DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAHARA INDIA MASS COMMUNICATION LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

6. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. From the records we observed that the assessee had produced a movie, for the purpose of advertising and promotion, it had utilized its sister concern to do the same. We observed that the AO had observed from the records, the assessee had merely accounted thru the journal entry instead

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

6,70,864 on account of reimbursement of actual expenses towards conveyance, air fare, out of pocket expenses, taxi charges, lodging etc. incurred and claimed by various persons on cost to cost basis. Details of expenses reimbursed alongwith copies of sample vouchers alongwith supporting evidencing are enclosed at pages 209-288 of PB on Merits. It is submitted that

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MODIPON LIMITED, UTTAR PRADESH

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 1987-88 Income-Tax Officer, Vs Modipon Ltd Ward 17(1), Hapur Road, Nagar Palika, New Delhi. Modinagar, Uttar Pradesh Pan: Aaacm2069E Revenue By Sh. Ravi Kant Gupta, Sr. Dr Assessee By Sh. Santosh Agarwal, Advocate Date Of Hearing 13.08.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 13.08.2018 Order Per K. Narasimha Chary, J.M. Revenue Preferred This Appeal Challenging The Order Dated 14/11/2014 In Appeal No. 0905/2014-15 & 0291/2014-15 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Viii, New Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, M/S. Modipon Ltd Is A Public Ltd Company & Is Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing & Selling

6. Revenue is, therefore, in appeal before us challenging the impugned order stating that Ld. CIT(A) committed an error by placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in M/s. Vikrant Tyres Ltd (supra), since in the said case assessee had paid the initial demand under section 143(3) of the Act whereas in the instant

HERO MOTO CORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. NEAC, DELHI

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

6,500.72 crores at the beginning of the relevant previous year and had also generated substantial surplus/interest free funds of Rs. 3,913.79 crores during the year, against which additional investments made during the year was of Rs. 2,271.34 crores only. In such circumstances, it is to be presumed that only interest free funds have been utilized for making

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

section 36(1)(viii). This addition may kindly be deleted. 6. That the disallowances made/upheld and the observations made are unjust, unlawful and based on mere surmises and conjectures. additions/disallowances made cannot be justified by any material on record and in any case they are excessive. 7. That the explanation given and the evidence produced, material placed and available

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

section 36(1)(viii). This addition may kindly be deleted. 6. That the disallowances made/upheld and the observations made are unjust, unlawful and based on mere surmises and conjectures. additions/disallowances made cannot be justified by any material on record and in any case they are excessive. 7. That the explanation given and the evidence produced, material placed and available

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

section 36(1)(viii). This addition may kindly be deleted. 6. That the disallowances made/upheld and the observations made are unjust, unlawful and based on mere surmises and conjectures. additions/disallowances made cannot be justified by any material on record and in any case they are excessive. 7. That the explanation given and the evidence produced, material placed and available

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

section 36(1)(viii). This addition may kindly be deleted. 6. That the disallowances made/upheld and the observations made are unjust, unlawful and based on mere surmises and conjectures. additions/disallowances made cannot be justified by any material on record and in any case they are excessive. 7. That the explanation given and the evidence produced, material placed and available

M/S. BAIN & COMPANY INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ITO (TDS) (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NEW DELHI

6 research charges, etc., the AO held that the same are in the nature of consultancy payments and, hence, taxes are required to be withheld on the same. In connection with other expenses under the head ‘Client related expenses’, travel expenses, hotel cost, etc., the AO held that since these expenses are closely linked with the obligation of the assessee

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

6,159.90 lacs, the amount of Rs. 1,034.90 was made on the basis of actual supplies made upto the end of the year as per price amendments actually issued as on 31.03.2010 lacs, detailed working whereof is enclosed in paper book and therefore, such amount cannot in any case be disallowed on the ground of the same being contingent

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

KAPLAN INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.S. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2007-08 Kaplan India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, Plot No. 15, Circle-5(1), Okhla Industrial Estate-Iii, New Delhi. New Delhi-110020 (Pan: Aaics9919F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee : S/Shri Nageswar Rao, Sandeep S. Karhail, Adv. Shri Parth, Adv. Department By: Shri Sandeep Kumar Mishra, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing: 23.01.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.03.2019

disallowance of expenditure towards Group medical insurance, the Ld. Sr. DR contented that the information available does not clearly show that ICCICI Lombard scheme is approved under section 36 (1) (ib) of the Act. 5.0 We have considered the rival contentions and have also perused the orders of the TPO and the Ld. CIT (A). In the context

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

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

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri K.N. Charry

disallowed under section 14A of the Act, where the assessee had sufficient surplus funds and there was no finding by the assessing officer of any direct nexus of borrowed funds with investments: ITA No.-6021/Del/2012 6.11. Lastly it is contended on behalf of the assessee that the disallowance computed under section 14A of the Act is incorrect since while

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)

disallowance of Rs. 3,96,91,355/- made by the Assessing Officer but also enhanced the income of the assessee by Rs.29,56,344/- without issuing the notice of enhancement u/s 251 of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that the aforesaid issue now stands covered in favour of the assessee by the order of the Tribunal in asseesse

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 made in that year was deleted on the ground that since in the first place, the Hero Motocorp Ltd. vs. ACIT parties were not related to the assessee company in terms of section 40A (2), disallowance on ground of excessive purchase price could not have been made under that section. Further, the Tribunal held that the transactions were entered

P vs. MULTIPLEX (INDIA) LTD.,MEERUTVS.ACIT, CIRCLE- 2, MEERUT

The appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

220/- on 30.09.2008. The case was selected for scrutiny and that assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act 2 on 29.12.2010 accepting the income declared in the ITR. Later on, the said assessment was revised, vide order dated 03.02.2012 passed under section 154/143(3) of the Act, at enhanced income of Rs.1

JAYPEE INFRA VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ACIT CIRCLE 13(1) , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed as above

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

220/-. The Assessing Officer (AO) worked out the disallowance of Rs.12,75,84,505/- under section 14A of the Act r.w.s. Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules. However, he restricted the disallowance under section 14A of the Act to the extent of expenses of Rs.6,91,49,764/- claimed in the Profit & Loss Account of the assessee. Since

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DEVINE INFRACON PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: M Balaganesh, Accontant Member & Ms Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2010-11 The Assistant Vs. M/S Divine Infracon Commissioner Of Income Private Limited, Plot Tax, Central Circle-09, No. 4, Sector-13, Jhandewalan, New Delhi, Dwarka City Centre, Room No.357, Ara Centre, Dwarka, New Delhi- E-2, Jhandewalan 110075 Extension, New Delhi Pan :Aaccd4476A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr, Advocate Department By Shri T James Singson, Cit, Dr

6) of the Act, moreover, the fact the investor company was subsequently purchased by the various members of Jagat Group is an irrelevant and extraneous consideration as it is a separate transaction altogether and has nothing to do with the fact that share capital received by the appellant company which was duly explained and documentary evidences were tendered to explain