MICROSOFT INDIA (R&D) PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

depreciation and expenses under section ('u/s') 57 of the Act amounting to INR 22,94,79,442. 3.2 That on the facts and in law, the Ld. AO erred in completely ignoring the order passed by the Honorable Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ('Hon'ble ITAT') dated 14-06-2021 and 24-09- 2021 in the Company's own case

MICROSOFT INDIA (R&D) P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

depreciation and expenses under section ('u/s') 57 of the Act amounting to INR 22,94,79,442. 3.2 That on the facts and in law, the Ld. AO erred in completely ignoring the order passed by the Honorable Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ('Hon'ble ITAT') dated 14-06-2021 and 24-09- 2021 in the Company's own case

UMRI POOPH PRATAPPUR TOOLLWAY PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 25(1), DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shuklaumri Pooph Pratappur Vs. Acit, Circle 25(1) Tollway Private Limited Cr Building, Ito 907, New Delhi House, Ip Estate 27 Barakhamba Road, New Delhi – 110002 Connaught Place, Delhi – 110001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcu3925G Appellant .. Respondent

depreciation @ 25% on ‘Right under service agreement’ as intangible asset. However, the AO considered it to be not an asset and allowed the project to be amortized. In para 2 Assessing Officer mentions that since assessee ‘under reported’ his income in consequence of misreporting within meaning of Section 270A

HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

depreciation on books and disallowance of Rs. 12,809,199/- on account of deduction u/s 36(i)(viii) of the Act. The ITAT also upheld the disallowances vide order dated 7th April, 2009. A penalty of Rs. 27,935,589/- was imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income which

M/S. HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.(HUDCO),NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

depreciation on books and disallowance of Rs. 12,809,199/- on account of deduction u/s 36(i)(viii) of the Act. The ITAT also upheld the disallowances vide order dated 7th April, 2009. A penalty of Rs. 27,935,589/- was imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income which

M/S. HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.(HUDCO),NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

depreciation on books and disallowance of Rs. 12,809,199/- on account of deduction u/s 36(i)(viii) of the Act. The ITAT also upheld the disallowances vide order dated 7th April, 2009. A penalty of Rs. 27,935,589/- was imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income which

M/S. HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.(HUDCO),NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

depreciation on books and disallowance of Rs. 12,809,199/- on account of deduction u/s 36(i)(viii) of the Act. The ITAT also upheld the disallowances vide order dated 7th April, 2009. A penalty of Rs. 27,935,589/- was imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income which

COMPUTER MODELLING GROUP LIMITED,CANADA vs. ACIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION CIRCLE 1(2)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee for AY 2012-13,

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

depreciation and brought forward loss shall be allowed to the assessee for such previous year. Explanation.—For the purposes of this section,— (i) "plant" includes ships, aircraft, vehicles, drilling units, scientific apparatus and equipment, used for the purposes of the said business; (ii) "mineral oil" includes petroleum and natural gas.” 8. Thus, a reading of the above section shows that

COMPUTER MODELLING GROUP LIMITED,CANADA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2)(1), INT. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee for AY 2012-13,

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

depreciation and brought forward loss shall be allowed to the assessee for such previous year. Explanation.—For the purposes of this section,— (i) "plant" includes ships, aircraft, vehicles, drilling units, scientific apparatus and equipment, used for the purposes of the said business; (ii) "mineral oil" includes petroleum and natural gas.” 8. Thus, a reading of the above section shows that

COMPUTER MODELLING GROUP LIMITED,CANADA vs. DCIT CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 1(2)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee for AY 2012-13,

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

depreciation and brought forward loss shall be allowed to the assessee for such previous year. Explanation.—For the purposes of this section,— (i) "plant" includes ships, aircraft, vehicles, drilling units, scientific apparatus and equipment, used for the purposes of the said business; (ii) "mineral oil" includes petroleum and natural gas.” 8. Thus, a reading of the above section shows that

INNOVATIVE TEXTILES LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Innovative Textiles Limited, Vs. Dcit, Circle 10(1), 81, Vighyan Vihar, New Delhi. Delhi – 110 092. (Pan : Aaaci0473J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate Revenue By : Shri S.K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.08.2025 Date Of Order : 24.09.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against Assessment Order Dated 26.03.2022 Passed By The Income Tax Department/National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi U/S 143(3) Read With Section 144C(13)/144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act”) For Assessment Year 2017-18 Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel U/S 144C(5) Of The Act Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. That The Orders Of The Learned Lower Tax Authorities Is/Are Contrary To The Law & Facts Of The Case.

270A of the Income - tax Act, 1961.” 2. At the time of hearing, ld. AR of the assessee pressed the issue in Ground No.3 only. In this regard, he submitted that the TPO has raised TP adjustment of Rs.84,85,443/- and submitted that in the final assessment order, the Assessing Officer has made the abovesaid TP adjustment

ACIT CIRCLE-15(2), NEW DELHI vs. LIFESTYLE PROBUILD PVT LTD, GHAZIABAD

In the result, this appeal by the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: AO; that valuation report dated 15.03.2012 prepared by the Chartered Accountant as per rule 11UA

270A for the said previous year. Explanation. —For the purposes of this clause,— (a) the fair market value of the shares shall be the value— 10 ITA No.3552/Del./2019 (i) as may be determined in accordance with such method as may be prescribed; or (ii) as may be substantiated by the company to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer, based

BALLUPUR SOLAR POWER PROJECTS PRIVATE LTD. ,DELHI vs. AO CIRCLE-4(2), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

depreciation claimed by the Appellant on such capital items while calculating the total taxable income during the subject assessment year Initiation of Penalty proceedings under Section 270A

STAR WIRE (INDIA) VIDYUT PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-22(2), DELHI

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma

270A of the Act. 11.Where there is any delay in filing of appeal(if yes, please attach application seeking condonation of delay). 4. On hearing both the sides, we find that admittedly Form 10CB was filed on 23.10.2023 and the same was filed during the assessment proceedings. The issue is no more res-integra after the decision

JUNIPER NETWORKS SOLUTION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NFAC ITD, NEW DELHI

In the result, ground no 3 raised by the assessee is allowed in its favour

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Juniper Networks Solution India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Assessment Unit, Unit No.Iia, 06Th Floor, Dlf Centre, Nfac Itd, Parliament Street, Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001. (Pan : Aaecj1345A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sachit Jolly, Sr. Advocate Shri Sandeep Bhalla, Advocate Shri Anurag Singhal, Ca Revenue By : Shri S.K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.08.2025 Date Of Order : 24.10.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Preferred By The Assessees Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 27.07.2024 Passed By The Income Tax Department, Assessment Unit U/S 143(3) Read With Section 144C(13)/144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act”) For Assessment Year 2020-21 Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel U/S 144C(5) Of The Act.

Depreciation expenses 4.32 4.32 Interest on lease liabilities 1.27 Other expenses (allocated based on 44.71 27.03 revenue from operations) 5 Operating expenses (B) 351.89 237.1 Operating profit (C = A – B) 10.86 -17.92 Operating profit/sales (D = C/a) -8.18% 7. We observed that in the above chart, the TPO has split the income and expenses on the basis of trading segment

ADOBE SYSTEMS SOFTWARE IRELAND LIMITED,IRELAND vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1(1)(1) INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes subject to the directions contained in para 11, 18 and 19 above

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2020-21

depreciation, investment losses, deductible expenses, carry forward and set-off losses, etc. However, deviations are made by DTAA in cases of royalty, interest etc. Such deviations are also made under the Act for example: Sections 44BB, 44BBA etc.). Under the impugned riding delivered by the AAR, remuneration to MSAS was justified by a transfer pricing analysis and, therefore, no further

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-02, DELHI, JHANDEWALAN vs. OTSUKA CHEMICAL INDIA PVT. LTD., ABHINASH MANSION

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Ms. Madhumita Roy

depreciation claimed by the assessee in the P & L account is disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee.” 5. The amount disallowed by the Assessing Officer stands offered to tax even before the conclusion of the assessment proceedings and the fact was duly appraised to the Assessing Officer. However, the Assessing Officer levied penalty u/s 270A

MASSIMO DUTTI INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarmassimo Dutti India Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, Unit No. 1 (Office 1) 8Th Floor, Circle-1(1), Ambience Island, Nh-8, Gurgaon Gurugram, Hayana-122 002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aajcm0103G Assessee By : Shri Ravi Sharma, Adv Ms. Shruti Khimta, Adv Ms. Kashish Gupta, Ca Revenue By: Shri S. K. Jadav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 11/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 08/12/2025

depreciation as per law in view of our aforesaid decision in Ground No. 2. 13. The Ground No. 6 raised by the Assessee is challenging the levy of interest under section 234B of the Act which is consequential in nature. 14. The Ground No. 7 raised by the Assessee is challenging the initiation of penalty proceedings under section 274 read