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

50,329/- on account of fees paid to JV company as reimbursement of expenses. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing the claim of Rs.8,91,153/- made u/s 14A. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred

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

50,329/- on account of fees paid to JV company as reimbursement of expenses. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing the claim of Rs.8,91,153/- made u/s 14A. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred

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

50,000 HUDCO-8.51% 45,46,438 NHPC-8.18% 54,13,927 PFC-8.18% 98,71,812 Total 15,11,45,290 Detailed working of disallowance under section

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

In the result, for assessment year 2007-08 the appeal of the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh, Judicialmember

section 14A of the Act allowable expenses for the year = (3509948/973248925)/672173271 = 2424142 3.3 The Assessing Officer did not accept the above working of the disallowance by the assessee due to two reasons. Firstly, the interest cost has not been taken into consideration while allocating the expenses towards exempted income. Secondly, the funds generating tax-free income

M/S RELIGARE FINVEST LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, for assessment year 2007-08 the appeal of the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh, Judicialmember

section 14A of the Act allowable expenses for the year = (3509948/973248925)/672173271 = 2424142 3.3 The Assessing Officer did not accept the above working of the disallowance by the assessee due to two reasons. Firstly, the interest cost has not been taken into consideration while allocating the expenses towards exempted income. Secondly, the funds generating tax-free income

ACIT,, NEW DELHI vs. M/S RELIGARE FINVEST LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, for assessment year 2007-08 the appeal of the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh, Judicialmember

section 14A of the Act allowable expenses for the year = (3509948/973248925)/672173271 = 2424142 3.3 The Assessing Officer did not accept the above working of the disallowance by the assessee due to two reasons. Firstly, the interest cost has not been taken into consideration while allocating the expenses towards exempted income. Secondly, the funds generating tax-free income

RELIGARE FINVEST LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIY, RANGE-21, NEW DELHI

In the result, for assessment year 2007-08 the appeal of the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh, Judicialmember

section 14A of the Act allowable expenses for the year = (3509948/973248925)/672173271 = 2424142 3.3 The Assessing Officer did not accept the above working of the disallowance by the assessee due to two reasons. Firstly, the interest cost has not been taken into consideration while allocating the expenses towards exempted income. Secondly, the funds generating tax-free income

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 14A r.w. Rule 8D. After reducing therefrom suo-moto disallowance of Rs.36,50,000/-, the Ld. AO disallowed Rs.1

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 14A r.w. Rule 8D. After reducing therefrom suo-moto disallowance of Rs.36,50,000/-, the Ld. AO disallowed Rs.1

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 14A r.w. Rule 8D. After reducing therefrom suo-moto disallowance of Rs.36,50,000/-, the Ld. AO disallowed Rs.1

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 14A r.w. Rule 8D. After reducing therefrom suo-moto disallowance of Rs.36,50,000/-, the Ld. AO disallowed Rs.1

INCOME TAX vs. LIMITED

The appeal is dismissed

Section 50(2) are attracted in the present case so as to tax short-term capital gain on transfer of block of assets?” 2008:DHC:2682-DB ITA No. 895 of 2007 Page 3 of 21 3. In order to deal with the issues raised in the appeal, it would be necessary for us to record certain undisputed facts

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI IV vs. EASTMAN INDUSTRIES LTD.

The appeal is dismissed

Section 50(2) are attracted in the present case so as to tax short-term capital gain on transfer of block of assets?” 2008:DHC:2682-DB ITA No. 895 of 2007 Page 3 of 21 3. In order to deal with the issues raised in the appeal, it would be necessary for us to record certain undisputed facts

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

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

disallowance of deduction under section 80-IC to the extent of Rs.2,05,97,466 on account of interest income earned by the eligible unit on loan given at subsidized rates to the employees and loan given for providing working capital loan to vendors. Re: Non-allowance of depreciation on iease-hold rights in land 21. That the assessing officer

TRIVENI TURBINE LTD,NOIDA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 5(3)(1), NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahay[Assessment Year: 2018-19]

Section 37(1), the AO disallowed the deduction of 210,50,000 claimed under Section 35(2AA) and added the amount

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

disallowance of Rs.29,50,00,000/- on account of commission paid to Managing Director, Shri Pawan Munjal under section 36(l)(ii) of the Act on the ground

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. OPUS PROJECTS LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

disallowance to extent of 50 % payment under Section 40 A(2)(a) of The Act . Under these circumstances, disallowance made

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S OPUS PROJECTS LTD.,, DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

disallowance to extent of 50 % payment under Section 40 A(2)(a) of The Act . Under these circumstances, disallowance made