MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs. Additional Cit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Range-6, Vasant Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aaacm0829Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Neeraj Jain, Rohit Jain, Adv. Romit Katyal & Ms. Tejasvi Jain, Cas Department By:Shri Amrendra Kumar, Cit(Dr)

section 233B of the Companies Act, 1956 and also the Statutory 61 Auditor as well as the Tax Auditor pursuant to tax audit under section 44AB of the Act. (d) The difference between the stock as per the stock register and physical inventory may be on account of several reasons, such as posting errors, estimation of consumption based on standard

B4S SOLUTION P.LTD,GHAZIABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

depreciation). Each of these deductions, has its contours, depending upon the expressions used, and the conditions that are to be met. It is therefore necessary to bear in mind that specific enumeration of deductions, dependent upon fulfillment of particular conditions, would qualify as allowable deductions: failure by the assessee to comply with those conditions, would render the claim vulnerable

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

depreciation could be used to set off against any head of income except salary. 56. The claim was denied by the Assessing Officer placing reliance on pre-amended provision of section 32 of the Act. 57. We are of the considered view that the Assessing Officer should consider the set off as per the amended provisions

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-16(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. New Delhi. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2010-11] Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-16(1), Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi. Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv., Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. & Ms. Tejasvi Jain & Ms. Somya Jain, Ca Respondent By Shri G.C.Srivastava, Adv., Shri Kalrav Mehrotra, Adv. & Shri Mayank Patawari, Ca Date Of Hearing 11.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09.02.2023

section 43B. thereby resulting in a double disallowance to the extent of Rs. 1,39,45,180/-. 7.4. Without prejudice, the assessing officer erred in granting the alternative deduction of depreciation

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-16(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. New Delhi. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2010-11] Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-16(1), Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi. Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv., Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. & Ms. Tejasvi Jain & Ms. Somya Jain, Ca Respondent By Shri G.C.Srivastava, Adv., Shri Kalrav Mehrotra, Adv. & Shri Mayank Patawari, Ca Date Of Hearing 11.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09.02.2023

section 43B. thereby resulting in a double disallowance to the extent of Rs. 1,39,45,180/-. 7.4. Without prejudice, the assessing officer erred in granting the alternative deduction of depreciation

ACIT, GURGAON vs. M/S. MOTOROLA INDIA PVT. LTD., GURGAON

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishimotorola India Pvt Ltd, Vs. Acit, Motorola Excellence Centre, Gurgaon Circle, 415/2, Sector-14, Mg Road, Gurgaon Gurgaon, Haryana Pan: Aaacm9343D (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Motorola India Pvt Ltd, Gurgaon Circle, Motorola Excellence Centre, Gurgaon 415/2, Sector-14, Mg Road, Gurgaon, Haryana Pan: Aaacm9343D (Appellant) (Respondent) Motorola Solutions India (P) Ltd, Vs. Acit, 415/2, Motorola Excellence Gurgaon Circle, Centre, Mg Road, Haryana Gurgaon Pan: Aaacm9343D (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Motorola Solutions India (P) Gurgaon Circle, Ltd, Gurgaon 415/2, Motorola Excellence Centre, Mg Road, Haryana Pan: Aaacm9343D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri G.C. Srivastava, Adv Shri Suvinay K. Dash, Adv Revenue By: Shri Sanjay I Bara, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 28/05/2018 Date Of Pronouncement 24/08/2018

section 43B(f) of the Act were not applicable in the instant case. 2. That the Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in remanding back to the Ld. AO the issue of verification of provision for leave encashment reversed during the year of Rs. 3,33,28,504/- when complete details in this regard were produced before the ld. CIT (Appeals

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4 DELHI vs. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

section 43B. thereby resulting in a double disallowance to the extent of Rs. 1,39,45,180/-. 7.4. Without prejudice, the assessing officer erred in granting the alternative deduction of depreciation

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4 DELHI vs. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

section 43B. thereby resulting in a double disallowance to the extent of Rs. 1,39,45,180/-. 7.4. Without prejudice, the assessing officer erred in granting the alternative deduction of depreciation

ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. THE FERTILIZER CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD., NOIDA

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

43B (Rs.553,90,97,000/-) in the impugned order.” Page 5 of 11 ITA No.-1911/Del/2017. M/s The Fertilizer Corporation of India Limited. (3) The present appeal before us in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (“ITAT”, for short) has been filed by Revenue against the aforesaid impugned order dated 23.11.2016 of the Ld. CIT(A). The appeal was listed

ACIT, CIRCLE-18(2), NOIDA vs. NOIDA TOLL BRIDGE CO. LTD., NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

depreciation. The same is deleted. 54. In addition to the issues considered in A.Y 2006-07 ITA No. 4411/DEL/2018, in this year the assessee has challenged the disallowance of unpaid interest of Rs. 1,71,04,300/-. 55. The underlying facts in the issue are that the assessee issued deep discount bonds to the public on which interest was payable

ACIT, CIRCLE-18(2), NOIDA vs. NOIDA TOLL BRIDGE CO. LTD., NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

depreciation. The same is deleted. 54. In addition to the issues considered in A.Y 2006-07 ITA No. 4411/DEL/2018, in this year the assessee has challenged the disallowance of unpaid interest of Rs. 1,71,04,300/-. 55. The underlying facts in the issue are that the assessee issued deep discount bonds to the public on which interest was payable

ACIT, CIRCLE-18(2), NOIDA vs. NOIDA TOLL BRIDGE CO. LTD., NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

depreciation. The same is deleted. 54. In addition to the issues considered in A.Y 2006-07 ITA No. 4411/DEL/2018, in this year the assessee has challenged the disallowance of unpaid interest of Rs. 1,71,04,300/-. 55. The underlying facts in the issue are that the assessee issued deep discount bonds to the public on which interest was payable

ACIT, CIRCLE-18(2), NOIDA vs. NOIDA TOLL BRIDGE CO. LTD., NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

depreciation. The same is deleted. 54. In addition to the issues considered in A.Y 2006-07 ITA No. 4411/DEL/2018, in this year the assessee has challenged the disallowance of unpaid interest of Rs. 1,71,04,300/-. 55. The underlying facts in the issue are that the assessee issued deep discount bonds to the public on which interest was payable

ACIT, CIRCLE-18(2), NOIDA vs. NOIDA TOLL BRIDGE CO. LTD., NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

depreciation. The same is deleted. 54. In addition to the issues considered in A.Y 2006-07 ITA No. 4411/DEL/2018, in this year the assessee has challenged the disallowance of unpaid interest of Rs. 1,71,04,300/-. 55. The underlying facts in the issue are that the assessee issued deep discount bonds to the public on which interest was payable

ACIT, CIRCLE-18(2), NOIDA vs. NOIDA TOLL BRIDGE CO. LTD., NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

depreciation. The same is deleted. 54. In addition to the issues considered in A.Y 2006-07 ITA No. 4411/DEL/2018, in this year the assessee has challenged the disallowance of unpaid interest of Rs. 1,71,04,300/-. 55. The underlying facts in the issue are that the assessee issued deep discount bonds to the public on which interest was payable

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III vs. ARCOTECH LTD (FORMERLY SKS LTD.)

The appeal is disposed of

Section 43B of the Act. The Assessing Officer disallowed depreciation claim of Rs.89,95,173/- and claim on account of loss

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S AJAY ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeal is dismissed and appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

depreciation on Printers & UPS. Both the parties have agreed that the reasoning of the AO while making the disallowance as well as the grounds on which the Ld. CIT(A) has granted relief are similar to Ground No. 3 for A. Y. 2008-09 in ITA No. 1348/Del/2013. This issue has already been decided by us in Ground

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. AJAY ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeal is dismissed and appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

depreciation on Printers & UPS. Both the parties have agreed that the reasoning of the AO while making the disallowance as well as the grounds on which the Ld. CIT(A) has granted relief are similar to Ground No. 3 for A. Y. 2008-09 in ITA No. 1348/Del/2013. This issue has already been decided by us in Ground