NATIONAL HOUSING BANK,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 8 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed with above direction

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishinational Housing Bank, Addl Cit, Core-5A, India Habitat Centre, Range-31(1), Vs. Lodhi Road, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) National Housing Bank, Addl Cit, Core-5A, India Habitat Centre, Range-31(1), Lodhi Road, New Delhi Vs. New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) National Housing Bank, Addl Cit, Core-5A, India Habitat Centre, Range-31(1), Vs. Lodhi Road, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) National Housing Bank, Addl Cit, Core-5A, India Habitat Centre, Range-31(1), Vs. Lodhi Road, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Page 2 Of 50 National Housing Bank, Addl Cit, Core-5A, India Habitat Centre, Range-31(1), Vs. Lodhi Road, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) National Housing Bank, Addl Cit, Core-5A, India Habitat Centre, Range-31(1), Vs. Lodhi Road, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

36(1)(viii) prior to AY 2010-11 and therefore, following decision we dismiss ground No. 1 to 7 of the above appeal of the assessee for AY 2003-04. 27. Now we come to ground No. 8 of the appeal of the assessee, which is against disallowing the loss of Rs. 1504532696/- with respect to securities. 28. Brief facts

EBRO INDIA PVT.LTD. ,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-7(1), DELHI

In the result, the ground no 4 raised by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Accountant Member)

viii. Undisputedly, no enquiry or examination was done by the assessing officer nor has any tangible material been brought on record to support the allegation that the capital received from unexplained money. It has been held in the following decisions that where the initial onus to prove identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction has been discharged by the assessee

COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX vs. S.S. AHLUWALIA

viii) The initiation of proceedings by ITO, Dimapur for assessment years 1985-86, 1986-87 and 1987-88 were legal and valid and there was infirmity in the proceedings assumed/conducted by the AO, New Delhi. All proceedings before the AO, New Delhi were illegal and set aside. (ix) However, AO, Delhi could acquire proper jurisdiction from the Chief Commissioner

COMMSSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI-XVI vs. S.S. AHLUWALIA

viii) The initiation of proceedings by ITO, Dimapur for assessment years 1985-86, 1986-87 and 1987-88 were legal and valid and there was infirmity in the proceedings assumed/conducted by the AO, New Delhi. All proceedings before the AO, New Delhi were illegal and set aside. (ix) However, AO, Delhi could acquire proper jurisdiction from the Chief Commissioner

NATIONAL COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT CORP

In the result, question No

36(1) (viii) of the Act read with clause (h) of the Explanation to the Section. We, accordingly, answer the substantial question of law in the affirmative and in favour of the Revenue. 13. Question No.5 is directed against the finding of the Tribunal that interest earned on short-term deposits made during the interregnum period between disbursement of funds

CORPORATION

In the result, question No

36(1) (viii) of the Act read with clause (h) of the Explanation to the Section. We, accordingly, answer the substantial question of law in the affirmative and in favour of the Revenue. 13. Question No.5 is directed against the finding of the Tribunal that interest earned on short-term deposits made during the interregnum period between disbursement of funds

NATIONAL COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT CORP

In the result, question No

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

36(1) (viii) of the Act read with clause (h) of the Explanation to the Section. We, accordingly, answer the substantial question of law in the affirrnative and in favour of the Revenue. 13. Question No.5 is directed against the finding of the Tribunal that ( t--.^-^^n+ o^*-ol ^- ohnrf-forrn r{e^ncifc rncr{e r{rrrino

NATIONAL COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, question No

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

36(1) (viii) of the Act read with clause (h) of the Explanation to the Section. We, accordingly, answer the substantial question of law in the affinnative and in favour of the Revenue. 13. Question No.5 is directed against the finding of the Tribunal that interest earnbd on short-term deposits made during the interregnum period between disbursernent of funds

(Now known as Sony India Limited)

36 of 142 valuation of the contract price and computation of the arm‘s length price, consequent assessments etc. are without jurisdiction and authority of law. 43. This argument on behalf of the assessees would have been weighty and perhaps justified, if the Legislature by the Finance Act, 2012 had not inserted sub-section (2B). The said Sub-Section

NATIONAL COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, question No

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

36(1) (viii) ofthe Act read with clause (h) of the Explanation to the Section. We, accordingly, answer. the substantial question of law in the affirmative and in favour of the Revenue. 13. Question No.5 is directed against the finding of the Tribunal that interest earned on short-term deposits made during the interregnum period between disbursemen~ of funds

NATIONAL COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, question No

36(1) (viii) ofthe Act read with clause (h) of the Explanation to the Section. We, accordingly, answer. the substantial question of law in the affirmative and in favour of the Revenue. 13. Question No.5 is directed against the finding of the Tribunal that interest earned on short-term deposits made during the interregnum period between disbursemen~ of funds

NATIONAL COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, question No

36(1) (viii) ofthe Act read with clause (h) of the Explanation to the Section. We, accordingly, answer. the substantial question of law in the affirmative and in favour of the Revenue. 13. Question No.5 is directed against the finding of the Tribunal that interest earned on short-term deposits made during the interregnum period between disbursemen~ of funds

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

36 of 74 (b) ―eligible assessee‖ means,— (i) any person in whose case the variation referred to in sub- section (1) arises as a consequence of the order of the Transfer Pricing Officer passed under sub-section (3) of section 92CA; and [(ii) any non-resident not being a company, or any foreign company.] Time limit for completion of assessment

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

36 of 74 (b) ―eligible assessee‖ means,— (i) any person in whose case the variation referred to in sub- section (1) arises as a consequence of the order of the Transfer Pricing Officer passed under sub-section (3) of section 92CA; and [(ii) any non-resident not being a company, or any foreign company.] Time limit for completion of assessment

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

36 of 74 (b) ―eligible assessee‖ means,— (i) any person in whose case the variation referred to in sub- section (1) arises as a consequence of the order of the Transfer Pricing Officer passed under sub-section (3) of section 92CA; and [(ii) any non-resident not being a company, or any foreign company.] Time limit for completion of assessment

M/S. CHITRAKOOT MERCHANDISE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the Appeals filed by the Assessee stand allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

viii. Jai Steel (India) Jodhpur vs. ACIT ITA No. 53/2011 order dated 24/05/2011 ix. JCIT Vs. Spectrum Pearls & Exports Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 2107 to 2113/Hyd./2011 order dated 04/04/2012 x. Sanjay Aggarwal Vs. DCIT ITA No. 3184/Del/2013 Order dated 16/06/2014 xi. Dream Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 5392/Del/2012 Order dated 22/11/2013 xii. ShriGovindAgarwal vs. ACIT ITA No. 339/Mum/2011 dated

M/S. CHITRAKOOT MERCHANDISE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the Appeals filed by the Assessee stand allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

viii. Jai Steel (India) Jodhpur vs. ACIT ITA No. 53/2011 order dated 24/05/2011 ix. JCIT Vs. Spectrum Pearls & Exports Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 2107 to 2113/Hyd./2011 order dated 04/04/2012 x. Sanjay Aggarwal Vs. DCIT ITA No. 3184/Del/2013 Order dated 16/06/2014 xi. Dream Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 5392/Del/2012 Order dated 22/11/2013 xii. ShriGovindAgarwal vs. ACIT ITA No. 339/Mum/2011 dated

TRANS WORLD INTERNATIONAL LLC,WILMINGTON, DELAWARE, USA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA, CIRCLE 3(1)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIVIC CENTRE, NEAR MINTO ROAD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

viii. Similar property 3.9. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer referring to the Explanation-6 inserted by the Legislature to specifically clarify that the expression ‘process’ used in Explanation-2 would include and should be deemed to have always included transmission by satellite (including up- linking, amplification, conversion for down-linking of any signal), cable, optic-fibre or by any other similar