DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 03, GUWAHATI vs. NUMALIGARH REFINERY LIMITED, GUWAHATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

disallowance of claim of deduction of expenses under the head ‘Retirement Benefit of employees’. The brief facts qua the issue are that for the assessment year 2007-08, the assessee claimed deduction of Rs.1,00,22,722/-being provisions for retiring benefits of employees, in computation of income under the general provisions of the Act as well as in determining

M/S. NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD.,GUWAHATI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

disallowance of claim of deduction of expenses under the head ‘Retirement Benefit of employees’. The brief facts qua the issue are that for the assessment year 2007-08, the assessee claimed deduction of Rs.1,00,22,722/-being provisions for retiring benefits of employees, in computation of income under the general provisions of the Act as well as in determining

M/S. NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD.,GUWAHATI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

disallowance of claim of deduction of expenses under the head ‘Retirement Benefit of employees’. The brief facts qua the issue are that for the assessment year 2007-08, the assessee claimed deduction of Rs.1,00,22,722/-being provisions for retiring benefits of employees, in computation of income under the general provisions of the Act as well as in determining

M/S. NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD.,GUWAHATI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

disallowance of claim of deduction of expenses under the head ‘Retirement Benefit of employees’. The brief facts qua the issue are that for the assessment year 2007-08, the assessee claimed deduction of Rs.1,00,22,722/-being provisions for retiring benefits of employees, in computation of income under the general provisions of the Act as well as in determining

M/S. NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD.,GUWAHATI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

disallowance of claim of deduction of expenses under the head ‘Retirement Benefit of employees’. The brief facts qua the issue are that for the assessment year 2007-08, the assessee claimed deduction of Rs.1,00,22,722/-being provisions for retiring benefits of employees, in computation of income under the general provisions of the Act as well as in determining

M/S. NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD.,GUWAHATI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

disallowance of claim of deduction of expenses under the head ‘Retirement Benefit of employees’. The brief facts qua the issue are that for the assessment year 2007-08, the assessee claimed deduction of Rs.1,00,22,722/-being provisions for retiring benefits of employees, in computation of income under the general provisions of the Act as well as in determining

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD., GUWAHATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

disallowance of claim of deduction of expenses under the head ‘Retirement Benefit of employees’. The brief facts qua the issue are that for the assessment year 2007-08, the assessee claimed deduction of Rs.1,00,22,722/-being provisions for retiring benefits of employees, in computation of income under the general provisions of the Act as well as in determining

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD., GUWAHATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

disallowance of claim of deduction of expenses under the head ‘Retirement Benefit of employees’. The brief facts qua the issue are that for the assessment year 2007-08, the assessee claimed deduction of Rs.1,00,22,722/-being provisions for retiring benefits of employees, in computation of income under the general provisions of the Act as well as in determining

ACIT, CIRCLE - TINSUKIA , TINSUKIA vs. M/S. GREENPLY INDUSTRIES LTD., TINSUKIA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Manish Borad

disallowance of amortization leasehold lands. We thus decline to interfere”. 30. We, therefore under the given facts and circumstances of the case and respectfully following the decisions referred hereinabove, are of the view that the amortization of leasehold land and land development charges of Rs.18,73,242/- deserves to be allowed as an expenditure under section

GREENPLY INDUSTRIES LIMITED,TINSUKIA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-TINSUKIA, TINSUKIA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Manish Borad

disallowance of amortization leasehold lands. We thus decline to interfere”. 30. We, therefore under the given facts and circumstances of the case and respectfully following the decisions referred hereinabove, are of the view that the amortization of leasehold land and land development charges of Rs.18,73,242/- deserves to be allowed as an expenditure under section

NAGAHAT TEA ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -1, JORHAT

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act, the Ld. AR averred that CBDT’s Circular No. 37 of 2016 dated 02.11.2016 directs that any enhancement on account of sections 32 to 43 of the Act should be considered as part of income for considering any deduction u/s 80IE (actually any deduction under Chapter

NAGAHAT TEA ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -1, JORHAT

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act, the Ld. AR averred that CBDT’s Circular No. 37 of 2016 dated 02.11.2016 directs that any enhancement on account of sections 32 to 43 of the Act should be considered as part of income for considering any deduction u/s 80IE (actually any deduction under Chapter

NAGAHAT TEA ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -1, JORHAT

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act, the Ld. AR averred that CBDT’s Circular No. 37 of 2016 dated 02.11.2016 directs that any enhancement on account of sections 32 to 43 of the Act should be considered as part of income for considering any deduction u/s 80IE (actually any deduction under Chapter