COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL vs. M/S M/S JINDAL EQUIPMENT LEASI

Appeals are allowed

section 47 of the Act. If the shares are held as stock-in- trade, income shall be chargeable to income-tax under the head “profits and gain of business or profession”. Here the spotlight should not entirely be on the concept of ‘transfer’ but instead whether there is business income in hands of the assessee. We, therefore, now proceed

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL vs. M/S ABHUINANDAN INVESTMENTS LT

Appeals are allowed

section 47 of the Act. If the shares are held as stock-in- trade, income shall be chargeable to income-tax under the head “profits and gain of business or profession”. Here the spotlight should not entirely be on the concept of ‘transfer’ but instead whether there is business income in hands of the assessee. We, therefore, now proceed

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL vs. M/S MANSAROVAR INVESTMENTS LTD

Appeals are allowed

section 47 of the Act. If the shares are held as stock-in- trade, income shall be chargeable to income-tax under the head “profits and gain of business or profession”. Here the spotlight should not entirely be on the concept of ‘transfer’ but instead whether there is business income in hands of the assessee. We, therefore, now proceed

TELETUBE ELECTRONICS LTD

The appeal of the Assessee is allowed

47) of the Act. The meaning of transfer in Section 269UA(f) has to be restricted for the purposes of Chapter XXC. The ITAT also held that merely because the payment of instalment was shown as lease rental, it could not be said that the instalments paid did not form part of the price. Once the price of the asset

CIT vs. M/S TELETUBE ELECTRONICS LTD

The appeal of the Assessee is allowed

47) of the Act. The meaning of transfer in Section 269UA(f) has to be restricted for the purposes of Chapter XXC. The ITAT also held that merely because the payment of instalment was shown as lease rental, it could not be said that the instalments paid did not form part of the price. Once the price of the asset

TELETUBE ELECTRONICS LTD

The appeal of the Assessee is allowed

47) of the Act. The meaning of transfer in Section 269UA(f) has to be restricted for the purposes of Chapter XXC. The ITAT also held that merely because the payment of instalment was shown as lease rental, it could not be said that the instalments paid did not form part of the price. Once the price of the asset

M/S. ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Before Shri G.S. Pannu & Before Shri G.S. Pannu Before Shri G.S. Pannu & Ms. Suchitra Kamblems. Suchitra Kamble Ms. Suchitra Kamble Ms. Suchitra Kamble

depreciation on computers; and, disallowance of amortization of land in respect of wind power projects. In appeal before the learned CIT(A), assessee was allowed partial relief and, not being satisfied with the order of the CIT(A), assessee is in further appeal in above stated Grounds of appeal. 6. In this background, the rival representatives have been heard. Insofar

M/S. ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Before Shri G.S. Pannu & Before Shri G.S. Pannu Before Shri G.S. Pannu & Ms. Suchitra Kamblems. Suchitra Kamble Ms. Suchitra Kamble Ms. Suchitra Kamble

depreciation on computers; and, disallowance of amortization of land in respect of wind power projects. In appeal before the learned CIT(A), assessee was allowed partial relief and, not being satisfied with the order of the CIT(A), assessee is in further appeal in above stated Grounds of appeal. 6. In this background, the rival representatives have been heard. Insofar

M/S. ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Before Shri G.S. Pannu & Before Shri G.S. Pannu Before Shri G.S. Pannu & Ms. Suchitra Kamblems. Suchitra Kamble Ms. Suchitra Kamble Ms. Suchitra Kamble

depreciation on computers; and, disallowance of amortization of land in respect of wind power projects. In appeal before the learned CIT(A), assessee was allowed partial relief and, not being satisfied with the order of the CIT(A), assessee is in further appeal in above stated Grounds of appeal. 6. In this background, the rival representatives have been heard. Insofar

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

Appeals are dismissed in favour of the assessee and

depreciation of buildings, machinery, plant or furniture, being tangible assets or know-how, patents, copyrights, trade marks, licences, franchises or any other business or commercial rights of similar nature, being intangible assets allowable to the predecessor and the successor in the case of succession referred to in [clause (xiii), Clause (xiiib) and Clause (xiv)] of Section 47

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

Section 80 IB and 80 HHC after withdrawing the depreciation quantified at Rs 11,41,47,451/-. The CIT (A) based

TELENOR (INDIA) COMMUNICATIONS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 25(1), NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

47) of the Act. In view thereof, he held that since the asset acquired by the assessee, before it got extinguished, which asset had been held by it for a period less than 36 months, and that the said capital asset constituted a short term capital asset within the meaning of section 2(14) of the Act. AO held that

GEODIS OVERSEAS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

section 32(1) of the Act that depreciation is permissible in respect of intangible assets listed herein, acquired on or after 01.04.1998. This clause contains certain specified and unspecified species of intangible assets. Whereas the specified intangible assets enshrined in the provision include know-how, patent and copyrights ITA No.1976/Del/2006 etc., the unspecified intangible assets have been described with

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

depreciation of ₹ 360,503,983/– on plant and machinery leased various authorities even though the assessee was no more the owner and the lease agreement was in the nature of higher purchase agreement. v. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) has erred in deleting the disallowance

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

depreciation of ₹ 360,503,983/– on plant and machinery leased various authorities even though the assessee was no more the owner and the lease agreement was in the nature of higher purchase agreement. v. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) has erred in deleting the disallowance

PITNEY BOWES INDIA (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, out of the five appeals of the assessee, the ITA Nos

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kant

47,290/- and government acquisition amounting to Rs.4,51,66,708/- Page -23 volume Depreciation chart Under the intangible assets category , 2 of the enclosed to the Tax the assessee has computed paessee’s paper Audit Report depreciation at the rate of 25% on the book ‘Government Authorizations’ of Rs. 4,51,66,708/- added during the year, which amounted

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -CENTRAL -1 vs. AAMBY VALLEY LTD.

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

47(vii) of the Act. 7. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT has disregarded the fact that the amount of Rs.46,999.38 crores by which the General Reserves increased were not routed through the Profit & Loss Account and thereby has erred in deleting the addition made under Section 115JB

VEDANTA LTD (SUCCESSOR TO CAIRN INDIA LTD),GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-26(1), NEW DELHI

Bench: Hon’Ble, Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

Depreciation 180,40,27,029/- 6850,01,87,820/- disallowed under UOP method Taxable Book Profit u/s 6850,01,87,820/- 115JB Tax Payable Basic @ 18.5% 1267,25,34,747/- Add : Surcharge @ 5% 63,36,26,737/- Add : Education Cess 3% 39,91,84,845/- Total Tax Payable under 1370,53,46,329/- MAT 11. So, the AO assessed