TECHNOLOGIES LTD) vs. ACIT

Appeals are allowed

48,325 3. ½% of average investments [(refer Rule 8D(2)(iii)] 97,39,000 Total 1,63,87,325 Less: Suo motu disallowance by appellant/assessee 7,79,063 DISALLOWANCE 1,56,08,262 4.2. The appellant/assessee carried the order, passed by the AO, in appeal to the CIT(A). The CIT(A), vide order dated 30.07.2013, partly allowed the appeal

TECHNOLOGIES LTD) vs. ACIT

Appeals are allowed

48,325 3. ½% of average investments [(refer Rule 8D(2)(iii)] 97,39,000 Total 1,63,87,325 Less: Suo motu disallowance by appellant/assessee 7,79,063 DISALLOWANCE 1,56,08,262 4.2. The appellant/assessee carried the order, passed by the AO, in appeal to the CIT(A). The CIT(A), vide order dated 30.07.2013, partly allowed the appeal

UFLEX LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 27, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee for AY 2011-12 and subsequent

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

disallowance for the reason that income from sale of scrap generated during manufacturing cannot be said to have been derived from industrial activity as it does not flow directly from such activity. 28.1 On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) relying on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Sadhu Forging Ltd. (2011) 336 ITR 444 (Delhi

UFLEX LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 27, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee for AY 2011-12 and subsequent

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

disallowance for the reason that income from sale of scrap generated during manufacturing cannot be said to have been derived from industrial activity as it does not flow directly from such activity. 28.1 On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) relying on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Sadhu Forging Ltd. (2011) 336 ITR 444 (Delhi

UFLEX LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 27, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee for AY 2011-12 and subsequent

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

disallowance for the reason that income from sale of scrap generated during manufacturing cannot be said to have been derived from industrial activity as it does not flow directly from such activity. 28.1 On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) relying on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Sadhu Forging Ltd. (2011) 336 ITR 444 (Delhi

UFLEX LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 27, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee for AY 2011-12 and subsequent

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

disallowance for the reason that income from sale of scrap generated during manufacturing cannot be said to have been derived from industrial activity as it does not flow directly from such activity. 28.1 On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) relying on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Sadhu Forging Ltd. (2011) 336 ITR 444 (Delhi

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 27, NEW DELHI vs. UFLEX LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee for AY 2011-12 and subsequent

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

disallowance for the reason that income from sale of scrap generated during manufacturing cannot be said to have been derived from industrial activity as it does not flow directly from such activity. 28.1 On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) relying on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Sadhu Forging Ltd. (2011) 336 ITR 444 (Delhi

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 27, NEW DELHI vs. UFLEX LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee for AY 2011-12 and subsequent

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

disallowance for the reason that income from sale of scrap generated during manufacturing cannot be said to have been derived from industrial activity as it does not flow directly from such activity. 28.1 On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) relying on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Sadhu Forging Ltd. (2011) 336 ITR 444 (Delhi

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 27, NEW DELHI vs. UFLEX LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee for AY 2011-12 and subsequent

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

disallowance for the reason that income from sale of scrap generated during manufacturing cannot be said to have been derived from industrial activity as it does not flow directly from such activity. 28.1 On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) relying on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Sadhu Forging Ltd. (2011) 336 ITR 444 (Delhi

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 27, NEW DELHI vs. UFLEX LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee for AY 2011-12 and subsequent

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

disallowance for the reason that income from sale of scrap generated during manufacturing cannot be said to have been derived from industrial activity as it does not flow directly from such activity. 28.1 On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) relying on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Sadhu Forging Ltd. (2011) 336 ITR 444 (Delhi

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

disallowance under section 43B of the Act following the assessment Orders for the 2 | P a g e earlier assessment years despite admitting that in the earlier year(s) most of the issues have been decided in favour of the appellant. 3.2. That the Assessing Officer erred on facts and in law in holding that the deduction of liability

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

disallowance under section 43B of the Act following the assessment Orders for the 2 | P a g e earlier assessment years despite admitting that in the earlier year(s) most of the issues have been decided in favour of the appellant. 3.2. That the Assessing Officer erred on facts and in law in holding that the deduction of liability

MODI RUBBER LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 17(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, Ground no.2 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey- & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia-

disallowance under Section 14A. 3. Briefly stated, the assessee-company is engaged in manufacture, selling and trading of automotive tyres, tubes and flaps for the Assessment Year 2012-13 in question. The assessee filed return of I.T.A. No.6866/Del/2018 2 income at ₹12,62,27,390/- under Section 139(1) of the Act. The return filed by the assessee was subjected

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. 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

C & S ELECTRIC LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1, LTU, NEW DELHI

In the result, the revenue's appeal stands dismissed as above

Disallowance of Club expenses of Rs.1,59,005/- (Gr. No. 4).\n6. The assessee has claimed deductions under section 80IC and 10AA of\nthe Act for its units situated in Uttarakhand and NOIDA respectively. The AO,\nquestioning the pricing of goods/material transferred to & from exempted to\nnon-exempted units & vice-versa and allocating the Head Office expenses of\nRs.4

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III vs. ARCOTECH LTD (FORMERLY SKS LTD.)

The appeal is disposed of

disallowance under Section 43B of Rs.4,48,19,194/- and Rs.17,325/- on account of finance charges and PF/ESI dues

ACIT, CIRCLE-10(1), NEW DELHI vs. IRCON INTERNATIONAL LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue are dismissed as above

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

section 80IA(13) does not prevent developers in claiming deduction u/s 80IA(4). Similarly showing the receipts as work receipts in the books of accounts of the appellant alone cannot determine the character of the appellant which in our opinion was that of development. The argument of revenue that infrastructure facility should be owned by the appellant is also misplaced