M/S. OIL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

1)(xii) of the Act, amounting to Rs.78,14,68,000/- and also claimed deduction under section 35(1

M/S. OIL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

1)(xii) of the Act, amounting to Rs.78,14,68,000/- and also claimed deduction under section 35(1

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed to the extent as mentioned above on the preliminary issue and the departmental appeal is dismissed

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Sh.J.S.Reddyi.T.A .No.-3304/Del/2010 (Assessment Year-2004-05) Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Vs Dcit, Corporate Office, Taxation Section, Circle-2(1), Room No.-398, First Floor, Bharat Sanchar Bhawan, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, Janpath, New Delhi-1110001. New Delhi Pan-Aabcb5576G (Appellant) (Respondent)

68,000 3. Interest from others 11,79,09,000 4. Liquidated Damages 76,71,90,000 5. Excess provision written back 1686,63,72,000 6. Others including sale of directories, 142,90,32,000 publications, forms, waste paper, etc. 6.2. Not convinced with the explanation offered the additions were made in the computation of income made under

BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed to the extent as mentioned above on the preliminary issue and the departmental appeal is dismissed

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Sh.J.S.Reddyi.T.A .No.-3304/Del/2010 (Assessment Year-2004-05) Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Vs Dcit, Corporate Office, Taxation Section, Circle-2(1), Room No.-398, First Floor, Bharat Sanchar Bhawan, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, Janpath, New Delhi-1110001. New Delhi Pan-Aabcb5576G (Appellant) (Respondent)

68,000 3. Interest from others 11,79,09,000 4. Liquidated Damages 76,71,90,000 5. Excess provision written back 1686,63,72,000 6. Others including sale of directories, 142,90,32,000 publications, forms, waste paper, etc. 6.2. Not convinced with the explanation offered the additions were made in the computation of income made under

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6 vs. MANUPATRA INFORMATION SOLUTION

The appeal is disposed of declaring the law as above and setting aside

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

35 above, we declare that the law in India would not warrant an approach to answer the question by looking at whether the course pack has become a textbook, but by considering whether the inclusion of the copyrighted work in the course pack was justified by the purpose of the course pack i.e. for instructional use by the teacher

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S ANGEL CEMENT PVT. LTD.,, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

1: NA Estate Pvt. Ltd. Ld. C.I.T(A) was not justified to uphold addition [ITA NO.509/ of Rs. 16 crores received DEL/2019] by the appellant company on account of balance share capital/premium as alleged unexplained cash credit u/s 68 on the ground that the appellant company had failed to discharge the onus cast on it by the said section

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SUPREME PLACEMENT SERVICES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

1: NA Estate Pvt. Ltd. Ld. C.I.T(A) was not justified to uphold addition [ITA NO.509/ of Rs. 16 crores received DEL/2019] by the appellant company on account of balance share capital/premium as alleged unexplained cash credit u/s 68 on the ground that the appellant company had failed to discharge the onus cast on it by the said section

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SINTEX CONSUMERS ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD., DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

1: NA Estate Pvt. Ltd. Ld. C.I.T(A) was not justified to uphold addition [ITA NO.509/ of Rs. 16 crores received DEL/2019] by the appellant company on account of balance share capital/premium as alleged unexplained cash credit u/s 68 on the ground that the appellant company had failed to discharge the onus cast on it by the said section

M/S GLOBUS REAL INFRA PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

1: NA Estate Pvt. Ltd. Ld. C.I.T(A) was not justified to uphold addition [ITA NO.509/ of Rs. 16 crores received DEL/2019] by the appellant company on account of balance share capital/premium as alleged unexplained cash credit u/s 68 on the ground that the appellant company had failed to discharge the onus cast on it by the said section

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. STAR LIGHT CONSUMER ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

1: NA Estate Pvt. Ltd. Ld. C.I.T(A) was not justified to uphold addition [ITA NO.509/ of Rs. 16 crores received DEL/2019] by the appellant company on account of balance share capital/premium as alleged unexplained cash credit u/s 68 on the ground that the appellant company had failed to discharge the onus cast on it by the said section

KASPER INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD-14(2), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

1: NA Estate Pvt. Ltd. Ld. C.I.T(A) was not justified to uphold addition [ITA NO.509/ of Rs. 16 crores received DEL/2019] by the appellant company on account of balance share capital/premium as alleged unexplained cash credit u/s 68 on the ground that the appellant company had failed to discharge the onus cast on it by the said section

ITO, WARD-7(1), NEW DELHI vs. DELIGHT RESORTS P.LTD, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

1: NA Estate Pvt. Ltd. Ld. C.I.T(A) was not justified to uphold addition [ITA NO.509/ of Rs. 16 crores received DEL/2019] by the appellant company on account of balance share capital/premium as alleged unexplained cash credit u/s 68 on the ground that the appellant company had failed to discharge the onus cast on it by the said section

ITO, WARD-7(1), NEW DELHI vs. DELIGHT RESORTS P.LTD, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

1: NA Estate Pvt. Ltd. Ld. C.I.T(A) was not justified to uphold addition [ITA NO.509/ of Rs. 16 crores received DEL/2019] by the appellant company on account of balance share capital/premium as alleged unexplained cash credit u/s 68 on the ground that the appellant company had failed to discharge the onus cast on it by the said section

ITO WARD - 14(2), NEW DELHI vs. KASPER INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PVT LTD, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

1: NA Estate Pvt. Ltd. Ld. C.I.T(A) was not justified to uphold addition [ITA NO.509/ of Rs. 16 crores received DEL/2019] by the appellant company on account of balance share capital/premium as alleged unexplained cash credit u/s 68 on the ground that the appellant company had failed to discharge the onus cast on it by the said section

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SUPERSTAR AGENCY PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

1: NA Estate Pvt. Ltd. Ld. C.I.T(A) was not justified to uphold addition [ITA NO.509/ of Rs. 16 crores received DEL/2019] by the appellant company on account of balance share capital/premium as alleged unexplained cash credit u/s 68 on the ground that the appellant company had failed to discharge the onus cast on it by the said section

ITO WARD - 13(3), NEW DELHI vs. JINGLE BELLS ALUMINIUM PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

1: NA Estate Pvt. Ltd. Ld. C.I.T(A) was not justified to uphold addition [ITA NO.509/ of Rs. 16 crores received DEL/2019] by the appellant company on account of balance share capital/premium as alleged unexplained cash credit u/s 68 on the ground that the appellant company had failed to discharge the onus cast on it by the said section

JINGLE BELLS ALUMINIUM,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 13(3), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

1: NA Estate Pvt. Ltd. Ld. C.I.T(A) was not justified to uphold addition [ITA NO.509/ of Rs. 16 crores received DEL/2019] by the appellant company on account of balance share capital/premium as alleged unexplained cash credit u/s 68 on the ground that the appellant company had failed to discharge the onus cast on it by the said section

KASPER INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-14(2), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

1: NA Estate Pvt. Ltd. Ld. C.I.T(A) was not justified to uphold addition [ITA NO.509/ of Rs. 16 crores received DEL/2019] by the appellant company on account of balance share capital/premium as alleged unexplained cash credit u/s 68 on the ground that the appellant company had failed to discharge the onus cast on it by the said section