DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S NIRALA HOUSING PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the five appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri S.K. Yadav & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

7 of 42 Fit for Publication ITA Nos.-3531/Del/2015 and four other appeals. (AM) (JM) M/s Nirala Housing Pvt. Ltd. The penalty levied U/s 271(1)(c) of I.T. Act for A.Y. 2011-12, amounting to aforesaid Rs. 66,93,323/- was in respect of the amount of Rs. 2,01,53,000/- which was offered by the Assessee

M/S. NIRALA HOUSING PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the five appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri S.K. Yadav & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

7 of 42 Fit for Publication ITA Nos.-3531/Del/2015 and four other appeals. (AM) (JM) M/s Nirala Housing Pvt. Ltd. The penalty levied U/s 271(1)(c) of I.T. Act for A.Y. 2011-12, amounting to aforesaid Rs. 66,93,323/- was in respect of the amount of Rs. 2,01,53,000/- which was offered by the Assessee

M/S. NIRALA HOUSING PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the five appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri S.K. Yadav & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

7 of 42 Fit for Publication ITA Nos.-3531/Del/2015 and four other appeals. (AM) (JM) M/s Nirala Housing Pvt. Ltd. The penalty levied U/s 271(1)(c) of I.T. Act for A.Y. 2011-12, amounting to aforesaid Rs. 66,93,323/- was in respect of the amount of Rs. 2,01,53,000/- which was offered by the Assessee

M/S. NIRALA HOUSING PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the five appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri S.K. Yadav & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

7 of 42 Fit for Publication ITA Nos.-3531/Del/2015 and four other appeals. (AM) (JM) M/s Nirala Housing Pvt. Ltd. The penalty levied U/s 271(1)(c) of I.T. Act for A.Y. 2011-12, amounting to aforesaid Rs. 66,93,323/- was in respect of the amount of Rs. 2,01,53,000/- which was offered by the Assessee

CIT vs. SELECT HOLIDAY RESORTS PVT LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

disallowed under Section 14A of the said Act. It is, therefore, clear that in terms of the said Rule, the amount of expenditure in relation to exempt income has two aspects -(a) direct and (b) indirect. The direct expenditure is straightaway taken into account by virtue of clause (i) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 8D. The indirect expenditure, where

CIT vs. SELECT HOLIDAY RESORTS PVT LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

disallowed under Section 14A of the said Act. It is, therefore, clear that in terms of the said Rule, the amount of expenditure in relation to exempt income has two aspects -(a) direct and (b) indirect. The direct expenditure is straightaway taken into account by virtue of clause (i) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 8D. The indirect expenditure, where

M/S EICHER GOODEARTH LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

7. By virtue of the Finance Act, 2002, the following proviso was inserted in section 14A and was deemed to have been inserted with effect from 11/05/2001:- “Provided that nothing contained in this section shall empower the Assessing Officer either to reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise

M/S EICHER GOODEARTH LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

7. By virtue of the Finance Act, 2002, the following proviso was inserted in section 14A and was deemed to have been inserted with effect from 11/05/2001:- “Provided that nothing contained in this section shall empower the Assessing Officer either to reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise

MINDA INDUSTRIES LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals stand disposed of as above

7. By virtue of the Finance Act, 2002, the following proviso was inserted in section 14A and was deemed to have been inserted with effect from 11/05/2001:- “Provided that nothing contained in this section shall empower the Assessing Officer either to reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise

EICHER LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals stand disposed of as above

7. By virtue of the Finance Act, 2002, the following proviso was inserted in section 14A and was deemed to have been inserted with effect from 11/05/2001:- “Provided that nothing contained in this section shall empower the Assessing Officer either to reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI IV vs. ESCORTS FINANCE LTD.

The appeals stand disposed of as above

7. By virtue of the Finance Act, 2002, the following proviso was inserted in section 14A and was deemed to have been inserted with effect from 11/05/2001:- “Provided that nothing contained in this section shall empower the Assessing Officer either to reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise

M/S EICHER GOODEARTH LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

7. By virtue of the Finance Act, 2002, the following proviso was inserted in section 14A and was deemed to have been inserted with effect from 11/05/2001:- “Provided that nothing contained in this section shall empower the Assessing Officer either to reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise

EICHER LTD. vs. COMMISSIONR OF INCOME TAX

The appeals stand disposed of as above

7. By virtue of the Finance Act, 2002, the following proviso was inserted in section 14A and was deemed to have been inserted with effect from 11/05/2001:- “Provided that nothing contained in this section shall empower the Assessing Officer either to reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. AKM SYSTEMS PVT LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

7. By virtue of the Finance Act, 2002, the following proviso was inserted in section 14A and was deemed to have been inserted with effect from 11/05/2001:- “Provided that nothing contained in this section shall empower the Assessing Officer either to reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. HCL PEROT SYSTEMS LTD.

The appeals stand disposed of as above

7. By virtue of the Finance Act, 2002, the following proviso was inserted in section 14A and was deemed to have been inserted with effect from 11/05/2001:- “Provided that nothing contained in this section shall empower the Assessing Officer either to reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise

M/S EICHER GOODEARTH LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

7. By virtue of the Finance Act, 2002, the following proviso was inserted in section 14A and was deemed to have been inserted with effect from 11/05/2001:- “Provided that nothing contained in this section shall empower the Assessing Officer either to reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise

M/S EICHER GOODEARTH LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

7. By virtue of the Finance Act, 2002, the following proviso was inserted in section 14A and was deemed to have been inserted with effect from 11/05/2001:- “Provided that nothing contained in this section shall empower the Assessing Officer either to reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise

M/S EICHER GOODEARTH LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

7. By virtue of the Finance Act, 2002, the following proviso was inserted in section 14A and was deemed to have been inserted with effect from 11/05/2001:- “Provided that nothing contained in this section shall empower the Assessing Officer either to reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise