RANBAXY LABORATORIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, we direct the AO to reduce the book profit u/s 115JB of the Act by the amount of reversal of the provision of Rs

Bench: Sh. I. C.Sudhir Judicialmember & Sh. Prashant Maharishia.Y.: - 2008-09 Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs Acit 12Th Floor, Devika Tower, Range -15 6, Nehru Place New Delhi New Delhi Pan No. Aaacr0127N (Appellant) (Respondent)

80G of the Act was claimed. Vide note no.13 to the computation of the income such contribution was claimed as deduction u/s 37 of the Act. Ld. AO disallowed it holding that it was not incurred for the purposes of the business and alternatively as no tax has been deducted it was disallowable

BRIJBASI EDUCATION AND WELFARE SOCIETY vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL III, NEW DELHI

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

80G thereof. The Appellant filed its return of income on 14th September, 2006 declaring nil income. The case was selected for scrutiny, and pursuant thereto, an Assessment Order under section 143(3) was passed on 15th December 2008. The Assessee preferred an appeal before Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] who confirmed the same vide

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. SURESH JAIN, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the department are dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita No. 369/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2000-01 Ita No. 370/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2001-02 Ita No. 374/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Acit Vs Suresh Jain Circle-38(1), C-29, Panchsheel Enclave New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Acxpj6507G Assessee By : Sh. Sh. Raj Kumar Gupta, Adv. & Sh. Sumit Goyal, Ca Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.02.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.04.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: These Appeals By The Department Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Each Dated 29.11.2001 Of The Ld. Cit(A)- Xxviii, New Delhi For The Assessment Year 2000-01, 2001-02 & 2006-2007. Since The Appeals Pertain To The Same Assessee, So These Are Being Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

iii) and does not fulfill conditions No. (ii) and (iv) as discussed below:- a. The assessee has not carried out any agricultural operations and shown agricultural income in order to prove that the land was used for agricultural purposes. A perusal of return of ITA Nos. 369, 370 & 374/Del/2012 8 Suresh Jain income for Asstt. Year shows that assessee

VISHWADHARMAYATAN TRUST vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

80G of the Act on 11th February 1983. 3. On 1st November 1996 the Income Tax Department („Department‟) undertook a search at the premises of the Assessee at C-18-19, Qutab Institutional Area, New Delhi under Section 132 of the Act. It is claimed that during the search certain documents were seized and an inventory was prepared. Notices were

RITES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, SPL. RANGE- 7, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Amit Shukla

section 37/36(l)(vii) of the Act. (iii) That in any case, the disallowance is merely on the basis of change of opinion and same is not sustainable in the case of reassessment u/s 147 of the Act. 3(i) That on facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming disallowance

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-7, NEW DELHI vs. RITES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Amit Shukla

section 37/36(l)(vii) of the Act. (iii) That in any case, the disallowance is merely on the basis of change of opinion and same is not sustainable in the case of reassessment u/s 147 of the Act. 3(i) That on facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming disallowance

GANDHI COLLEGE OF PHARMACY,KARNAL vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. C. M. Garg, Jm Ita No. 3476/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Gandhi College Of Pharmacy, Vs Acit, Near Iti Chowk, G. T. Road, Circle, Karnal Karnal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaatg5629D Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Ashish Goel, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.12.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.02.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 19.03.2012 Of Ld. Cit(A), Karnal. 2. Following Grounds Have Been Raised In This Appeal: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)] Is Bad Both In The Eye Of Law & On Facts. 2(I) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred Both On Facts & In Law In Confirming The Action Of A.O. In Holding That The Assesses Is Not Eligible For Exemption Under Section 10(23C)(Iiiad) Of The Act.

5 of the assessment order dated 06.08.2009, for the cost of repetition, the same is not reproduced herein. He further observed that appeal of the assessee filed against the order dated 24.04.2008 of the ld. CIT, Karnal was dismissed by the ITAT vide order dated 9 Gandhi College of Pharmacy 12.06.2009 in ITA No. 2185/Del/2008. The AO also observed that