DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

50,000 20,00,84,5 0-21 25 43 0 68 18 + 24 9,15,19,864 (28.68%) + 3,85,454 + 1.47,75,588 From the above table it can be seen that in a case of the appellant if the disallowances are made on account of alleged Bogus expenses and expenses incurred in cash above prescribed limit

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTIONS,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-11, NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

50,000 20,00,84,5 0-21 25 43 0 68 18 + 24 9,15,19,864 (28.68%) + 3,85,454 + 1.47,75,588 From the above table it can be seen that in a case of the appellant if the disallowances are made on account of alleged Bogus expenses and expenses incurred in cash above prescribed limit

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION,GAUTAM BUDH NAGER vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 , NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

50,000 20,00,84,5 0-21 25 43 0 68 18 + 24 9,15,19,864 (28.68%) + 3,85,454 + 1.47,75,588 From the above table it can be seen that in a case of the appellant if the disallowances are made on account of alleged Bogus expenses and expenses incurred in cash above prescribed limit

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

50,000 20,00,84,5 0-21 25 43 0 68 18 + 24 9,15,19,864 (28.68%) + 3,85,454 + 1.47,75,588 From the above table it can be seen that in a case of the appellant if the disallowances are made on account of alleged Bogus expenses and expenses incurred in cash above prescribed limit

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTIONS ,GAUTAM BUDH NAGER vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

50,000 20,00,84,5 0-21 25 43 0 68 18 + 24 9,15,19,864 (28.68%) + 3,85,454 + 1.47,75,588 From the above table it can be seen that in a case of the appellant if the disallowances are made on account of alleged Bogus expenses and expenses incurred in cash above prescribed limit

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTIONS,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-11, NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

50,000 20,00,84,5 0-21 25 43 0 68 18 + 24 9,15,19,864 (28.68%) + 3,85,454 + 1.47,75,588 From the above table it can be seen that in a case of the appellant if the disallowances are made on account of alleged Bogus expenses and expenses incurred in cash above prescribed limit

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

50,000 20,00,84,5 0-21 25 43 0 68 18 + 24 9,15,19,864 (28.68%) + 3,85,454 + 1.47,75,588 From the above table it can be seen that in a case of the appellant if the disallowances are made on account of alleged Bogus expenses and expenses incurred in cash above prescribed limit

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTIONS,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-11, NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

50,000 20,00,84,5 0-21 25 43 0 68 18 + 24 9,15,19,864 (28.68%) + 3,85,454 + 1.47,75,588 From the above table it can be seen that in a case of the appellant if the disallowances are made on account of alleged Bogus expenses and expenses incurred in cash above prescribed limit

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTONS ,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ACIT CENTAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

50,000 20,00,84,5 0-21 25 43 0 68 18 + 24 9,15,19,864 (28.68%) + 3,85,454 + 1.47,75,588 From the above table it can be seen that in a case of the appellant if the disallowances are made on account of alleged Bogus expenses and expenses incurred in cash above prescribed limit

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

50,000 20,00,84,5 0-21 25 43 0 68 18 + 24 9,15,19,864 (28.68%) + 3,85,454 + 1.47,75,588 From the above table it can be seen that in a case of the appellant if the disallowances are made on account of alleged Bogus expenses and expenses incurred in cash above prescribed limit

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

50,000 20,00,84,5 0-21 25 43 0 68 18 + 24 9,15,19,864 (28.68%) + 3,85,454 + 1.47,75,588 From the above table it can be seen that in a case of the appellant if the disallowances are made on account of alleged Bogus expenses and expenses incurred in cash above prescribed limit

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

50,000 20,00,84,5 0-21 25 43 0 68 18 + 24 9,15,19,864 (28.68%) + 3,85,454 + 1.47,75,588 From the above table it can be seen that in a case of the appellant if the disallowances are made on account of alleged Bogus expenses and expenses incurred in cash above prescribed limit

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -7 vs. SUMITOMO CORPORATION INDIA (P) LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

disallowance of deduction claimed under section 10B of the Act.  Said final assessment order was accompanied by notice of demand issued under section 156 and notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act for initiating penalty proceedings. provided to the Petitioner to file objections before the DRP, even though the Respondent was mandated

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -6 vs. MICROSOFT INDIA ( R & D) PVT. LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

disallowance of deduction claimed under section 10B of the Act.  Said final assessment order was accompanied by notice of demand issued under section 156 and notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act for initiating penalty proceedings. provided to the Petitioner to file objections before the DRP, even though the Respondent was mandated

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -6 vs. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

disallowance of deduction claimed under section 10B of the Act.  Said final assessment order was accompanied by notice of demand issued under section 156 and notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act for initiating penalty proceedings. provided to the Petitioner to file objections before the DRP, even though the Respondent was mandated

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, 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