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

28. Now we take up the appeals of the Revenue. 29. Ground No. (a) and Ground No. 1 in AY 2013-14 and 2014-15 relate to disallowance of depreciation of Rs. 57,05,766/- and Rs. 11,41,153/- respectively . In making the impugned disallowances the Ld. AO followed the order of AY 2011-12 and 2012-13 wherein

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

28. Now we take up the appeals of the Revenue. 29. Ground No. (a) and Ground No. 1 in AY 2013-14 and 2014-15 relate to disallowance of depreciation of Rs. 57,05,766/- and Rs. 11,41,153/- respectively . In making the impugned disallowances the Ld. AO followed the order of AY 2011-12 and 2012-13 wherein

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

28. Now we take up the appeals of the Revenue. 29. Ground No. (a) and Ground No. 1 in AY 2013-14 and 2014-15 relate to disallowance of depreciation of Rs. 57,05,766/- and Rs. 11,41,153/- respectively . In making the impugned disallowances the Ld. AO followed the order of AY 2011-12 and 2012-13 wherein

DCIT, CIRCLE- 21(1), NEW DELHI vs. RELIGARE ENTERPRISES LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed and cross-objection

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia:Assessment Year: 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Religare Enterprises Income-Tax, Circle-21(1), Ltd., 2Nd Floor, Rajlok New Delhi Building, 24-Nehru Place, New Delhi-110019 Pan :Aaacv5888N (Appellant) (Respondent)

28,73,862 on account of interest on non-convertible debentures (NCDs). Whereas, it has only considered a part of such interest cost for the purpose of disallowance under Section

RELIGARE FINVEST LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 21(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, -Appeal in ITA No

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

sections 36(2) /36(l)(vii)/ 28 of the Act.” 9 ITA Nos. 4796/Del/2017 & ors. M/s Religare Finvest Ltd. Vs. DCIT 2.6. I.T.A. No. 133/DEL/2018 (A.Y. 2014-15) (Department) “ On the facts and under the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting the disallowance

ACIT, CIRCLE- 21(1), NEW DELHI vs. RELIGARE FINVEST LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, -Appeal in ITA No

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

sections 36(2) /36(l)(vii)/ 28 of the Act.” 9 ITA Nos. 4796/Del/2017 & ors. M/s Religare Finvest Ltd. Vs. DCIT 2.6. I.T.A. No. 133/DEL/2018 (A.Y. 2014-15) (Department) “ On the facts and under the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting the disallowance

RELIGARE FINVEST LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 21(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, -Appeal in ITA No

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

sections 36(2) /36(l)(vii)/ 28 of the Act.” 9 ITA Nos. 4796/Del/2017 & ors. M/s Religare Finvest Ltd. Vs. DCIT 2.6. I.T.A. No. 133/DEL/2018 (A.Y. 2014-15) (Department) “ On the facts and under the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting the disallowance

DCIT, CIRCLE- 21(1), NEW DELHI vs. RELIGARE FINVEST LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, -Appeal in ITA No

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

sections 36(2) /36(l)(vii)/ 28 of the Act.” 9 ITA Nos. 4796/Del/2017 & ors. M/s Religare Finvest Ltd. Vs. DCIT 2.6. I.T.A. No. 133/DEL/2018 (A.Y. 2014-15) (Department) “ On the facts and under the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting the disallowance

RELIGARE FINVEST LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 21(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, -Appeal in ITA No

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

sections 36(2) /36(l)(vii)/ 28 of the Act.” 9 ITA Nos. 4796/Del/2017 & ors. M/s Religare Finvest Ltd. Vs. DCIT 2.6. I.T.A. No. 133/DEL/2018 (A.Y. 2014-15) (Department) “ On the facts and under the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting the disallowance

ACIT (OSD), CIRCLE- 21(1), NEW DELHI vs. RELIGARE FINVEST LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, -Appeal in ITA No

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

sections 36(2) /36(l)(vii)/ 28 of the Act.” 9 ITA Nos. 4796/Del/2017 & ors. M/s Religare Finvest Ltd. Vs. DCIT 2.6. I.T.A. No. 133/DEL/2018 (A.Y. 2014-15) (Department) “ On the facts and under the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting the disallowance

RELIGARE FINVEST LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 21(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, -Appeal in ITA No

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

sections 36(2) /36(l)(vii)/ 28 of the Act.” 9 ITA Nos. 4796/Del/2017 & ors. M/s Religare Finvest Ltd. Vs. DCIT 2.6. I.T.A. No. 133/DEL/2018 (A.Y. 2014-15) (Department) “ On the facts and under the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting the disallowance

HERO MOTOCORP LTD (AS SUCCESSOR OF HERO INVESTMENT P.LTD),NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 11(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2011-12

disallowance under section 14A- Rs.1,01,82,707. The said assessed total income was subsequently rectified to Rs.6,02,96,513 vide order dated 08.04.2015 passed under section 154/ 143(3) of the Act. The aforesaid assessment order was challenged in further appeal before the CIT(A)-Ludhiana, which was disposed off vide order dated 30.10.2018, in favor

TECHNOLOGIES LTD) vs. ACIT

Appeals are allowed

Section 143(3) of the Act. An order to that effect was passed on 30.12.2010, wherein the appellant/assessee‟s taxable income was assessed at Rs. 36,28,88,570/-. The assessing officer [in short “AO”] while passing the assessment order, inter alia, made the following disallowances

TECHNOLOGIES LTD) vs. ACIT

Appeals are allowed

Section 143(3) of the Act. An order to that effect was passed on 30.12.2010, wherein the appellant/assessee‟s taxable income was assessed at Rs. 36,28,88,570/-. The assessing officer [in short “AO”] while passing the assessment order, inter alia, made the following disallowances

TECHNOLOGIES LTD) vs. ACIT

Appeals are allowed

Section 143(3) of the Act. An order to that effect was passed on 30.12.2010, wherein the appellant/assessee‟s taxable income was assessed at Rs. 36,28,88,570/-. The assessing officer [in short “AO”] while passing the assessment order, inter alia, made the following disallowances

M/S EICHER GOODEARTH LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

disallowance under Section 14A cannot stand.” 28. It was contended that unless and until there was actual expenditure for earning

M/S EICHER GOODEARTH LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

disallowance under Section 14A cannot stand.” 28. It was contended that unless and until there was actual expenditure for earning

M/S EICHER GOODEARTH LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

disallowance under Section 14A cannot stand.” 28. It was contended that unless and until there was actual expenditure for earning