ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S NIIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

deduction under section 10B of the Act allowable to the assessee at ₹89,68,09,126/- as follows: Total profit

NIIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

deduction under section 10B of the Act allowable to the assessee at ₹89,68,09,126/- as follows: Total profit

NIIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

deduction under section 10B of the Act allowable to the assessee at ₹89,68,09,126/- as follows: Total profit

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S NIIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

deduction under section 10B of the Act allowable to the assessee at ₹89,68,09,126/- as follows: Total profit

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI IV vs. INTERNATIONAL TRACTORS LTD.

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

68. In the present case, the assessment was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act for AY 1998-99 onwards. There was no error as such committed by the AO in allowing the deductions

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S INTERNATIONAL TRACTORS LTD

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

68. In the present case, the assessment was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act for AY 1998-99 onwards. There was no error as such committed by the AO in allowing the deductions

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (LTU) vs. INTERNATIONAL TRACTORS LIMITED

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

68. In the present case, the assessment was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act for AY 1998-99 onwards. There was no error as such committed by the AO in allowing the deductions

RALLISON ELECTRICALS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri O. P. Kant

deduction claimed under section 80IC by Rs.1,55,68,080/- on apportionment of expenses including that of depreciation on the basis

DIVYA CREATION,NOIDA vs. PR.CIT, NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Divya Creation, Vs. Pr. Cit, Plot No. 97, Nsez, Noida Aayakar Bhawan, A2 D- Block, Sector 24, Noida Pan :Aadfd4879K (Appellant) (Respondent)

deduction u/s 10A on interest income of Rs. 66,68,296 as claimed and initiation of section 263 proceedings in this

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV vs. DELHI PRESS PATRA PRAKASHAN LTD

68. In order to qualify under Section 80-I(2)(i) of the Act, the newly established industrial undertaking should not be formed by splitting, or reconstruction of a business already in existence. The key word in the condition imposed under section 80-I(2)(i) of the Act is “formed”. Thus, what is to be considered is whether formation

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV vs. DELHI PRESS PATRA PRAKASHAN LTD

68. In order to qualify under Section 80-I(2)(i) of the Act, the newly established industrial undertaking should not be formed by splitting, or reconstruction of a business already in existence. The key word in the condition imposed under section 80-I(2)(i) of the Act is “formed”. Thus, what is to be considered is whether formation

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV vs. DELHI PRESS PATRA PRAKASHAN LTD

68. In order to qualify under Section 80-I(2)(i) of the Act, the newly established industrial undertaking should not be formed by splitting, or reconstruction of a business already in existence. The key word in the condition imposed under section 80-I(2)(i) of the Act is “formed”. Thus, what is to be considered is whether formation

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

68. In order to qualify under Section 80-I(2)(i) of the Act, the newly established industrial undertaking should not be formed by splitting, or reconstruction of a business already in existence. The key word in the condition imposed under section 80-I(2)(i) of the Act is “formed”. Thus, what is to be considered is whether formation

CIT vs. DELHI PRESS PATRA PRAKASHAN LTD

68. In order to qualify under Section 80-I(2)(i) of the Act, the newly established industrial undertaking should not be formed by splitting, or reconstruction of a business already in existence. The key word in the condition imposed under section 80-I(2)(i) of the Act is “formed”. Thus, what is to be considered is whether formation

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

68. In order to qualify under Section 80-I(2)(i) of the Act, the newly established industrial undertaking should not be formed by splitting, or reconstruction of a business already in existence. The key word in the condition imposed under section 80-I(2)(i) of the Act is “formed”. Thus, what is to be considered is whether formation

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S DELHI PRESS PATRA PRAKASHAN LTD

68. In order to qualify under Section 80-I(2)(i) of the Act, the newly established industrial undertaking should not be formed by splitting, or reconstruction of a business already in existence. The key word in the condition imposed under section 80-I(2)(i) of the Act is “formed”. Thus, what is to be considered is whether formation

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

68. In order to qualify under Section 80-I(2)(i) of the Act, the newly established industrial undertaking should not be formed by splitting, or reconstruction of a business already in existence. The key word in the condition imposed under section 80-I(2)(i) of the Act is “formed”. Thus, what is to be considered is whether formation

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. DELHI PRESS PATRA PRAKASHAN LT

68. In order to qualify under Section 80-I(2)(i) of the Act, the newly established industrial undertaking should not be formed by splitting, or reconstruction of a business already in existence. The key word in the condition imposed under section 80-I(2)(i) of the Act is “formed”. Thus, what is to be considered is whether formation

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NIIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2006-07

68,98,037 50,90,742 Less : Brought forward unabsorbed depreciation 14,22,71,036 Gross Total Loss (13,71,80,294) From the above table, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee has claimed deduction u/s. 10B without considering the brought forward unabsorbed depreciation and that the assessee has not completely followed section