JCIT(OSD), RANGE-10, NEW DELHI , C.R. BUILDING ITO vs. RURAL ELECTRIFICATION CORPORATION LTD., KASTURBA NAGAR

disallowance of Rs.5584,57,541/- under section 36(1)(vii) and\nsection 36(1) (viia) (c) of the Act i.e., deductions under both section is\nindependent on each other?\"\n4. Since the issue raised by the revenue and assessee relating to the issue of\ndeduction claimed u/s 36(1)(viii

REC LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT-10 (OSD), DELHI, NEW DELHI

disallowance of Rs.5584,57,541/- under section 36(1)(vii) and\nsection 36(1) (viia) (c) of the Act i.e., deductions under both section is\nindependent on each other?\"\n4. Since the issue raised by the revenue and assessee relating to the issue of\ndeduction claimed u/s 36(1)(viii

JCIT(OSD), RANGE-10, NEW DELHI , C.R. BUILDING ITO vs. RURAL ELECTRIFICATION CORPORATION LTD. , KASTURBA NAGAR

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in the AY 2020-21 and AY\n2021-22 are dismissed

disallowance of Rs.5584,57,541/- under section 36(1)(vii) and\nsection 36(1) (viia) (c) of the Act i.e., deductions under both section is\nindependent on each other?\"\n4. Since the issue raised by the revenue and assessee relating to the issue of\ndeduction claimed u/s 36(1)(viii

JCIT(OSD), RANGE-10, NEW DELHI , ITO C.R. BUILDING vs. RURAL ELECTRIFICATION CORPORATION LTD. , KASTURBA NAGAR

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in the AY 2020-21 and AY\n2021-22 are dismissed

disallowance of Rs.5584,57,541/- under section 36(1)(vii) and\nsection 36(1) (viia) (c) of the Act i.e., deductions under both section is\nindependent on each other?\"\n4. Since the issue raised by the revenue and assessee relating to the issue of\ndeduction claimed u/s 36(1)(viii

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

disallowance of Rs. 1,76,16,528/- under section 36(1)(viii) and disallowance of Rs. 9,69,602/- under

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

disallowance of Rs. 1,76,16,528/- under section 36(1)(viii) and disallowance of Rs. 9,69,602/- under

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

disallowance of Rs. 1,76,16,528/- under section 36(1)(viii) and disallowance of Rs. 9,69,602/- under

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

disallowance of Rs. 1,76,16,528/- under section 36(1)(viii) and disallowance of Rs. 9,69,602/- under

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S POWER FINANCE CORPORATION LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, all these appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

1)(viii) of the Income Tax Act. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming disallowance of Rs. 36,45,565/- under section

POWER FINANCE CORPORATION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all these appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

1)(viii) of the Income Tax Act. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming disallowance of Rs. 36,45,565/- under section

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. POWER FINANCE CORPORATION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all these appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

1)(viii) of the Income Tax Act. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming disallowance of Rs. 36,45,565/- under section

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. POWER FINANCE CORPORATION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all these appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

1)(viii) of the Income Tax Act. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming disallowance of Rs. 36,45,565/- under section

POWER FINANCE CORPORATION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all these appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

1)(viii) of the Income Tax Act. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming disallowance of Rs. 36,45,565/- under section

DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. POWER FINANCE CORPORATION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all these appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

1)(viii) of the Income Tax Act. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming disallowance of Rs. 36,45,565/- under section

M/S POWER FINANCE CORPORATION LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all these appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

1)(viii) of the Income Tax Act. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming disallowance of Rs. 36,45,565/- under section

DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. POWER FINANCE CORPORATION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all these appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

1)(viii) of the Income Tax Act. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming disallowance of Rs. 36,45,565/- under section

POWER FINANCE CORPORATION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all these appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

1)(viii) of the Income Tax Act. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming disallowance of Rs. 36,45,565/- under section

POWER FINANCE CORPORATION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI

In the result, all these appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

1)(viii) of the Income Tax Act. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming disallowance of Rs. 36,45,565/- under section