowed is subject to the final decision

M/S KEI INDUSTRIES LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Section 43A thus could not apply in the case of the assessee which is also held by various Benches of the Tribunal in the decisions quoted above. Accounting Standard-11 would also apply in the case of the assessee. The assessee has also explained that Companies Amendment Rules also apply to the facts of the case because option is given

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

depreciation. For the purpose of assessing tax under Section 115J, firstly, the profit as computed under the Income-tax Act has to be prepared and thereafter the book profit as contemplated by the provisions of Section 115J are to be determined and then the tax is to be levied. The liability of the assessee for payment of tax under Section