M/S. HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD (HUDCO),NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantsl. No.

penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) have been initiated separately. (Addition of Rs. 3,27,500) 19 ITA Nos. 4303/Del/2009; 1166 to1168/Del/2012; 3365 & 3366/Del/2013; 1561 & 1562/Del/2012 Housing & Urban Development Corp. Ltd. 9.4 Once, the condition of dissatisfaction is fulfilled; the issue left before us is to decide the quantum of disallowance. We have seen that in assessment years

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORP. LTD. (HUDCO), NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantsl. No.

penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) have been initiated separately. (Addition of Rs. 3,27,500) 19 ITA Nos. 4303/Del/2009; 1166 to1168/Del/2012; 3365 & 3366/Del/2013; 1561 & 1562/Del/2012 Housing & Urban Development Corp. Ltd. 9.4 Once, the condition of dissatisfaction is fulfilled; the issue left before us is to decide the quantum of disallowance. We have seen that in assessment years

M/S. HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantsl. No.

penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) have been initiated separately. (Addition of Rs. 3,27,500) 19 ITA Nos. 4303/Del/2009; 1166 to1168/Del/2012; 3365 & 3366/Del/2013; 1561 & 1562/Del/2012 Housing & Urban Development Corp. Ltd. 9.4 Once, the condition of dissatisfaction is fulfilled; the issue left before us is to decide the quantum of disallowance. We have seen that in assessment years

M/S HOUSING & URBAN DEVLOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantsl. No.

penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) have been initiated separately. (Addition of Rs. 3,27,500) 19 ITA Nos. 4303/Del/2009; 1166 to1168/Del/2012; 3365 & 3366/Del/2013; 1561 & 1562/Del/2012 Housing & Urban Development Corp. Ltd. 9.4 Once, the condition of dissatisfaction is fulfilled; the issue left before us is to decide the quantum of disallowance. We have seen that in assessment years

M/S HOUSING & URBAN DEVLOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantsl. No.

penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) have been initiated separately. (Addition of Rs. 3,27,500) 19 ITA Nos. 4303/Del/2009; 1166 to1168/Del/2012; 3365 & 3366/Del/2013; 1561 & 1562/Del/2012 Housing & Urban Development Corp. Ltd. 9.4 Once, the condition of dissatisfaction is fulfilled; the issue left before us is to decide the quantum of disallowance. We have seen that in assessment years

M/S. HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantsl. No.

penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) have been initiated separately. (Addition of Rs. 3,27,500) 19 ITA Nos. 4303/Del/2009; 1166 to1168/Del/2012; 3365 & 3366/Del/2013; 1561 & 1562/Del/2012 Housing & Urban Development Corp. Ltd. 9.4 Once, the condition of dissatisfaction is fulfilled; the issue left before us is to decide the quantum of disallowance. We have seen that in assessment years

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORP. LTD. (HUDCO), NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantsl. No.

penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) have been initiated separately. (Addition of Rs. 3,27,500) 19 ITA Nos. 4303/Del/2009; 1166 to1168/Del/2012; 3365 & 3366/Del/2013; 1561 & 1562/Del/2012 Housing & Urban Development Corp. Ltd. 9.4 Once, the condition of dissatisfaction is fulfilled; the issue left before us is to decide the quantum of disallowance. We have seen that in assessment years

M/S. HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantsl. No.

penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) have been initiated separately. (Addition of Rs. 3,27,500) 19 ITA Nos. 4303/Del/2009; 1166 to1168/Del/2012; 3365 & 3366/Del/2013; 1561 & 1562/Del/2012 Housing & Urban Development Corp. Ltd. 9.4 Once, the condition of dissatisfaction is fulfilled; the issue left before us is to decide the quantum of disallowance. We have seen that in assessment years

DCIT, REWARI vs. M/S THE REWARI DISTRICT PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.,, REWARI

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

u/s. 271(l)(c) & the penalty proceeding needs to be deleted. The facts of the case are squarely covered by the Hon’ble ITAT, Delhi in its order in ITA NO. 2362 & 2363/Del/2012 dated 31/7/2012 in the appellant’s case for Assessment Year 2009-10. Therefore, I delete the said addition. The grounds of appeal are allowed.” As noted

CAREFOUR WC&C INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

section 28 to 43D relate to computation of business income, which is carried on by the assessee, it follows that the expenses during the pre- commencement period will not be deductable. Similarly loss incurred during the period cannot also be treated as business loss. It cannot, therefore, be carried forward. It has been so held in Liquidators of Pursa

SUMITOMO CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal are allowed

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

43D, which apparently excludes the operation of section 44D of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that taxation on Gross Basis in the instant case as upheld by the CIT(A) is an arbitrary and absurd interpretation. The Ld. AR relied upon the decisions in cases of Boston Consulting 94 ITD 31 (Mum) and Horizontal Drilling

DDIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SUMITOMO CORPORATION, NEW DELHI

Appeal are allowed

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

43D, which apparently excludes the operation of section 44D of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that taxation on Gross Basis in the instant case as upheld by the CIT(A) is an arbitrary and absurd interpretation. The Ld. AR relied upon the decisions in cases of Boston Consulting 94 ITD 31 (Mum) and Horizontal Drilling

M/S SUMITOMO CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NEW DELHI

Appeal are allowed

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

43D, which apparently excludes the operation of section 44D of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that taxation on Gross Basis in the instant case as upheld by the CIT(A) is an arbitrary and absurd interpretation. The Ld. AR relied upon the decisions in cases of Boston Consulting 94 ITD 31 (Mum) and Horizontal Drilling

M/S SUMITOMO CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NEW DELHI

Appeal are allowed

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

43D, which apparently excludes the operation of section 44D of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that taxation on Gross Basis in the instant case as upheld by the CIT(A) is an arbitrary and absurd interpretation. The Ld. AR relied upon the decisions in cases of Boston Consulting 94 ITD 31 (Mum) and Horizontal Drilling

DDIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SUMITOMO CORPORATION, NEW DELHI

Appeal are allowed

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

43D, which apparently excludes the operation of section 44D of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that taxation on Gross Basis in the instant case as upheld by the CIT(A) is an arbitrary and absurd interpretation. The Ld. AR relied upon the decisions in cases of Boston Consulting 94 ITD 31 (Mum) and Horizontal Drilling

DDIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SUMITOMO CORPORATION, NEW DELHI

Appeal are allowed

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

43D, which apparently excludes the operation of section 44D of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that taxation on Gross Basis in the instant case as upheld by the CIT(A) is an arbitrary and absurd interpretation. The Ld. AR relied upon the decisions in cases of Boston Consulting 94 ITD 31 (Mum) and Horizontal Drilling

SUMITOMO CORPORATION,DELHI vs. DDIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal are allowed

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

43D, which apparently excludes the operation of section 44D of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that taxation on Gross Basis in the instant case as upheld by the CIT(A) is an arbitrary and absurd interpretation. The Ld. AR relied upon the decisions in cases of Boston Consulting 94 ITD 31 (Mum) and Horizontal Drilling

SUMITOMO CORPORATION,DELHI vs. DDIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal are allowed

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

43D, which apparently excludes the operation of section 44D of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that taxation on Gross Basis in the instant case as upheld by the CIT(A) is an arbitrary and absurd interpretation. The Ld. AR relied upon the decisions in cases of Boston Consulting 94 ITD 31 (Mum) and Horizontal Drilling

SUMITOMO CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. DDIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal are allowed

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

43D, which apparently excludes the operation of section 44D of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that taxation on Gross Basis in the instant case as upheld by the CIT(A) is an arbitrary and absurd interpretation. The Ld. AR relied upon the decisions in cases of Boston Consulting 94 ITD 31 (Mum) and Horizontal Drilling