PRAGATI POWER CORPORATION LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 20(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

penalty, in case of failure by the DISCOMS to pay its dues within the period as specified by DERC. When the principal amount of bills towards sale of electricity itself is due then there is no basis for making out a case that LPSC payable by the customers would be collectible with certainty. J) the other CPSUs such as NTPC

M/S. NTPC LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 3590/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Ita No.3194 /Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Dcit, Vs Ntpc Limited, Circle-18(2), Ntpc Bhawan, Scope Complex, New Delhi-110002 7, Institutional Area, Lodi Road, New Delhi-110003 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacn0255D

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is bad, both in the eyes of law and on facts. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law in upholding the levy of penalty on account of the addition made by the AO of the amortization of premium paid

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NTPC LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 3590/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Ita No.3194 /Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Dcit, Vs Ntpc Limited, Circle-18(2), Ntpc Bhawan, Scope Complex, New Delhi-110002 7, Institutional Area, Lodi Road, New Delhi-110003 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacn0255D

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is bad, both in the eyes of law and on facts. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law in upholding the levy of penalty on account of the addition made by the AO of the amortization of premium paid

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NTPC LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 3590/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Ita No.3194 /Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Dcit, Vs Ntpc Limited, Circle-18(2), Ntpc Bhawan, Scope Complex, New Delhi-110002 7, Institutional Area, Lodi Road, New Delhi-110003 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacn0255D

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is bad, both in the eyes of law and on facts. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law in upholding the levy of penalty on account of the addition made by the AO of the amortization of premium paid

SRF LIMITED,DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 1, LTU, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2015-16] Srf Limited, Vs Acit, The Galleria, Dlf Mayur Vihar, Circle-1, Ltu, Unit No.236 & 237, Second Floor, New Delhi. Mayur Place, Noida Link Road, Mayur Vihar, Phase-I Extn., Delhi-110091. Pan-Aaacs0206P Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Pradeep Dinodia, Ca, Shri R.K.Kapoor, Adv. & Shri Harish Dhamija, Adv. Respondent By Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 26.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 20.11.2023 Order

penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act mechanically and without recording any satisfaction for its initiation. 9. That the Ld. A.O has erred in law in charging interest u/s 234C and 234D of the Act on wholly illegal and untenable grounds.  The above grounds are without prejudice to each other.  The Appellant craves leave to alter, amend

SRF LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASSISTANT / DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 10(1), NEW DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

iia) and 32AC of the Act respectively in respect of Capital expenditure of which weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) of the Act was disallowed. 55.0 The Hon’ble ITAT may be pleased to grant the weighted deduction amounting to Rs. 1,64,72,14,000/- u/s 35(2AB) of the Act. X. Disallowance of Deduction u/s

SRF LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-10(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

iia) and 32AC of the Act respectively in respect of Capital expenditure of which weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) of the Act was disallowed. 55.0 The Hon’ble ITAT may be pleased to grant the weighted deduction amounting to Rs. 1,64,72,14,000/- u/s 35(2AB) of the Act. X. Disallowance of Deduction u/s

SRF LIMITED ,DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-10(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

iia) and 32AC of the Act respectively in respect of Capital expenditure of which weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) of the Act was disallowed. 55.0 The Hon’ble ITAT may be pleased to grant the weighted deduction amounting to Rs. 1,64,72,14,000/- u/s 35(2AB) of the Act. X. Disallowance of Deduction u/s

SONY INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. NATIOANAL E- ASSESMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri N.K. Billaiya

iia); or (iic) the amount of income, being the share of the assessee in the income of an association of persons or body of individuals, on which no income-tax is payable in accordance with the provisions of section 86, if any, such amount is credited to the statement of profit and loss; or (iid) the amount of income accruing