THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -6 vs. MICROSOFT INDIA ( R & D) PVT. LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

disallowance of deduction claimed under section 10B of the Act.  Said final assessment order was accompanied by notice of demand issued under section 156 and notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act for initiating penalty proceedings. provided to the Petitioner to file objections before the DRP, even though the Respondent was mandated

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -6 vs. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

disallowance of deduction claimed under section 10B of the Act.  Said final assessment order was accompanied by notice of demand issued under section 156 and notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act for initiating penalty proceedings. provided to the Petitioner to file objections before the DRP, even though the Respondent was mandated

M/S CONTINENTAL DEVICE INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri A.T. Varkey

197 1,09,149 Total 66,95,884 1,76,84,338 20,41,601 8,18,386 12,23,215 ITA No.316/Del/2013 The AO observed that the deprecation on building is claimed by the assessee at full rate, whereas it was admissible for half rate as all assets of the acquired plant were claimed to have been

M/S CONTINENTAL DEVICE INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri A.T. Varkey

197 1,09,149 Total 66,95,884 1,76,84,338 20,41,601 8,18,386 12,23,215 ITA No.316/Del/2013 The AO observed that the deprecation on building is claimed by the assessee at full rate, whereas it was admissible for half rate as all assets of the acquired plant were claimed to have been

M/S CONTINENTAL DEVICE INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri A.T. Varkey

197 1,09,149 Total 66,95,884 1,76,84,338 20,41,601 8,18,386 12,23,215 ITA No.316/Del/2013 The AO observed that the deprecation on building is claimed by the assessee at full rate, whereas it was admissible for half rate as all assets of the acquired plant were claimed to have been

M/S. CONTINENTAL DEVICE INDIA LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri A.T. Varkey

197 1,09,149 Total 66,95,884 1,76,84,338 20,41,601 8,18,386 12,23,215 ITA No.316/Del/2013 The AO observed that the deprecation on building is claimed by the assessee at full rate, whereas it was admissible for half rate as all assets of the acquired plant were claimed to have been

ADIT(E), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. IILM FOUNDATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

disallowance by AO. 19. In view of the aforesaid profile/ roles and responsibilities and contributions/ services of Mrs. Malvika Rai, it has been submitted that the aforesaid salary paid to her was very much justified and not at all unreasonable/ excessive and ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 16 cannot, in any manner, be considered as giving

IILM FOUNDAION,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT (EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

disallowance by AO. 19. In view of the aforesaid profile/ roles and responsibilities and contributions/ services of Mrs. Malvika Rai, it has been submitted that the aforesaid salary paid to her was very much justified and not at all unreasonable/ excessive and ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 16 cannot, in any manner, be considered as giving

ADIT(E), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. IILM FOUNDATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

disallowance by AO. 19. In view of the aforesaid profile/ roles and responsibilities and contributions/ services of Mrs. Malvika Rai, it has been submitted that the aforesaid salary paid to her was very much justified and not at all unreasonable/ excessive and ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 16 cannot, in any manner, be considered as giving

ADIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. IILM FOUNDATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

disallowance by AO. 19. In view of the aforesaid profile/ roles and responsibilities and contributions/ services of Mrs. Malvika Rai, it has been submitted that the aforesaid salary paid to her was very much justified and not at all unreasonable/ excessive and ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 16 cannot, in any manner, be considered as giving

ITO (E), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. IILM FOUNDATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

disallowance by AO. 19. In view of the aforesaid profile/ roles and responsibilities and contributions/ services of Mrs. Malvika Rai, it has been submitted that the aforesaid salary paid to her was very much justified and not at all unreasonable/ excessive and ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 16 cannot, in any manner, be considered as giving

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. SH. KULBEER SINGH, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiito, Vs. Kulbeer Singh, Ward-26(1), H-432, Vikas Puri, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Amqps5847P (Appellant) (Respondent)

1), New Delhi against the order of The Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeals – XXIV , New Delhi dated 3/7/2014 for AY 2010 – 11 where the only issue is that the learned CIT – A has deleted the disallowance of RS. 44140860/– on account of commission paid to the various commission agents outside India. According to the assessing officer this expenditure is disallowable

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. HERO HONDA MOTORS LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2005-06

1) of the Act; and therefore the same ought to be allowed as business deduction. 13.0.2 Without prejudice to the above, it was further argued that if the said expenditure was not to be treated as “for the purpose of business”, but having relation with investment activity, then this expenditure needs to be alternatively allowed against income arising from investment

M/S. HERO MOTOCORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2005-06

1) of the Act; and therefore the same ought to be allowed as business deduction. 13.0.2 Without prejudice to the above, it was further argued that if the said expenditure was not to be treated as “for the purpose of business”, but having relation with investment activity, then this expenditure needs to be alternatively allowed against income arising from investment

MRS. SASHI SADH,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2010-11 Mrs. Sashi Sadh, 52/12, C.R. Park, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-23(2), New Delhi New Delhi Gir/Pan : Amlps4154L (Appellant) (Respondent)

197- ITAT-Indore-SB. In the judgment dated 28.03.2012, the Special Bench of the ITAT has held that, "...In case of Liberty India, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has dealt with the provisions ofsection 80IA of the Act wherein no formula was laid down for computing the profits derived by the undertaking which has specifically been provided under sub-section

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

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

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

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

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

disallowing this claim. Therefore, Ground No. 18 to 18.2 are allowed in favour of the assessee.” From the records it can be seen that the provision for the material is worked out in respect of price amendments which were already issued on 31.03.2009 which was made on the basis of actual supplied made upto the end of the year