CAIRN ENERGY HYDROCARBON LTD. ,GURGAON vs. DCIT, INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6357/Del/2013: Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., C/O. Cairn India Ltd., 3Rd & 4Th Circle-3(2), International Taxation, Floor, Vipul Plaza, Suncity, Sector- New Delhi 54, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc3279J

32(l)(iia) of the Act is in the nature of an incentive and cannot, therefore, be treated at par with ‘normal depreciation’. 7. The revenue has raised the following grounds in ITA No. 5989/Del/2018 for Assessment Year 2014-15:- “1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing

CAIRN ENERGY HYDROCARBON LTD. ,GURGAON vs. DCIT, INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6357/Del/2013: Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., C/O. Cairn India Ltd., 3Rd & 4Th Circle-3(2), International Taxation, Floor, Vipul Plaza, Suncity, Sector- New Delhi 54, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc3279J

32(l)(iia) of the Act is in the nature of an incentive and cannot, therefore, be treated at par with ‘normal depreciation’. 7. The revenue has raised the following grounds in ITA No. 5989/Del/2018 for Assessment Year 2014-15:- “1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing

DCIT, INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, GURGAON vs. CAIRN ENERGY HYDROCARBON LTD. , GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6357/Del/2013: Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., C/O. Cairn India Ltd., 3Rd & 4Th Circle-3(2), International Taxation, Floor, Vipul Plaza, Suncity, Sector- New Delhi 54, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc3279J

32(l)(iia) of the Act is in the nature of an incentive and cannot, therefore, be treated at par with ‘normal depreciation’. 7. The revenue has raised the following grounds in ITA No. 5989/Del/2018 for Assessment Year 2014-15:- “1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing

DDIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. CAIRN ENERGY HYDROCARBONS LTD., GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6357/Del/2013: Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., C/O. Cairn India Ltd., 3Rd & 4Th Circle-3(2), International Taxation, Floor, Vipul Plaza, Suncity, Sector- New Delhi 54, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc3279J

32(l)(iia) of the Act is in the nature of an incentive and cannot, therefore, be treated at par with ‘normal depreciation’. 7. The revenue has raised the following grounds in ITA No. 5989/Del/2018 for Assessment Year 2014-15:- “1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing

DCIT, INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, GURGAON vs. CAIRN ENERGY HYDROCARBON LTD. , GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6357/Del/2013: Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., C/O. Cairn India Ltd., 3Rd & 4Th Circle-3(2), International Taxation, Floor, Vipul Plaza, Suncity, Sector- New Delhi 54, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc3279J

32(l)(iia) of the Act is in the nature of an incentive and cannot, therefore, be treated at par with ‘normal depreciation’. 7. The revenue has raised the following grounds in ITA No. 5989/Del/2018 for Assessment Year 2014-15:- “1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing

CAIRN ENERGY HYDROCARBONS LTD.,GURGAON vs. DDIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6357/Del/2013: Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., C/O. Cairn India Ltd., 3Rd & 4Th Circle-3(2), International Taxation, Floor, Vipul Plaza, Suncity, Sector- New Delhi 54, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc3279J

32(l)(iia) of the Act is in the nature of an incentive and cannot, therefore, be treated at par with ‘normal depreciation’. 7. The revenue has raised the following grounds in ITA No. 5989/Del/2018 for Assessment Year 2014-15:- “1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing

DALMIA CEMENT (BHARAT) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 26, NEW DELHI

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2013-14] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.63/Chny/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.3157/Chny2017) [Assessment Year: 2013-14] M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. The Assistant Commissioner Of Dalmiapuram, Income Tax, Circle-1, Tamilnadu-621651 Vs Williams Road, Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan- Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2014-15] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue

property. In view of the difference rulings and question of law involved, the appeal is filed. 3) Deduction in respect of provision for bad and doubtful debts: The learned Commissioner (A) erred in deleting the addition of provision for bad doubtful debts. As the deduction u/s.37(1)(vii) is allowable in respect of any bad debt which is written

DALMIA CEMENT (BHARAT) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 26, NEW DELHI

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2013-14] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.63/Chny/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.3157/Chny2017) [Assessment Year: 2013-14] M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. The Assistant Commissioner Of Dalmiapuram, Income Tax, Circle-1, Tamilnadu-621651 Vs Williams Road, Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan- Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2014-15] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue

property. In view of the difference rulings and question of law involved, the appeal is filed. 3) Deduction in respect of provision for bad and doubtful debts: The learned Commissioner (A) erred in deleting the addition of provision for bad doubtful debts. As the deduction u/s.37(1)(vii) is allowable in respect of any bad debt which is written

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 4(2), DELHI, I.P.ESTATE vs. BUREAU VERITAS CONSUMER PRODUCTS SERVICES(INDIA) PVT. LTD., LAJPAT NAGAR

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2013-14] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.63/Chny/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.3157/Chny2017) [Assessment Year: 2013-14] M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. The Assistant Commissioner Of Dalmiapuram, Income Tax, Circle-1, Tamilnadu-621651 Vs Williams Road, Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan- Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2014-15] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue

property. In view of the difference rulings and question of law involved, the appeal is filed. 3) Deduction in respect of provision for bad and doubtful debts: The learned Commissioner (A) erred in deleting the addition of provision for bad doubtful debts. As the deduction u/s.37(1)(vii) is allowable in respect of any bad debt which is written

INDIAN NATIONAL CONG. (I) AICC vs. C.I.T.- XI

house property’. 29. As regards the expenditure towards salaries and other benefits to its employees, postage and telegrams, travelling, rent and taxes, water and 2016:DHC:2463-DB ITA Nos. 145/2001 & 180/2001 Page 17 of 71 electricity, printing and stationery etc. in the sum of Rs.1,45,98,768.16, the AO allowed the entire expenditure

INDUS TOWERS LTD.,GURUGRAM, HARYANA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 12(1), NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

iia) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB\nof the Act. Consequentially, the Learned AO made an upward adjustment\nof Rs 1112.30 crores on account of this transaction while computing book\nprofit under section 115JB of the Act. This was reduced to Rs 1030.95\ncrores by the Learned CITA rectifying the factual errors committed by the\nLearned AO.\n10.2 We have

PUBLIC POLITICAL PARTY,DELHI vs. DCIT, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

32,22,3 270 ,239 914 ,523 886 ,670 ,502 ,791 ,840 6,636 P a g e | 14 8 appeals Public Political Party (AY: 2015-16 to2017-18, 2021-22 & 2022-23) 7. These facts in remand report were countered by the assessee by submitting comments/rejoinder copy of which is made available at page 38 - 48 of the paper

PUBLIC POLITICAL PARTY,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 31, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

32,22,3 270 ,239 914 ,523 886 ,670 ,502 ,791 ,840 6,636 P a g e | 14 8 appeals Public Political Party (AY: 2015-16 to2017-18, 2021-22 & 2022-23) 7. These facts in remand report were countered by the assessee by submitting comments/rejoinder copy of which is made available at page 38 - 48 of the paper

PUBLIC POLITICAL PARTY,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 31, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

32,22,3 270 ,239 914 ,523 886 ,670 ,502 ,791 ,840 6,636 P a g e | 14 8 appeals Public Political Party (AY: 2015-16 to2017-18, 2021-22 & 2022-23) 7. These facts in remand report were countered by the assessee by submitting comments/rejoinder copy of which is made available at page 38 - 48 of the paper

PUBLIC POLITICAL PARTY,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 31, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

32,22,3 270 ,239 914 ,523 886 ,670 ,502 ,791 ,840 6,636 P a g e | 14 8 appeals Public Political Party (AY: 2015-16 to2017-18, 2021-22 & 2022-23) 7. These facts in remand report were countered by the assessee by submitting comments/rejoinder copy of which is made available at page 38 - 48 of the paper

PUBLIC POLITICAL PARTY,DELHI vs. DCIT, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

32,22,3 270 ,239 914 ,523 886 ,670 ,502 ,791 ,840 6,636 P a g e | 14 8 appeals Public Political Party (AY: 2015-16 to2017-18, 2021-22 & 2022-23) 7. These facts in remand report were countered by the assessee by submitting comments/rejoinder copy of which is made available at page 38 - 48 of the paper

PUBLIC POLITICAL PARTY,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-31, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

32,22,3 270 ,239 914 ,523 886 ,670 ,502 ,791 ,840 6,636 P a g e | 14 8 appeals Public Political Party (AY: 2015-16 to2017-18, 2021-22 & 2022-23) 7. These facts in remand report were countered by the assessee by submitting comments/rejoinder copy of which is made available at page 38 - 48 of the paper

PUBLIC POLITICAL PARTY,DELHI vs. DCIT, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

32,22,3 270 ,239 914 ,523 886 ,670 ,502 ,791 ,840 6,636 P a g e | 14 8 appeals Public Political Party (AY: 2015-16 to2017-18, 2021-22 & 2022-23) 7. These facts in remand report were countered by the assessee by submitting comments/rejoinder copy of which is made available at page 38 - 48 of the paper