ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE,GURGAON vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jain, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1581/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1582/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 1583/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 1199/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Oriental Bank Of Commerce, Vs Addl. Cit, Central Accounts Office, Plot No. 5, Range-13 (Present Range-19) Sector-32, Institutional Area, New Delhi Gurgaon-122001 Dcit/Acit, Circle-19(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaco0191M

depreciation is nil; or] (iv) to (vi) [****] (vii) the amount of profits of sick industrial company for the assessment year commencing on and from the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the said company has become a sick industrial company under sub-section (1) of section 171 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (1

ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jain, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1581/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1582/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 1583/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 1199/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Oriental Bank Of Commerce, Vs Addl. Cit, Central Accounts Office, Plot No. 5, Range-13 (Present Range-19) Sector-32, Institutional Area, New Delhi Gurgaon-122001 Dcit/Acit, Circle-19(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaco0191M

depreciation is nil; or] (iv) to (vi) [****] (vii) the amount of profits of sick industrial company for the assessment year commencing on and from the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the said company has become a sick industrial company under sub-section (1) of section 171 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (1

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE, GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jain, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1581/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1582/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 1583/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 1199/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Oriental Bank Of Commerce, Vs Addl. Cit, Central Accounts Office, Plot No. 5, Range-13 (Present Range-19) Sector-32, Institutional Area, New Delhi Gurgaon-122001 Dcit/Acit, Circle-19(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaco0191M

depreciation is nil; or] (iv) to (vi) [****] (vii) the amount of profits of sick industrial company for the assessment year commencing on and from the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the said company has become a sick industrial company under sub-section (1) of section 171 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (1

ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jain, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1581/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1582/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 1583/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 1199/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Oriental Bank Of Commerce, Vs Addl. Cit, Central Accounts Office, Plot No. 5, Range-13 (Present Range-19) Sector-32, Institutional Area, New Delhi Gurgaon-122001 Dcit/Acit, Circle-19(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaco0191M

depreciation is nil; or] (iv) to (vi) [****] (vii) the amount of profits of sick industrial company for the assessment year commencing on and from the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the said company has become a sick industrial company under sub-section (1) of section 171 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (1

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE, GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jain, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1581/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1582/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 1583/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 1199/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Oriental Bank Of Commerce, Vs Addl. Cit, Central Accounts Office, Plot No. 5, Range-13 (Present Range-19) Sector-32, Institutional Area, New Delhi Gurgaon-122001 Dcit/Acit, Circle-19(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaco0191M

depreciation is nil; or] (iv) to (vi) [****] (vii) the amount of profits of sick industrial company for the assessment year commencing on and from the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the said company has become a sick industrial company under sub-section (1) of section 171 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (1

ACIT, MORADABAD vs. M/S. PRATHMA BANK, MORADABAD

In the result, appeal of the department is dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita No. 4090/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S Prathma Bank, Tax, Circle-1, Ramganga Vihar, Moradabad Moradabad (U.P.) (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaajp0988Q Assessee By : Sh. Piyush Kaushik, Adv. Revenue By : Smt. Paramita Tripathy, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 20.06.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.07.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 17.04.2013 Of Ld. Cit(A), Bareilly.

depreciation @ 15% will be allowed. Sir, kindly give a deep thought to this situation and consider as to whether the answer pointed out hereinabove regarding applicability of section 32(1) is correct or not. If the answer is correct, the same interpretation is to be given to the provisions of sections of section 36(1)(viia) (as language used

M/S. LUCKY EXPORTS,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2008-09 Lucky Exports, Vs Dcit, Ug-28, Som Dutt Chambers-Ii, Circle-24(1), 9, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaafl1147P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Naveen N.D. Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Shri Saras Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 20.08.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.09.2020 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 21.11.2013 Of The Cit(A)-28, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm & Is Engaged In The Business As Merchant Exporter. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 27Th September, 2008 Declaring The Total Income At Rs.2,96,21,168/-. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Ao Observed From The Profit & Loss Account That The Assessee Has Claimed A Sum Of Rs.1,61,35,879/- Under The Head ‘Write Off/Bad Debt.’ He, Therefore, Asked The Assessee To Explain & Justify The Advances /Bad Debt Written Off In Respect Of 22 Parties. He Asked The Assessee To File Partywise Explanation & Justification Of Bad Debt/Advances Written Off & To Produce The Copy Of Account & Names Of Such Parties For The Last Three Years. He Also Asked The Assessee To File: (A) Copy Of Bank Statement When Payment Of Advances Written Off Were Made; (B) Complete Name, Address, Pan & Contact Details Of The Parties Including Current Address, If Any; & (C) Copy Of Correspondence Made In Connection With Recovery Of Loan/Advances Written Off.

vii) read with Section 36(2) of the Act were not satisfied as the amount had not been taken into account in computing income of the earlier years. It was noted that this amount was paid to M/s Gulmohar Estate Limited for purchase of property/plots at Gurgaon but this amount was neither refunded nor the property/plot was sold

ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Sh. I.C.Sudhir, Jm & Sh. Prashant Maharishi, Am Asstt. Year: 2007-08

section 36(2). 5 A Y 2007-08 Therefore, assessee is entitled to the deduction of bad debt pertaining to non-rural branches without any restriction of provisioning. Identical issue has arisen in the case of assessee for AY 2006-07 in ITA no. 22/Del/2011 dated 15 March, 2013 wherein ITAT has admitted these additional grounds, accepted the contention

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Sh. I.C.Sudhir, Jm & Sh. Prashant Maharishi, Am Asstt. Year: 2007-08

section 36(2). 5 A Y 2007-08 Therefore, assessee is entitled to the deduction of bad debt pertaining to non-rural branches without any restriction of provisioning. Identical issue has arisen in the case of assessee for AY 2006-07 in ITA no. 22/Del/2011 dated 15 March, 2013 wherein ITAT has admitted these additional grounds, accepted the contention

ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE,GURGAON vs. ACIT, SPL. RANGE-07, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2016-17

depreciation is nil; or] (iv) to (vi) [****] (vii) the amount of profits of sick industrial company for the assessment year commencing on and from the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the said company has become a sick industrial company under sub-section (1) of section 171 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (1

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ALTUS GROUP (INDIA) PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2012-13

vii) , where by money is unable to be recovered. In all other cases, the claim for allowance should have to be sustained under Section 37(1) which requires that the expenditure (not being of a capital nature) should have been wholly and exclusively incurred for the purpose of the business. 5.11 For claiming deduction under section

ALTUS GROUP (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2012-13

vii) , where by money is unable to be recovered. In all other cases, the claim for allowance should have to be sustained under Section 37(1) which requires that the expenditure (not being of a capital nature) should have been wholly and exclusively incurred for the purpose of the business. 5.11 For claiming deduction under section

ASIA SATELLITE TELECOMMUNICATIONS CO. LTD. vs. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

depreciation. The Tribunal also upheld the contention of the appellant that the provisions of Section 44C would not be attracted and hence the disallowing provisions thereof would be inapplicable. 23. As regards the levy of interest under Sections 234A and 234B was concerned, the Tribunal held that the appellant would be liable to pay interest under Section 234A. However, with

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX DELHI vs. M/S LUFTHANSA CARGO INDIA P .

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA

depreciation. The aggregate of the direct expenditure incurred outside India works out to 55%, 81% and 67% of the total expenses debited to Profit & ITA 95/2005 Page 12 Loss Account of each of the three years. It is submitted that remaining indirect expenditure was on account of Head Office expenses in India and expenditure on the ground staff, overnight stay

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX DELHI vs. M/S LUFTHANSA CARGO INDIA P .

depreciation. The aggregate of the direct expenditure incurred outside India works out to 55%, 81% and 67% of the total expenses debited to Profit & 2015:DHC:4797-DB ITA 95/2005 Page 12 Loss Account of each of the three years. It is submitted that remaining indirect expenditure was on account of Head Office expenses in India and expenditure

M/S. RELIGARE SECURITIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed in terms of our directions contained in the preceding

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaasstt. Year: 2008-09

vii) read with section 36(2) of the Act stood satisfied inasmuch as part of the above debts written off comprised of brokerage income and interest on delayed payment which were duly accounted as income by the appellant earlier ill the books of accounts. 3.2 Without prejudice, and in the alternative, the Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) erred on facts

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ESCORTS FINANCE LTD., FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the appellant is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

1) (vii) R/W Section 36 (2) of the Act? (iv) Whether ITAT was correct in law in allowing depreciation@ 60% to the assessee

DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), GURGAON vs. M/S. MSV INTERNATIONAL INC., GURGAON

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri R.K. Panda

depreciation, various restrictions placed under section 36, proviso to section 37 regarding disallowance of unlawful expenses, limitation u/ s 40(a)(i) and 43B etc. The limitation referred in Article 7(3) does not mean that income is to be taxed under presumptive scheme of computation u/ s 44D. It would Practically mean going back to article