COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI VIII vs. INDIAN FARMERS FERTILIZERS CO-OP. LTD.

The appeal stands disposed of accordingly

depreciation allowance or any other allowance under this then it will be deemed to be a case where income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. The present case will fall under this explanation.” 16. On merits, the Assessing Officer, after discussing the scope and ambit of the provisions of Section 80

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

80 HHC, we would have to bear in mind the provisions of Sections 30 to 43D as referred to in Section 29, Section 80AB and Section 80B(5). A conjoint reading of these provisions leads to the conclusion that depreciation

PRAGATI POWER CORPORATION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-20(1), NEW DELHI

In the result the Miscellaneous Application of the assessee is\nallowed

Depreciation as per Income Tax Act\n(1,223,292,202)\n(814,871,495) (408,420,707)\nLess: Gratuity paid during the year\n(3,035,806)\n(2,655,227)\n(380,579)\nLess: Water cess liability paid during the year-u/s 43B\n(307,709)\n(307,709)\nLess: Water cess written back during the 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)

depreciation losses from other industries. The aforesaid provisions of sub-section (5) of Section 80-IA merely give legislative sanction

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. HIMALAYA INTERNATIONAL LTD., HIMACHAL PRADESH

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2012-13

depreciation. The capital-work-in- progress as per the audited balance sheet as on 31st March, 2008 was Rs. 22,13,39,000/- and as on 31/3/2009 it was reflected at Rs. 14,27,66,000/-. After claiming deduction u/s 80IC on account of substantial expansion of the unit for Rs. 12,80,92,168/-, the return filed

M/S. HIMALYA INTERNATIONAL LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2012-13

depreciation. The capital-work-in- progress as per the audited balance sheet as on 31st March, 2008 was Rs. 22,13,39,000/- and as on 31/3/2009 it was reflected at Rs. 14,27,66,000/-. After claiming deduction u/s 80IC on account of substantial expansion of the unit for Rs. 12,80,92,168/-, the return filed

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. HIMALAYA INTERNATIONAL LTD., HIMACHAL PRADESH

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2012-13

depreciation. The capital-work-in- progress as per the audited balance sheet as on 31st March, 2008 was Rs. 22,13,39,000/- and as on 31/3/2009 it was reflected at Rs. 14,27,66,000/-. After claiming deduction u/s 80IC on account of substantial expansion of the unit for Rs. 12,80,92,168/-, the return filed

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI vs. VRM INDIA LTD

80-IB reads as follows: “80IB.Deduction in respect of profits and gains from certain industrial undertakings other than infrastructure development undertakings.- (1) Where the gross total income of an assessee includes any profits and gains derived from any business referred to in sub-sections (3) to(11), (11A) and (11B) (such business being hereinafter referred to as the eligible business

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI vs. VRM INDIA LTD

80-IB reads as follows: “80IB.Deduction in respect of profits and gains from certain industrial undertakings other than infrastructure development undertakings.- (1) Where the gross total income of an assessee includes any profits and gains derived from any business referred to in sub-sections (3) to(11), (11A) and (11B) (such business being hereinafter referred to as the eligible business

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI vs. VRM INDIA LTD

80-IB reads as follows: “80IB.Deduction in respect of profits and gains from certain industrial undertakings other than infrastructure development undertakings.- (1) Where the gross total income of an assessee includes any profits and gains derived from any business referred to in sub-sections (3) to(11), (11A) and (11B) (such business being hereinafter referred to as the eligible business

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SPLENDOR LANDBASE LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kanti.T.A. No.2461/Del/2016 A.Y. : 2010-11 Assistant Commissioner M/S Splendor Landbase Of Income, Central Vs. Limited, Circle-3, F-38/2, Splendor House, New Delhi Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-Ii, New Delhi (Pan: Aaeca3986E) (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No. 215/Del/2016 In I.T.A. No. 2461/Del/2016 A.Y. : 2010-11 M/S Splendor Landbase Assistant Commissioner Limited, Vs. Of Income, Central Circle- F-38/2, Splendor House, 3, Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi Phase-Ii, New Delhi (Pan: Aaeca3986E) (Appellant) (Respondent)

depreciation is not a loss as it is governed by provisions of section 32(2), the restrictive provisions of section 80

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. GOVIND NAGAR SUGAR LIMITED

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA

depreciation, it was not necessary that the return should have been filed within the time allowed under Section 139(1) read with Section 139(3) of the Income Tax Act? (b) Whether ITAT was correct in law in holding that the provisions of Section 80

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ADIT INFRATEL PVT. LTD., GURGAON

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit, Vs. Adit Infratel Pvt Ltd, Circle-1(2), A-45/27, Dlf City, New Delhi Phase-1, Gurgaon Pan: Aabcl6812B (Appellant) (Respondent)

80 IC of the income tax act is not allowable to the assessee. Consequently the assessment order under section 143 (3) of the income tax act was passed on 23/2/2015 by disallowing the above claim of deduction and further not allowing the carry forward of the business loss of ₹ 5 26268 and unabsorbed depreciation

ACIT CIRCLE-7(1), NEW DELHI vs. DLF ASSETS PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, the order of the ld. CIT (A) is confirmed and the Revenue’s appeal for AY 2013-14 is dismissed

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

80-IAB of the Act is available to an assessee engaged in the development of a notified SEZ and such benefit can be availed by the assessee for ten consecutive years out of the first fifteen years. The rental income is required to be disclosed in the return of income under the head 'income from house property' and service income

ACIT CIRCLE-7(1), NEW DELHI vs. DLF ASSETS PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, the order of the ld. CIT (A) is confirmed and the Revenue’s appeal for AY 2013-14 is dismissed

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

80-IAB of the Act is available to an assessee engaged in the development of a notified SEZ and such benefit can be availed by the assessee for ten consecutive years out of the first fifteen years. The rental income is required to be disclosed in the return of income under the head 'income from house property' and service income

ACIT CIRCLE-7(1), NEW DELHI vs. DLF ASSETS PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, the order of the ld. CIT (A) is confirmed and the Revenue’s appeal for AY 2013-14 is dismissed

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

80-IAB of the Act is available to an assessee engaged in the development of a notified SEZ and such benefit can be availed by the assessee for ten consecutive years out of the first fifteen years. The rental income is required to be disclosed in the return of income under the head 'income from house property' and service income

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL-III vs. UNIPATCH RUBBER LTD

Appeal is dismissed

80-I. (1) Where the gross total income of an assessee includes any profits and gains derived from an industrial undertaking or a ship or the business of a hotel [or the business of repairs to ocean-going vessels or other powered craft], to which this section applies, there shall, in accordance with and subject to the provisions of this

COMMISSIONER OF INCOEM TAX DEL vs. UNIPATCH RUBBER LTD.

Appeal is dismissed

80-I. (1) Where the gross total income of an assessee includes any profits and gains derived from an industrial undertaking or a ship or the business of a hotel [or the business of repairs to ocean-going vessels or other powered craft], to which this section applies, there shall, in accordance with and subject to the provisions of this