HERO MOTOCORP LTD (AS SUCCESSOR OF HERO INVESTMENT P.LTD),NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 11(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2011-12

28(iv) of the Act. In the impugned order, the assessing officer has alleged that one-time lump-sum license fee of Rs.2151.80 crores paid by HHML to Honda pursuant to the share purchase transaction by HIPL from Honda was in lieu of discount availed by HIPL for acquiring 26% controlling stake from Honda. 29.1 Then it was submitted that

DABUR INDIA LIMITED vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: We Consider The Submissions Made In Support Of The Appeal The Following Facts Require To Be Noted:- 2.1 The Assessee Is In The Business Of Manufacturing Herbal Products & Cosmetics. On 30.11.2000 Assessee Filed Its Return For Assessment Year 2000-01 Wherein, It Declared An Income Of Rs 12,15,25,093/-. On 10.5.2001 The Return Was Processed Under Section 143(1)(A) Of The Act As The Returned Income. However, Notices Were Issued Under Section 143(2) Of The Act. 2.2 In Response To The Aforesaid Notices, Hearing Was Attended By An Authorized Representative Before The Assessing Officer. 2008:Dhc:2521

depreciation subject to the provisions of sub-Section (2) of Section 72 and sub-Section (3) of Section 73 of the Act. Sections 30, 31 and 32 (A) to 35(E) provide for rebates, allowances and deductions under various heads. Section 36 provides for certain “other deductions” specified therein while, computing the income referred to in Section 28

INTERGLOBE AVIATION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 4, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2015 – 16 is allowed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 28 (iv) of the income tax act, 1961. 4. The learned AO has raised an additional ground of appeal by letter dated 20 February 2018 as Under:- “without prejudice to the above, the CIT – A held that the receipts were in the nature of capital receipts or to have followed the order of predecessor in assessment year

INTERGLOBE AVIATION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 4, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2015 – 16 is allowed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 28 (iv) of the income tax act, 1961. 4. The learned AO has raised an additional ground of appeal by letter dated 20 February 2018 as Under:- “without prejudice to the above, the CIT – A held that the receipts were in the nature of capital receipts or to have followed the order of predecessor in assessment year

INTERGLOBE AVIATION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 4, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2015 – 16 is allowed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 28 (iv) of the income tax act, 1961. 4. The learned AO has raised an additional ground of appeal by letter dated 20 February 2018 as Under:- “without prejudice to the above, the CIT – A held that the receipts were in the nature of capital receipts or to have followed the order of predecessor in assessment year

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 4, NEW DELHI vs. INTERGLOBE AVIATION LTD., NEW DELHI

Accordingly, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2015 – 16 is allowed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 28 (iv) of the income tax act, 1961. 4. The learned AO has raised an additional ground of appeal by letter dated 20 February 2018 as Under:- “without prejudice to the above, the CIT – A held that the receipts were in the nature of capital receipts or to have followed the order of predecessor in assessment year

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 4, NEW DELHI vs. INTERGLOBE AVIATION LTD., NEW DELHI

Accordingly, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2015 – 16 is allowed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 28 (iv) of the income tax act, 1961. 4. The learned AO has raised an additional ground of appeal by letter dated 20 February 2018 as Under:- “without prejudice to the above, the CIT – A held that the receipts were in the nature of capital receipts or to have followed the order of predecessor in assessment year

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. K.E.I. INDUSTRIES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, Ground No.3

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, A.M.

section 28(iv) of the I.T. Act. The assessee is in manufacturing business and has admittedly utilised the FCCBs by increasing the asset of the assessee company and most of them being depreciable

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

In the result, Ground No.3

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, A.M.

section 28(iv) of the I.T. Act. The assessee is in manufacturing business and has admittedly utilised the FCCBs by increasing the asset of the assessee company and most of them being depreciable

AREVA T & D INDIA LTD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II

Appeals are dismissed in favour of the assessee and

depreciation on the amount described as goodwill. It was thus argued on behalf of the assessee Company that Section 32(1)(ii) would 2012:DHC:2226-DB ITA’s 315/2010, 1151/2010 & 1152/2010 Page 28

SKYLARK HOSPITALITY INDIA (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result we reverse the order of the Ld

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiskylark Hospitality India (P) Vs. Dy. Cit, Ltd, Circle-9(1), Formerly Known As Ssp New Delhi Catering India P Ltd, 404, 4Th Floor, Surya Kiran Building, 19 Kg Marg, New Delhi Pan: Aalcs7159J (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 32(1) of the Act which allows the depreciation on the capital expenditure incurred for the purpose of the business on the building not owned by them. iii) The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and facts while upholding the contention of the Ld. A.O. that the expenditure on leasehold asset incurred by the assessee neither falls within

INTERNATIONAL HOSPITAL LIMITED vs. DCIT CIRCLE 12 (2)

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

28 of 52 the sum payable by the predecessor shall thereafter be payable by and recoverable from the successor and the successor shall be entitled to recover from the predecessor any sum so paid. (4) Where any business or profession carried on by a Hindu undivided family is succeeded to, and simultaneously with the succession or after the succession there

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. WASAN ESPORTS (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, this ground of appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

28 (iv) of the IT Act. 14. Another important issue which arises is the applicability of the Section 41 (1) of the IT Act. The said provision is re-produced as under: “41. Profits chargeable to tax.- (1) Where an allowance or deduction has been made in the assessment for any year in respect of loss, expenditure or trading liability

WASAN EXPORTS (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, this ground of appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

28 (iv) of the IT Act. 14. Another important issue which arises is the applicability of the Section 41 (1) of the IT Act. The said provision is re-produced as under: “41. Profits chargeable to tax.- (1) Where an allowance or deduction has been made in the assessment for any year in respect of loss, expenditure or trading liability

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. CORNELL OVERSEAS (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the department is dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita No. 2166/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Dcit, Vs Cornell Overseas (P) Ltd., Circle-3(1), B-235, Okhla Indl. Area, Phase-I, New Delhi New Delhi-110020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacc0034F Assessee By : Ms. Vandana Bhandari, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Neeraj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.02.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.05.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 28.02.2011 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xx, New Delhi.

Section 32(1)(iia) (being additional depreciation available on achieving substantial expansion by way of increase in installed capacity). One of the arguments put forward by AO for denial of additional depreciation is that perusal of Schedule 19 to the balance sheet containing significant accounting policies and notes to accounts shows that quantitative and other information regarding goods manufactured, licensed

CIT vs. ESCORTS HEART INSTITUTE AND RESEARCH CENTRE LTD

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and those

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

depreciation as tax planning. 24. Rebutting the arguments of Mr. .Sahni, predicated on the alleged violation of terms of scheme of keyman insurance policy by assigning the same to the kayman, it was argued that no such contention was ever raised before the , Authorities below. Even otherwise, the insurance company had accepted, the assignment. So much so, even the Department

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. RAJAN NANDA

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and those

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

depreciation as tax planning. 24. Rebutting the arguments of Mr. Sahni, predicated on the alleged violation of terms of scheme of keyman insurance policy by assigning the same to the kayman, it was argued that no such contention was ever raised before the Authorities below. Even otherwise, the insurance company had accepted the assignment. So much so, even the Department

CIT vs. ESCORTS HEART INSTITUTE AND RESEARCH CENTRE LTD

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and those

depreciation as tax planning. 24. Rebutting the arguments of Mr. .Sahni, predicated on the alleged violation of terms of scheme of keyman insurance policy by assigning the same to the kayman, it was argued that no such contention was ever raised before the , Authorities below. Even otherwise, the insurance company had accepted, the assignment. So much so, even the Department