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 234B and 234C of the Act. This is consequential. 23. Ground No. 4 in AY 2014-15 relates to disallowance

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 234B and 234C of the Act. This is consequential. 23. Ground No. 4 in AY 2014-15 relates to disallowance

M/S. ASAHI INDIA GLASS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2007-08 Asahi India Glass Limited, Dcit, Circle- 2(1), 38, Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi. Vs. Phase- Iii, New Delhi.

234B in respect of disallowance on account of provision for bad and doubtful debts and disallowance on account of deferred tax liability under MAT provisions which has been reproduced by the ld. CIT(A) at page 2 of the order which reads as under :- “6. That the Ld. AO erred in charging interest under section

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ASAHI INDIA GLASS LIMITED, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2007-08 Asahi India Glass Limited, Dcit, Circle- 2(1), 38, Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi. Vs. Phase- Iii, New Delhi.

234B in respect of disallowance on account of provision for bad and doubtful debts and disallowance on account of deferred tax liability under MAT provisions which has been reproduced by the ld. CIT(A) at page 2 of the order which reads as under :- “6. That the Ld. AO erred in charging interest under section

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION vs. GE PACKAGED POWER INC

disallow such claim for deduction. Similarly, vide Finance Act, 2008, w.e.f. 1.4.2008 sub-section (6) has been inserted in Section 195 which requires the payer to furnish information relating to payment of any sum in such form and manner as may be prescribed by the Board. This provision is brought into force only from 1.4.2008. It will not apply

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

234B of the Act by first adjusting the interest computed under that section on the basis of the assessed income against the self assessment tax paid by the appellant. The appellant prays leave to add, amend, alter, delete or forego any of the grounds either before or during the course of hearing.” 3. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee raised

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

234B of the Act by first adjusting the interest computed under that section on the basis of the assessed income against the self assessment tax paid by the appellant. The appellant prays leave to add, amend, alter, delete or forego any of the grounds either before or during the course of hearing.” 3. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee raised

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

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

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

section 153 A of The Act. Dharampal Satyapal Ltd Vs, DCIT ITA No. 3738, 3739/Del/2016 (A) & ITA No. 3882 & 3883/Del/2016(R) Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2011-12 13(i). That Ld. CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in sustaining disallowance of purchase of sandalwood oil to extent of Rs 54,94,24,290/- holding same to be bogus

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. 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 297 of the Companies Act, 1956. (iii) That adjustment of royalty and consequential claim of deduction u/s 80IB/80IC is illegal, arbitrary and based on conjectures and surmises. 14(i). That on facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Assessing officer was not justified in making disallowance to the extent of Rs. 50,59,20,379/- being claim

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

disallowance under section 40(a)(i) of the Act was warranted as the\nsaid provisions were not applicable in view of the provisions of Article 24 of\nthe Treaty.\n11. That the AO has erred in law, on facts and in the circumstances of the\ncase in allowing TDS credit of Rs.19,65,40,178/- only against\nRs.20

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SOUL SPACE PROJECTS LTD., DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 193/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 1849/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Acit, Vs Soul Space Projects Ltd., Central Circle-15, E-23/B-1, Extn. Mcie, Mathura New Delhi-110055 Road, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajcs7736F Co No. 271/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Co No. 284/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Soul Space Projects Ltd., Vs Acit, E-23/B-1, Extn. Mcie, Mathura Central Circle-15, Road, New Delhi-110044 New Delhi-110055 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajcs7736F

Disallowance under section 14A/ r.8D That the CIT(A) erred on the facts and in law in upholding addition of Rs.2,93,635/-under provision of section 14A/r.8D of the Act. Re: Interest under section 234A/B of the Act 8. That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in charging/ computing interest under sections 234A & 234B

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SOUL SPACE PROJECTS LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 193/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 1849/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Acit, Vs Soul Space Projects Ltd., Central Circle-15, E-23/B-1, Extn. Mcie, Mathura New Delhi-110055 Road, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajcs7736F Co No. 271/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Co No. 284/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Soul Space Projects Ltd., Vs Acit, E-23/B-1, Extn. Mcie, Mathura Central Circle-15, Road, New Delhi-110044 New Delhi-110055 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajcs7736F

Disallowance under section 14A/ r.8D That the CIT(A) erred on the facts and in law in upholding addition of Rs.2,93,635/-under provision of section 14A/r.8D of the Act. Re: Interest under section 234A/B of the Act 8. That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in charging/ computing interest under sections 234A & 234B

JINDAL STAINLESS LTD.,HISAR vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, ground number 2 of the appeal of the learned AO for 2007 – 08 is dismissed

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

234B and Section 234C of the Act‖. Facts for AY 2007-08 6. First, we take up the appeals for A.Y. 2007 – 08, the assessee company filed its return of income [ROI] on 27/10/2007 declaring total income of ₹ 2610690840/- . This return was revised on 20/3/2008 declaring that income of ₹ 2630499040/–. During the year, assessee has entered into four international transactions

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S JSL LTD.,, HISAR

Accordingly, ground number 2 of the appeal of the learned AO for 2007 – 08 is dismissed

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

234B and Section 234C of the Act‖. Facts for AY 2007-08 6. First, we take up the appeals for A.Y. 2007 – 08, the assessee company filed its return of income [ROI] on 27/10/2007 declaring total income of ₹ 2610690840/- . This return was revised on 20/3/2008 declaring that income of ₹ 2630499040/–. During the year, assessee has entered into four international transactions

AMADEUS IT GROUP SA,SPAIN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1) INT.TAXATION, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2020-21

disallowing the aforesaid expenses by invoking provisions of section 40(a)(i) of the Act. 13.4 That the DRP/ assessing officer erred on facts and in law in holding that part of the allocated expenses has already been included in the expenses incurred in India resulting in duplication of deduction. 13.5 That the DRP/ assessing officer erred on facts