GE MONEY FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result ground, no

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

32A(2) and Section 33 of the Act, dealing with Investment Allowance and Development Rebate respectively, held thus: - "9. Sub-section (2) of Section 32-A, however, requires to be examined to see whether there is any provision in that sub-section which requires that the assessee should not merely use the machinery for the purposes of his business

THOMSON PRESS (INDIA) LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II

32A, clause (ii) of sub- section (2) of section 33, sub-section (4) of section 35 or the second proviso to clause (ix) of sub-section (1) of section 36, as the case may be, shall not apply in relation to any such allowance or deduc-tion; (ii) no loss referred to in sub-section (1) of section

THOMSON PRESS (INDIA) LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II

32A, clause (ii) of sub- section (2) of section 33, sub-section (4) of section 35 or the second proviso to clause (ix) of sub-section (1) of section 36, as the case may be, shall not apply in relation to any such allowance or deduc-tion; (ii) no loss referred to in sub-section (1) of section

THOMSON PRESS (INDIA) LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II

32A, clause (ii) of sub- section (2) of section 33, sub-section (4) of section 35 or the second proviso to clause (ix) of sub-section (1) of section 36, as the case may be, shall not apply in relation to any such allowance or deduc-tion; (ii) no loss referred to in sub-section (1) of section

THOMSON PRESS (INDIA) LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II

32A, clause (ii) of sub- section (2) of section 33, sub-section (4) of section 35 or the second proviso to clause (ix) of sub-section (1) of section 36, as the case may be, shall not apply in relation to any such allowance or deduc-tion; (ii) no loss referred to in sub-section (1) of section

M/S THOMSON PRESS (INDIA) LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -II

32A, clause (ii) of sub- section (2) of section 33, sub-section (4) of section 35 or the second proviso to clause (ix) of sub-section (1) of section 36, as the case may be, shall not apply in relation to any such allowance or deduc-tion; (ii) no loss referred to in sub-section (1) of section

M/S THOMSON PRESS (INDIA) LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- II

32A, clause (ii) of sub- section (2) of section 33, sub-section (4) of section 35 or the second proviso to clause (ix) of sub-section (1) of section 36, as the case may be, shall not apply in relation to any such allowance or deduc-tion; (ii) no loss referred to in sub-section (1) of section

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. JAGAN AUTOMOTIVE PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed and the Cross

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 5382/Del./2011 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Acit, Vs M/S Jagan Automotive Pvt. Ltd., Circle 4(1) No. 14, Dda Transport Centre, New Delhi. Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi-110026 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcj7818F & C.O. No.220/Del/2012 (In Ita No. 5382/Del./2011 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09) M/S Jagan Automotive Pvt. Ltd., Acit, No.14, Dda Transport Centre, Vs Circle-4(1), Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi New Delhi Pan : Aabcj7818F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. C. S. Aggarwal, Sr. Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Deepak Garg, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.10.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.12.2019

price is Rs.71,47,249/-. 31. The inventory of the stock found during the survey operation at Transport Centre, New Delhi is as under:(page no. 62 of the paper book) S.No. ITEM QTY RATE AMOUNT 1 H4 12V 100/90 W 200000 34 6800000.00 2 H4 12V 100/90 CP 289159 35 10120598.00 3 H4 24V 100/90

GREEN INFRA WIND FARM ASSET LTD.,GURUGRAM vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 10(2), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2016-17] Green Infra Wind Farm Asset Ltd., Vs Acit, 5Th Floor, Tower C, Building No.8, Circle-10(2), Dlf Cyber City, Gurugram, New Delhi. Haryana-122002. Pan-Aaecg4080H Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Vartik Chokshi, Ca & Shri Biren Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 23.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 04.07.2025 Order

transferred, shall be increased or decreased, as the case may be, by the amount or the aggregate of the amounts referred to in the said sub-clause relatable to such foreign operations. Explanation.—For the purposes of this sub-section, the expression— (i)"year of convergence" means the previous year within which the convergence date falls; (ii)"convergence date" means

TITANOR COMPONENTS LTD.) vs. CIT AND ANOTHER

The appeals are dismissed

transfer. 17. We note for benefit the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Jogta Coal Co. Ltd. vs. CIT AIR 1959 SC 1232, wherein the Supreme Court has held as under:- “12. The words which require to be considered are "on the original cost thereof to the assessee". It has been held by the Privy Council in Commissioner

M/S TITANOR COMPONENTS LTD vs. CIT & ANR

The appeals are dismissed

transfer. 17. We note for benefit the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Jogta Coal Co. Ltd. vs. CIT AIR 1959 SC 1232, wherein the Supreme Court has held as under:- “12. The words which require to be considered are "on the original cost thereof to the assessee". It has been held by the Privy Council in Commissioner

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,DEL vs. M/S DEWAN CHAND SATYAPAL

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

price of the scanner. Their submission was that they process the ITA Nos. 87/03, 1411, 1541/06 Page 5 goods, being the unexposed films by the use of the scanner and thus they are to be classed as an industrial undertaking. They relied upon Section 10(15) (iv) (c) of the 1961 Act and upon the Explanation to Section

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. DEWAN CHAND SATYAPAL

price of the scanner. Their submission was that they process the 2012:DHC:7635-DB ITA Nos. 87/03, 1411, 1541/06 Page 5 goods, being the unexposed films by the use of the scanner and thus they are to be classed as an industrial undertaking. They relied upon Section 10(15) (iv) (c) of the 1961 Act and upon the Explanation

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-16(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. New Delhi. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2010-11] Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-16(1), Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi. Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv., Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. & Ms. Tejasvi Jain & Ms. Somya Jain, Ca Respondent By Shri G.C.Srivastava, Adv., Shri Kalrav Mehrotra, Adv. & Shri Mayank Patawari, Ca Date Of Hearing 11.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09.02.2023

section 43B of the Act which is separate code in itself and overrides other provisions of the Act. Undisputedly, the R&D cess has actually been paid to the Government within the time limits prescribed by section 43B of the Act. He contended that section 43B of the Act allows payment of statutory dues on payment basis. Any expenses which

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-16(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. New Delhi. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2010-11] Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-16(1), Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi. Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv., Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. & Ms. Tejasvi Jain & Ms. Somya Jain, Ca Respondent By Shri G.C.Srivastava, Adv., Shri Kalrav Mehrotra, Adv. & Shri Mayank Patawari, Ca Date Of Hearing 11.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09.02.2023

section 43B of the Act which is separate code in itself and overrides other provisions of the Act. Undisputedly, the R&D cess has actually been paid to the Government within the time limits prescribed by section 43B of the Act. He contended that section 43B of the Act allows payment of statutory dues on payment basis. Any expenses which

BRACE IRON & STEEL P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-2,, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

32A(2) and Section 33 of the Act. 80 ITA.No.8617/Del./2019 M/s. Brace Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. 5.3. The appellant relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court on the dispute between Tata Steel BSL Limited (respondent) and the assessee (petitioner). As per the facts of the cited case, the respondent on taking over