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

depreciation on the value of Rs. 22,30,795/- as per the revised valuation. On such facts, the High Court held that the Explanation 3 to section 43(1) of the Act correspondents to section 10(5

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

depreciation on the value of Rs. 22,30,795/- as per the revised valuation. On such facts, the High Court held that the Explanation 3 to section 43(1) of the Act correspondents to section 10(5

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. WOODWARD GOVERNOR INDIA PVT. LTD.

The appeal is dismissed

5. The submissions on behalf of the Appellant are as under: (a) As regards the increase in liability on capital account incurred in relation to acquisition of capital assets on deferred foreign currency payment basis, the question to be asked is whether the liability on account of such increase has been incurred by the assessee during the previous year

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. INDIA PVT. LTD.

The appeal is dismissed

5. The submissions on behalf of the Appellant are as under: (a) As regards the increase in liability on capital account incurred in relation to acquisition of capital assets on deferred foreign currency payment basis, the question to be asked is whether the liability on account of such increase has been incurred by the assessee during the previous year

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

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms Suchitra Kamble(Through Video Conferencing) Vs Havells India Ltd. Acit 1, Raj Narian Marg, Ltu Civil Lines New Delhi New Delhi Aaach0351E (Respondent) (Appellant)

43,97,77,650/- on 30/09/2009. After issuance of notice u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act dated 4/8/2009, the Assessing Officer assessed the assessee’s income at Rs. 55,84,6,968/- after making following additions/disallowance: S. No. Particulars Amount (in Rs.) 1 Disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) 5,68,856 2 Disallowances of Provision

ASIA SUGAR INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Asia Sugar Industries Vs. Acit, Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-5, New Delhi 6-B, Jor Bagh Lane, New Delhi Pan :Aaaca2286D (Appellant) (Respondent)

depreciation, reserves for shipping business, rehabilitation fund, expenditure on certain eligible objects or schemes, deductions, amounts not deductible, profits chargeable to tax, etc. The assessee is no doubt correct in contending that the only definition of derivatives is to be found in Section 43 (5

CIT vs. DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

43(6)(c)(i)(C)(b)] used the words "would have been allowable" and this indicated the intention of the legislature to determine the capital gains for the purposes of Section 50B of the Act by computing depreciation as allowable to the Assessee and not as was, in fact, allowed. 5

M/S. DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Sh. Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Dharampal Satyapal Ltd. Acit, 1711, S. P. Mukherjee Marg, Vs Central Circle – 29, Delhi-110006 New Delhi Pan No. Aaacd0132H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. R. S. Singhavi, Ca Sh. Satyajeet Goel, Ca Respondent By Sh. Sanjay I. Bara, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 28/08/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 07/10/2020 Order

43[For purposes of this sub-section, "market value", in relation to any goods or services, means- (i) price that such goods or services would ordinarily fetch in open market; or (ii) arm's length price as defined in clause (ii) of section 92F, where transfer of such goods or services is a specified domestic transaction referred to in section

PCL FOODS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ADDI CIT, NATIONAL E- ASSESMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2016-17] Pcl Foods Private Limited, Additional / Joint/ Unit No.-219, Plot No. 2, Deputy/Assistant Vardhman Crown Mall, Lsc, Vs Commissioner Of Income Sector 19, Dwarka, New Tax/ Income Tax Officer, Delhi-110075. National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi. Pan- Aahcp3493L Assessee Revenue

Depreciation Claim II. Investments/advances/loans III. International transaction(s) 4. In this case, a reference dated 01.11.2018 was made to the Transfer pricing Officer (TPO) under Section 92CA(1) of the Act, by the ITO, ward 19(2), New Delhi to determine the Arm’s length price in respect of international transactions undertaken by the assessee company with its Associates Enterprises

STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD vs. COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are dismissed with no costs

Section 43(1) were not applicable, appears to be completely misplaced. The reduction in the value of the assets was occasioned by the waiver of the loan by the Government and the amount of reduction was to the extent of accretion in capitalized interest.” 2012:DHC:2259-DB ITA 37/2010 & conn. Page 5 of 16 In this view

STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD vs. COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are dismissed with no costs

Section 43(1) were not applicable, appears to be completely misplaced. The reduction in the value of the assets was occasioned by the waiver of the loan by the Government and the amount of reduction was to the extent of accretion in capitalized interest.” 2012:DHC:2259-DB ITA 37/2010 & conn. Page 5 of 16 In this view

M/S SUCON INDIA LTD.,,FARIDABAD vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2009-10 Vs. Acit, Circle-Ii, New Delhi M/S. Sucon India Ltd., B-532, Nehru Ground Nit, Faridabad Pan : Aagcs9603L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Dr. Rakesh Gupta & Sh. Amit Kumar, Advocates Respondent By Sh. S.S. Rana, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 29.11.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 18.01.2017 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.:

depreciation, reserves for shipping business, rehabilitation fund, expenditure on certain eligible objects or schemes, deductions, amounts not deductible, profits chargeable to tax, etc. The assessee is no doubt correct in contending that the only definition of derivatives is to be found in Section 43(5

DCIT, CIRCLE-24(2), NEW DELHI vs. STERLING AGRO INDS. LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri C.M. Gargassessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Vs. Sterling Agro Inds. Ltd., 11Th Floor, Circle-24(2), New Delhi. Agarwal Cyber Plaza-Ii, Netaji Subhash Place, New Delhi. Pan: Aaacs2278R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Amit Sharma, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.07.2022 Order Per C.M. Garg, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld.Cit(A)-8, New Delhi, Dated 27.11.2019, Relating To Assessment Year 2016.- 17. 2. The Sole Ground Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue In This Appeal Reads As Follows:- “1. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Addition Made By The Ao On Account Of Disallowance Of Deduction U/S 80Ia Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Amounting To Rs.12,63,07,697/-.”

section 801A of the Income tax Act, 1961. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Id CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 469.01 lakhs under Rule 8D(2)(ii) by ignoring the mandatory provisions of Rule 8D w.r.s. 14A of the Income

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

depreciation on the value of Rs. 22,30,795/- as per the revised valuation. On such facts, the High Court held that the Explanation 3 to section 43(1) of the Act correspondents to section 10(5

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm It(Tp)A No. 5623/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 M/S Continental Device India Ltd., Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax C-120, Naraina Industrial Area, Circle-3(1), New Delhi-110028 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacc1835E Assessee By : Sh. R. K. Kapoor, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Ravi Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.10.2015 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.12.2015 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

depreciation on the value of Rs. 22,30,795/- as per the revised valuation. On such facts, the High Court held that the Explanation 3 to section 43(1) of the Act correspondents to section 10(5

IFCI LTD. vs. ADDL. CIT, CIRCLE-11(1),,

In the result ITA number 2205/Del/2005 filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 139(5). Return filed u/s 139 (3) if in accordance with the other provisions of the filing of the loss return for the provisions of the act shall apply to that return as if it were return under subsection (1) of the act. The learned Commissioner of income tax Appeals by considering the above claim of the assessee

DCIT, CIRCLE-II(I) vs. I.F.C.I. LTD.,,

In the result ITA number 2205/Del/2005 filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 139(5). Return filed u/s 139 (3) if in accordance with the other provisions of the filing of the loss return for the provisions of the act shall apply to that return as if it were return under subsection (1) of the act. The learned Commissioner of income tax Appeals by considering the above claim of the assessee

PETRONET LNG LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastavadr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 5230/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 5231/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 5232/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Petronet Lng Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of First Floor, World Trade Centre, Income Tax, Circle-19(2), Babar Road, Barakhamba Lane, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacp8148D Ita No. 4902/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 4903/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 4904/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs Petronet Lng Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-19(2), First Floor, World Trade Centre, New Delhi Babar Road, Barakhamba Lane, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacp8148D Assessee By : Sh. Vishal Kalra, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.01.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.03.2021

Section 80IA in such cases, the eligible profits would be determined only after setting off of the losses/ unabsorbed depreciation carried forward in the year the deduction is claimed. 34. This ratio applies to ground nos. 1 & 2 of the departmental appeal for the assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11 and ground no. 1 for the assessment year