YOSHIO KUBO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

10 (10CC) is neutral about the kind of benefit availed by the employee. The 2013:DHC:3744-DB ITA 441/2003 and connected cases Page 25 decisions of the Supreme Court, on Section 40(1) (c) and Section 40A are, in the context of the expressions "any expenditure which results… in the provision of any benefit or amenity or perquisite" read

MR. NIKHIL SAWHNEY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarmr. Nikhil Sawhney, Vs. Dcit, 17, Sunder Nagar, Central Circle, New Delhi-11003 Noida (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaups0222Q

section 5 and the third proviso thereto: "5. This Act shall apply to every business of which any part of the profits made during the chargeable accounting period is Mr. Nikhil Sawhney chargeable to income-tax by virtue of the provisions of sub- clause (i) or sub-clause (ii) of clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section

DCIT, CIRCLE- 1, LTU, NEW DELHI vs. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh.Anubhav Sharmaita No. 1952/Del/2018, A.Y. 2013-14 M/S. The Oriental Insurance Co. Vs. Dcit, Ltd. Circle-1, Ltu, A-25/27, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi New Delhi- 110002 Pan :Aaact0627R

25. Section 27B (1) of the IA mandates that no insurer carrying on general insurance business shall "invest or keep invested any part of his assets otherwise than in any of the following approved investments." These 'approved investments are set out in clauses (a) to (j) there under. Section 27B (4) states that an insurer "shall not invest or keep

THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1, LTU, NEW DELHI

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh.Anubhav Sharmaita No. 1952/Del/2018, A.Y. 2013-14 M/S. The Oriental Insurance Co. Vs. Dcit, Ltd. Circle-1, Ltu, A-25/27, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi New Delhi- 110002 Pan :Aaact0627R

25. Section 27B (1) of the IA mandates that no insurer carrying on general insurance business shall "invest or keep invested any part of his assets otherwise than in any of the following approved investments." These 'approved investments are set out in clauses (a) to (j) there under. Section 27B (4) states that an insurer "shall not invest or keep

M/S THE ORIENTAL INSSURANCE CO.LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Anubhav Sharmam/S. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd, Vs. The Dcit, A 25/27, Asaf Ali Road, Ltu, New Delhi New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaact0627R

25. Section 27B (1) of the IA mandates that no insurer carrying on general insurance business shall "invest or keep invested any part of his assets otherwise than in any of the following approved investments." These 'approved investments are set out in clauses (a) to (j) there under. Section 27B (4) states that an insurer "shall not invest or keep

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S ANSAL HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2007-08] Dcit, Vs Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd., Central Circle-20, Ugf-15, Indraprastha Building, 21, New Delhi. Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan-Aaaca0377R Appellant Respondent

section In the assessment order, the assessing officer proportionately allocated following expenses to the eligible 80IB(10) of the projects in ratio or sales and consequently proposed disallowance of deduction Rs.3,59,98,438 for all nine Act on account projects. However, considering that out of the 9 projects, the assessing officer had already disallowed the of proportionate entire claim

DCIT,C-11(1), NEW DELHI vs. HERO MOTOCORP LTD.,, NEW DELHI

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat

25 12.50 NHPC-8.18% - 16.11 8.055 PFC-8.18% - 32.39 16.195 Total of average value of investments yielding exempt income 381.46 (A) 0.5% of (A) 0.19073 Suo Moto disallowance made by the assessee 0.67037 In view of the above, it is submitted that the disallowance of expenses of Rs. 19.07 lacs under section 14A of the Act, computed as per clause

INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND (ICID PF TRUST),NEW DELHI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

disallowance of exemption under section 10(25)(ii) of the Income Tax act, 1961 (Act). 4. The relevant facts giving

INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND (ICID PF TRUST),NEW DELHI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

disallowance of exemption under section 10(25)(ii) of the Income Tax act, 1961 (Act). 4. The relevant facts giving

MANKIND PHARMA LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), MEERUT

In the result, the additional Ground No

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

Disallowance w.r.t. deduction claimed under Section 6,38,13,601 80G of the Act on account of donations given 14. Aggrieved by the adjustments made to the returned income, the assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal. 15. As regards impugned adjustments to the deductions eligible under s.80IC & s.80IE of Act in terms of section 80IA(10) r.w.s 92CA

M/S. PTC INDIA FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2013-14 & Asstt. Year 2014-15

10(34) of the Act. It was also stated that no direct or indirect expenditure was incurred by the assessee with respect to above. However, the assessee suo-moto disallowed an amount of Rs. 37,60,000/- under section 14A of the Act. The said amount was computed on the basis of a prudent and reasonable method adopted

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 7, NEW DELHI vs. PTC INDIA FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2013-14 & Asstt. Year 2014-15

10(34) of the Act. It was also stated that no direct or indirect expenditure was incurred by the assessee with respect to above. However, the assessee suo-moto disallowed an amount of Rs. 37,60,000/- under section 14A of the Act. The said amount was computed on the basis of a prudent and reasonable method adopted

PTC INDIA FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 19(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2013-14 & Asstt. Year 2014-15

10(34) of the Act. It was also stated that no direct or indirect expenditure was incurred by the assessee with respect to above. However, the assessee suo-moto disallowed an amount of Rs. 37,60,000/- under section 14A of the Act. The said amount was computed on the basis of a prudent and reasonable method adopted

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PTC INDIA FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2013-14 & Asstt. Year 2014-15

10(34) of the Act. It was also stated that no direct or indirect expenditure was incurred by the assessee with respect to above. However, the assessee suo-moto disallowed an amount of Rs. 37,60,000/- under section 14A of the Act. The said amount was computed on the basis of a prudent and reasonable method adopted

INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON IRRIGATION & DRAINAGE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. DDIT (E) TRUST CIRCLE-2, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri N.K. Choudhry

25)(ii) completely and undisputedly. 3.3 The CPC vide order dated 07.06.2016 rejected the Assessee’s application filed u/s 154 of the Act, on the grounds stated below: “On verification, it is seen that there is no prima facie error in the order which you have sought to be rectified. Therefore, your application for rectification under section 154 is rejected

INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON IRRIGATION & DRAINAGE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. DDIT (E) TRUST CIRCLE-2, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri N.K. Choudhry

25)(ii) completely and undisputedly. 3.3 The CPC vide order dated 07.06.2016 rejected the Assessee’s application filed u/s 154 of the Act, on the grounds stated below: “On verification, it is seen that there is no prima facie error in the order which you have sought to be rectified. Therefore, your application for rectification under section 154 is rejected

BHAGWANT SINGH CHARITABLE TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT(EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

disallowed expenditure incurred by assessee towards 'Adivasan Sounds' whether Maintenance of studio was intrinsic and in pursuance of objects of assessee which was education as teaching of Indian Classical Music was within field of 'education' - Whether since activities of studio were carried on in order to achieve main object of Trust and could not be construed as business, proviso

M/S EICHER GOODEARTH LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

25,35,482/- was not disallowed and that the Tribunal estimated the disallowable expenditure by adopting a formula of 10% of the dividend income. The Tribunal’s judgment and order, to the 2011:DHC:5797-DB ITA 687/09 & Ors Page 38 of 38 extent it partially deleted the disallowance under section