JAGPAL,GURUGRAM vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, FARIDABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Naveen Chandra

reassessment proceedings, accepted the claim of the assessee vide his order dated 21.03.2023. 5. The PCIT, Faridabad found that the AO did not conduct proper enquiry in terms of law laid down by Supreme Court and Punjab & Haryana High Court as well law provided in the Act in terms of section 56(2)(viii) r.w. 57(iv) read with section

DLF HOME DEVELOPERS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE - 7(2), NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

section 145A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. With regards to query related to valuation of project in progress, it is submitted that project in progress are valued at lower of cost and net realizable value. Cost includes cost of land, development rights, materials, services and other related overheads Net Realizable value is the estimated selling price in the ordinary

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. EICHER LIMITED

In the result, we are of the opinion that no substantial question

reassessment is well settled that mere change of pinion does not confer jurisdiction to reopen a completed assessment on the interpretation of a particular provision earlier adopted by the AO. The scope of Section 148 does not extend to reviewing its earlier order sou moto irrespective of there being any material to come to a different conclusion apart from just

BSES RAJDHANI POWER LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri Inturi Rama Rao Assessment Year : 2005-06 Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Vs. Assistant Cit, Bses Bhawan, Nehru Place, Circle-3(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Deputy Cit, Vs. Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Circle 3(1), Bses Bhavan, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2006-07 Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Vs. Assistant Cit, Bses Bhawan, Nehru Place, Circle-3(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Deputy Cit, Vs. Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Circle 3(1), Bses Bhavan, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent)

145A. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in section 145,— (a) the valuation of purchase and sale of goods and inventory for the purposes of determining the income chargeable under the head “Profits and gains of business or profession” shall be— (i) in accordance with the method of accounting regularly employed by the assessee; and (ii) further adjusted to include

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL LTD.,, DELHI

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

reassessment proceedings u/s 147 for AY 2004-05 were quashed by Hon‘ble ITAT vide its order dated 8th January 2016 on ground that there was no tangible/incriminating material and as such on parity of reasoning and principle laid down, there is no legal basis for assuming jurisdiction u/s 153 A of I.T. Act, 1961. (iii) That scope of proceedings

SH. DEV RAJ KATARIA,PANIPAT vs. DCIT, PANIPAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands disposed off accordingly

Bench: Shri R. S. Syal & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

reassessment on basis that conditions for allowance were not fulfilled- Valid-Within jurisdiction of Assessing Officer-Income-Tax Act, 1961; ss, 36(1)(vii), (2), 1.43(1 )(a), 147, 148." 4.07 In view of the factual and legal position discussed above, the plea of the appellant is not tenable and in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional

ACIT, MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. M/S TIKAULA SUGAR MILLS LTD., MUZAFFARNAGAR

Bench: Shri R. S. Syal & Smt Suchitra Kamble

Section 145A will not be applicable, but as regards the basis of accounting concept the assessee has not followed proper procedure as excise duty was not mentioned in closing stock of alcohol. While excise duty payable should be compared of production cost, closing stock should include element of such duties. This matter needs to be taken into consideration

DCIT, MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. M/S TIKAULA SUGAR MILLS LTD., MUZAFFARNAGAR

Bench: Shri R. S. Syal & Smt Suchitra Kamble

Section 145A will not be applicable, but as regards the basis of accounting concept the assessee has not followed proper procedure as excise duty was not mentioned in closing stock of alcohol. While excise duty payable should be compared of production cost, closing stock should include element of such duties. This matter needs to be taken into consideration

DCIT CIRCLE I vs. TIKAULA SUGAR MILLS LTD,

Bench: Shri R. S. Syal & Smt Suchitra Kamble

Section 145A will not be applicable, but as regards the basis of accounting concept the assessee has not followed proper procedure as excise duty was not mentioned in closing stock of alcohol. While excise duty payable should be compared of production cost, closing stock should include element of such duties. This matter needs to be taken into consideration

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S PUNJAB & SIND BANK, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 2 of the appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, Vs. Punjab & Sind Bank, Circle-20(1), Ho Accounts & Audit New Delhi Department, Bank House 21, Rajendra Place, New Delhi Pan:Aaacp1206G (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessment order u/s 147/143(3) by not appreciating explanation 1 to Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld CIT (A) has erred in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 10.43 crores made by the AO on account of change in accounting policy failing to appreciating