THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, DIBRUGARH vs. OIL INDIA LTD., DIBRUGARH

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

disallowed such claim under Section 80IB and also under Section 80IC for the respective years on, inter alia, the following grounds:- A) The assessee’s oil wells for which the claim is made, is not an new industrial undertaking or enterprise; though there is no dispute that these are plants. B) As per Sub Rule (2) of Rule 18BBB

OIL INDIA LTD.,,DIBRUGARH vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2,, DIBRUGARH.

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

disallowed such claim under Section 80IB and also under Section 80IC for the respective years on, inter alia, the following grounds:- A) The assessee’s oil wells for which the claim is made, is not an new industrial undertaking or enterprise; though there is no dispute that these are plants. B) As per Sub Rule (2) of Rule 18BBB

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2,, DIBRUGARH. vs. OIL INDIA LTD., DIBRUGARH

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

disallowed such claim under Section 80IB and also under Section 80IC for the respective years on, inter alia, the following grounds:- A) The assessee’s oil wells for which the claim is made, is not an new industrial undertaking or enterprise; though there is no dispute that these are plants. B) As per Sub Rule (2) of Rule 18BBB

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2,, DIBRUGARH. vs. OIL INDIA LTD., DIBRUGARH

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

disallowed such claim under Section 80IB and also under Section 80IC for the respective years on, inter alia, the following grounds:- A) The assessee’s oil wells for which the claim is made, is not an new industrial undertaking or enterprise; though there is no dispute that these are plants. B) As per Sub Rule (2) of Rule 18BBB

OIL INDIA LTD.,DIBRUGARH vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE -2, DIBRUGARH

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

disallowed such claim under Section 80IB and also under Section 80IC for the respective years on, inter alia, the following grounds:- A) The assessee’s oil wells for which the claim is made, is not an new industrial undertaking or enterprise; though there is no dispute that these are plants. B) As per Sub Rule (2) of Rule 18BBB

OIL INDIA LTD.,DIBRUGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE -2, DIBRUGARH

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

disallowed such claim under Section 80IB and also under Section 80IC for the respective years on, inter alia, the following grounds:- A) The assessee’s oil wells for which the claim is made, is not an new industrial undertaking or enterprise; though there is no dispute that these are plants. B) As per Sub Rule (2) of Rule 18BBB

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. ASSAM AIR PRODUCTS (P) LTD, GUWAHATI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed as per terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

disallowances assessed the income at Rs. 3,71,32,967/-. 6. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before ld. CIT(A) and partly succeeded. 7. Aggrieved, the Revenue is now in appeal before this Tribunal. 8. Ld. D/R, supporting the order of ld. AO stated that the assessee is not manufacturing/producing gases and is merely refuelling gases and therefore, not liable

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. ASSAM AIR PRODUCTS (P) LTD, GUWAHATI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed as per terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

disallowances assessed the income at Rs. 3,71,32,967/-. 6. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before ld. CIT(A) and partly succeeded. 7. Aggrieved, the Revenue is now in appeal before this Tribunal. 8. Ld. D/R, supporting the order of ld. AO stated that the assessee is not manufacturing/producing gases and is merely refuelling gases and therefore, not liable

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. ASSAM AIR PRODUCTS (P) LTD, GUWAHATI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed as per terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

disallowances assessed the income at Rs. 3,71,32,967/-. 6. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before ld. CIT(A) and partly succeeded. 7. Aggrieved, the Revenue is now in appeal before this Tribunal. 8. Ld. D/R, supporting the order of ld. AO stated that the assessee is not manufacturing/producing gases and is merely refuelling gases and therefore, not liable

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. ASSAM AIR PRODUCTS (P) LTD, GUWAHATI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed as per terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

disallowances assessed the income at Rs. 3,71,32,967/-. 6. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before ld. CIT(A) and partly succeeded. 7. Aggrieved, the Revenue is now in appeal before this Tribunal. 8. Ld. D/R, supporting the order of ld. AO stated that the assessee is not manufacturing/producing gases and is merely refuelling gases and therefore, not liable

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. ASSAM AIR PRODUCTS (P) LTD, GUWAHATI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed as per terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

disallowances assessed the income at Rs. 3,71,32,967/-. 6. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before ld. CIT(A) and partly succeeded. 7. Aggrieved, the Revenue is now in appeal before this Tribunal. 8. Ld. D/R, supporting the order of ld. AO stated that the assessee is not manufacturing/producing gases and is merely refuelling gases and therefore, not liable

M/S. BRAHMAPUTRA CRACKER & POLYMER LTD. ,DIBRUGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 2, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

disallowed the claim of capitalizing interest received by assessee from short term deposit (herein after referred as ‘STD’) of unutilized borrowed funds by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. (supra), Bokaro Steels Ltd.(supra) and Bongaigaon Refinery & Petrochemicals Co. Ltd. (supra). The Ld. ITA Nos. 94 to 97/Gau/2018

M/S. BRAHMAPUTRA CRACKER & POLYMER LTD. ,DIBRUGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 2, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

disallowed the claim of capitalizing interest received by assessee from short term deposit (herein after referred as ‘STD’) of unutilized borrowed funds by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. (supra), Bokaro Steels Ltd.(supra) and Bongaigaon Refinery & Petrochemicals Co. Ltd. (supra). The Ld. ITA Nos. 94 to 97/Gau/2018

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 2, DIBRUGARH vs. M/S. BRAHMAPUTRA CRACKER & POLYMER LTD. , DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

disallowed the claim of capitalizing interest received by assessee from short term deposit (herein after referred as ‘STD’) of unutilized borrowed funds by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. (supra), Bokaro Steels Ltd.(supra) and Bongaigaon Refinery & Petrochemicals Co. Ltd. (supra). The Ld. ITA Nos. 94 to 97/Gau/2018