HERO MOTOCORP LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Sh. I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Motocorp Limited, Jcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Range-1, New Delhi Vs. Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0812J (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Vs. New Delhi Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community

disallowed on the ground of the same being contingent in nature. He further submitted that similar provision for increase in prices as at the end of the year was accepted and allowed in Hero MotoCorp Limited Vs. JCIT & DCIT Vs. Hero MotoCorp Ltd. ITA Nos. 1545/Del/2015 and 2424/Del/2015 (AY 2010-11) ITA No. 1609/Del/2016 and 914/Del/2016 (AY 2011-12) Page

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

145A of the Act, is tax neutral event in as much as the same amount is both debited as well as credited to the P&L A/c. However, to give effect to the provisions of section 43B of the Act which mandates that duties paid by the assessee are allowable only on the payment basis, the custom duty paid

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

145A of the Act, is tax neutral event in as much as the same amount is both debited as well as credited to the P&L A/c. However, to give effect to the provisions of section 43B of the Act which mandates that duties paid by the assessee are allowable only on the payment basis, the custom duty paid

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

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 145A of The Act, if there is a change in closing stock as on 31st March, 1999, there must necessarily be a corresponding adjustment made in opening stock as on 1st April, 1998. 17. He further submitted that Further, considering entirety of facts, adjustment in value of opening and closing stock would be a revenue neutral exercise

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

Section 145A of The Act, if there is a change in closing stock as on 31st March, 1999, there must necessarily be a corresponding adjustment made in opening stock as on 1st April, 1998. 17. He further submitted that Further, considering entirety of facts, adjustment in value of opening and closing stock would be a revenue neutral exercise

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

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No. 467/Del/2014 (A.Y 2009-10)

section 145A were not applicable as the assessment year under consideration was 1995-96. In view of the detailed discussion supra with reference to the applicability of section 145A to the year in question, there can be no escape from valuation of purchase, sale and inventories under the inclusive method. We, therefore, direct the AO to recast Profit and loss

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

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

SECTION 45, READ WITH SECTION 28(i), OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 - CAPITAL GAINS, CHARGEABLE AS - ISSUE OF TAXABILITY OF SURPLUS ON SALE OF SHARES AND SECURITIES - CAPITAL GAINS OR BUSINESS INCOME - INSTRUCTIONS IN ORDER TO REDUCE LITIGATION CIRCULAR NO.6/2016 [F.NO.225/12/2016-ITA-II], DATED 29-2-2016 1. Sub-section (14) of section 2 of the Income

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

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

SECTION 45, READ WITH SECTION 28(i), OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 - CAPITAL GAINS, CHARGEABLE AS - ISSUE OF TAXABILITY OF SURPLUS ON SALE OF SHARES AND SECURITIES - CAPITAL GAINS OR BUSINESS INCOME - INSTRUCTIONS IN ORDER TO REDUCE LITIGATION CIRCULAR NO.6/2016 [F.NO.225/12/2016-ITA-II], DATED 29-2-2016 1. Sub-section (14) of section 2 of the Income

VEDANTA LTD (EARLIER KNOWN AS STERLITE INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LTD.),GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 26(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishivedanta Ltd. Vs. Acit, (Earlier Known As Sterlite Circle-26(1), Industries (India) Ltd,) New Delhi Core-6, 3Rd Floor, Scope Complex, 7, Lodhi Road, New Delhi Pan: Aaccs7101B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 145A brings out the following principles that are to be followed by an Assessee:- o Income chargeable under the head Income from business and profession has to be determined as per the method of accounting regularly followed by the Assessee. o The Central Government has prescribed certain accounting standards which are mandatorily required to be followed by the Assessee

HERO MOTOCROP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 11(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2015-16

disallowance of Rs.3.95 lacs (13.83 – 9.87 lacs)), in respect of cost of rejection of semi-finished goods and obsolete items, on the ground that the aforesaid cost needs to be added to the value of closing stock in accordance with accounting standard-2 read with section 145A

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

145A, is tax neutral inasmuch as the same amount is both debited as well as credited to the profit and loss account. However, to give effect to the provisions of section 43B, which mandates that duties paid by the assessee are allowable only on payment basis, custom duty paid by the assessee on import of components for export purposes, whether

BIGESTO TECHNOLOTIES LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukla & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year : 2010-11 Vs. Dcit, Circle-3(1), New Delhi M/S. Bigesto Technologies Ltd., B-11, Mahendru Enclave, Delhi Pan : Aaacb3036E (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 145A of the Act, amounting to Rs.8,77,134/- and made disallowance of Rs.1,50,000/- out of travelling

DE LA RUE CASH PROCESSING SOLUTION PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, GURGAON

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

145A r.w.s. 145 (1) & 145(3) of the Act, the Assessing Officer disallowed an amount of Rs.47,44,677/-. 6. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 7. As regards to disallowance of Provision for Warranty amounting

DE LA RUE CASH SYSTEMS INDIA P, LTD(PRESENTLY KNOWN AS - DE LA RUE CASH PROCESSING SOLUTINS P.LTD,GURGAON vs. ITO 1(1)(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

145A r.w.s. 145 (1) & 145(3) of the Act, the Assessing Officer disallowed an amount of Rs.47,44,677/-. 6. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 7. As regards to disallowance of Provision for Warranty amounting

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II vs. M/S. LAKSHMI SUGAR MILLS CO. LIMITED

The appeal stands disposed of

Section 145A of the Income Tax Act, 1961?” 2014:DHC:4298-DB ITA No. 233/2013 Page 2 of 9 2. The respondent-assessee was engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of sugar. It was also having income from house property. 3. The Assessing Officer disallowed

BHIM SINGH,GURGAON vs. ITO WARD 1(3) , GURGAON

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

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

disallowance of deduction of Rs 51,110/- claimed U/s 80C &Rs 18,172/- claimed U/s 80Dof the Act. The action of the ld.AO is totally unlawful, unjustified and unreasonable. The deduction claimed deserves to be allowed. 2. On the basis of Facts &circumstances of the case there is no legal warrant or valid justification on the part of learned

PERFETTI VAN MELLE INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1), GURGAON

In the result, the additional ground raised by the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench “I-2”, New Delhi

disallowance worked out by the AO suffered from various flaws. He submitted that section 145A of the Act, which deals

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. EICHER LIMITED

In the result, we are of the opinion that no substantial question

disallowed. 2. While calculating effect of newly inserted section 145A an amount of Rs.3,53,56,437/- on account of excise