COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. ABHINANDAN INVESTMENT LTD

forward and set off of the balance loss in the subsequent year(s).” 2015:DHC:2664-DB ITA Nos.25/01, 840/08 & 26/01 Page 34 28. Having once accepted the decision of the ITAT, in the same fact situation, - in fact in the same common order, the revenue cannot legitimately agitate a position contrary to the one it accepted in Nalwa – especially

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. ABHINANDAN INVESTMENT LTD

forward and set off of the balance loss in the subsequent year(s).” 2015:DHC:2664-DB ITA Nos.25/01, 840/08 & 26/01 Page 34 28. Having once accepted the decision of the ITAT, in the same fact situation, - in fact in the same common order, the revenue cannot legitimately agitate a position contrary to the one it accepted in Nalwa – especially

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. ABHINANDAN INVESTMENT LTD

forward and set off of the balance loss in the subsequent year(s).” 2015:DHC:2664-DB ITA Nos.25/01, 840/08 & 26/01 Page 34 28. Having once accepted the decision of the ITAT, in the same fact situation, - in fact in the same common order, the revenue cannot legitimately agitate a position contrary to the one it accepted in Nalwa – especially

HONEY ENTERPRISES

transfer on a minimum guarantee basis ; (ii) the rights of exhibition of a feature film shall be deemed to have been sold only on the date when the positive prints of the film are delivered by the film distributor to the purchaser of such rights ; (iii) distributor shall include a sub-distributor.” 13. Rule 9B of the Rules has been

HONEY ENTERPRISES

transfer on a minimum guarantee basis ; (ii) the rights of exhibition of a feature film shall be deemed to have been sold only on the date when the positive prints of the film are delivered by the film distributor to the purchaser of such rights ; (iii) distributor shall include a sub-distributor.” 13. Rule 9B of the Rules has been

HONEY ENTERPRISES

transfer on a minimum guarantee basis ; (ii) the rights of exhibition of a feature film shall be deemed to have been sold only on the date when the positive prints of the film are delivered by the film distributor to the purchaser of such rights ; (iii) distributor shall include a sub-distributor.” 13. Rule 9B of the Rules has been

HONEY ENTERPRISES

transfer on a minimum guarantee basis ; (ii) the rights of exhibition of a feature film shall be deemed to have been sold only on the date when the positive prints of the film are delivered by the film distributor to the purchaser of such rights ; (iii) distributor shall include a sub-distributor.” 13. Rule 9B of the Rules has been

M/S GEODIS OVERSEAS PVT. LTD.,,GURGAON vs. DCIT,, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarita No. 3195/Del/2017 Assessment Year: 2003-04 Ita No. 3196/Del/2017 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Geodis Overseas Pvt.Ltd., Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Building No.5,Tower B, Income Tax, 10Th Floor, Dlf Cyber City, Company Circle- Ii(1), Phase Iii, Gurgaon Chennai-34 Pin: 122 002 Pan No. Aaacc6168L (Appellant) (Respondent)

carrying on business in providing international freight forwarding services to various customers. For the assessment year 2003-04, it filed a return on 01.12.2003 admitting a loss of Rs.6,63,51,190/-. The case was taken up for scrutiny. In response to notices under Sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act, Shri D.C.Gupta, Sr. Manager (Finance & Accounts

DR. BHIM RAO AMBEDKAR MAHASANG HARYANA,FARIDABAD vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH/FARIDABAD

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarita No. 3195/Del/2017 Assessment Year: 2003-04 Ita No. 3196/Del/2017 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Geodis Overseas Pvt.Ltd., Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Building No.5,Tower B, Income Tax, 10Th Floor, Dlf Cyber City, Company Circle- Ii(1), Phase Iii, Gurgaon Chennai-34 Pin: 122 002 Pan No. Aaacc6168L (Appellant) (Respondent)

carrying on business in providing international freight forwarding services to various customers. For the assessment year 2003-04, it filed a return on 01.12.2003 admitting a loss of Rs.6,63,51,190/-. The case was taken up for scrutiny. In response to notices under Sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act, Shri D.C.Gupta, Sr. Manager (Finance & Accounts

SUCON INDIA LTD.,FARIDABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- II, FARIDABAD

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed

prices or rates, a credit rating or credit index, or similar variable (sometimes called the 'underlying); (b) that requires no initial net investment or little initial net investment relative to other types of contracts that have a similar response to changes in market conditions; and (c) that is settled at a future date. Actually, derivatives are assets, whose values

SAIF PARTNERS INDIA IV LIMITED ,DELHI vs. ACIT INT. TAXATION-3(1)(2), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

transfer of such shares, though the company has incurred loss, but has opted not to carry forward the said loss. 12. Specific reply of the assessee alongwith notes to computation of income was considered by the Assessing Officer who completed the assessment vide order dated 09.12.2019. Assuming jurisdiction conferred upon him by provisions of section

SIS LIVE ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-3(1)(2),INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 Sis Live, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of 4Th Floor, Statesman House Income Tax, Building, Barakhamba Road, Circle-3(1)(2), International Connaught Place, Taxation, New Delhi New Delhi Pan :Abrfs4787L (Appellant) (Respondent)

carrying on business activity/operation through a PE, there should be continuity, which is absent in the present case. As regards the allowability of set off of brought forward losses, he submitted, they can be considered in the year of set off. 12 | P a g e ITA Nos.2145 & 2146/Del/2022 AY: 2018-19 & 2019-20 11. We have considered rival submissions

SIS LIVE,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 Sis Live, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of 4Th Floor, Statesman House Income Tax, Building, Barakhamba Road, Circle-3(1)(2), International Connaught Place, Taxation, New Delhi New Delhi Pan :Abrfs4787L (Appellant) (Respondent)

carrying on business activity/operation through a PE, there should be continuity, which is absent in the present case. As regards the allowability of set off of brought forward losses, he submitted, they can be considered in the year of set off. 12 | P a g e ITA Nos.2145 & 2146/Del/2022 AY: 2018-19 & 2019-20 11. We have considered rival submissions

M/S. AMERICAN EXPRESS SERVICES INDIA LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

forward business losses and unabsorbed depreciation against the income of the subject assessment year. 9. That on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO has erred in charging excess interest under section 234B of the Act. Also, the learned AO has erred on facts and in law in charging interest u/s 234B

AMERICA EXPRESS SERVICES INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

forward business losses and unabsorbed depreciation against the income of the subject assessment year. 9. That on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO has erred in charging excess interest under section 234B of the Act. Also, the learned AO has erred on facts and in law in charging interest u/s 234B

HEIDELBERG CEMENT INDIA LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 2 , GURGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaheidelberg Cement India Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 9Th Floor, Tower-C, Infinity Circle-2, Towers, Dlf, Cybercity, Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aabcm2359J

loss of ₹113,02,65,434/-. During the course of assessment proceedings for AY 2011-12, certain items were reclassified under the head “building, other than residential” instead of “plant and machineries” as claimed by the assessee in its return of income. Accordingly, depreciation on such items was recomputed @10% instead of 15% as claimed by the assessee

M/S GEODIS OVERSEAS PVT. LTD.,,GURGAON vs. DCIT,, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

forwarding services to\nvarious customers. For the assessment year 2003-04, it filed a return on\n01.12.2003 admitting a loss of Rs.6,63,51,190/-. The case was taken up for\nscrutiny. In response to notices under Sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act,\nShri D.C.Gupta, Sr. Manager (Finance & Accounts) of the company appeared\nand filed details

PCL FOODS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ADDI CIT, NATIONAL E- ASSESMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2016-17] Pcl Foods Private Limited, Additional / Joint/ Unit No.-219, Plot No. 2, Deputy/Assistant Vardhman Crown Mall, Lsc, Vs Commissioner Of Income Sector 19, Dwarka, New Tax/ Income Tax Officer, Delhi-110075. National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi. Pan- Aahcp3493L Assessee Revenue

transfer pricing study initially identified only one comparable, namely M/s Sakuma Exports Ltd., and applied the Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) as the most appropriate method. The TPO observed that the assessee's business of rice trading is not of such a unique or specialized nature as to warrant only a single comparable and further noted that the turnover filter