DXC TECHNOLOGY INDIA PVT LTD,INDORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), INDORE, INDORE

Appeal is allowed

section 14A and\nRule 8D as well as the judicial rulings cited before us. Precisely stated, the\ndispute in present case relates to the additional disallowance of Rs.\n7,27,84,216/- made by AO u/s 14A invoking Rule 8D(2) of the Income-tax\nRules, 1962. Admittedly, the assessee earned tax-free dividend of Rs.\n33,93,37

SHREE SHANTANU VIDHYAPEETH SOCIETY ,INDORE, M.P. vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

37. In Collector (LA) v. Katiji [Collector (LA) v. Katiji, (1987) 2\nSCC 107], the Court noted that it had been adopting a justifiably\nliberal approach in condoning delay and that “justice on merits” is to be\n\npreferred as against what “scuttles a decision on merits”. Albeit, while\nreversing an order of the High Court therein condoning delay, principles

S T I INDIA LTD.,INDORE vs. ACIT-5(1), INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

2: 10. This ground relates to the deduction of depreciation on plant and machinery. The assessee claimed depreciation of Rs. 3,89,37,375/-; the AO disallowed fully and the CIT(A) upheld disallowance partly to the extent of Rs. 1,82,66,673/-. Now, the assessee claims that it should have been allowed fully. 11. Facts apropos to this

S T I INDIA LTD.,INDORE vs. ACIT-5(1), INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

2: 10. This ground relates to the deduction of depreciation on plant and machinery. The assessee claimed depreciation of Rs. 3,89,37,375/-; the AO disallowed fully and the CIT(A) upheld disallowance partly to the extent of Rs. 1,82,66,673/-. Now, the assessee claims that it should have been allowed fully. 11. Facts apropos to this

S T I INDIA LTD.,INDORE vs. ACIT-5(1), INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

2: 10. This ground relates to the deduction of depreciation on plant and machinery. The assessee claimed depreciation of Rs. 3,89,37,375/-; the AO disallowed fully and the CIT(A) upheld disallowance partly to the extent of Rs. 1,82,66,673/-. Now, the assessee claims that it should have been allowed fully. 11. Facts apropos to this

ACIT-5(1), INDORE vs. S T I INDIA LTD., INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

2: 10. This ground relates to the deduction of depreciation on plant and machinery. The assessee claimed depreciation of Rs. 3,89,37,375/-; the AO disallowed fully and the CIT(A) upheld disallowance partly to the extent of Rs. 1,82,66,673/-. Now, the assessee claims that it should have been allowed fully. 11. Facts apropos to this

ACIT-5(1), INDORE vs. S T I INDIA LTD., INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

2: 10. This ground relates to the deduction of depreciation on plant and machinery. The assessee claimed depreciation of Rs. 3,89,37,375/-; the AO disallowed fully and the CIT(A) upheld disallowance partly to the extent of Rs. 1,82,66,673/-. Now, the assessee claims that it should have been allowed fully. 11. Facts apropos to this

S T I INDIA LTD.,INDORE vs. ACIT-5(1), INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

2: 10. This ground relates to the deduction of depreciation on plant and machinery. The assessee claimed depreciation of Rs. 3,89,37,375/-; the AO disallowed fully and the CIT(A) upheld disallowance partly to the extent of Rs. 1,82,66,673/-. Now, the assessee claims that it should have been allowed fully. 11. Facts apropos to this

ACIT-5(1), INDORE vs. S T I INDIA LTD., INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

2: 10. This ground relates to the deduction of depreciation on plant and machinery. The assessee claimed depreciation of Rs. 3,89,37,375/-; the AO disallowed fully and the CIT(A) upheld disallowance partly to the extent of Rs. 1,82,66,673/-. Now, the assessee claims that it should have been allowed fully. 11. Facts apropos to this

ACIT-5(1), INDORE vs. S T I INDIA LTD., INDORE

Appeals are disposed of as under:

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

2: 10. This ground relates to the deduction of depreciation on plant and machinery. The assessee claimed depreciation of Rs. 3,89,37,375/-; the AO disallowed fully and the CIT(A) upheld disallowance partly to the extent of Rs. 1,82,66,673/-. Now, the assessee claims that it should have been allowed fully. 11. Facts apropos to this

MILLION TRADERS BHOPAL P LTD,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT,CPC,BENGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

2 of 24 ITA No.124/Ind/2023 & ITANo.35/Ind/2023 Million Trader Bhopal Page 3 of 24 also assessed to tax. Thus, Ld. Sr. counsel has submitted that the individual license holders in whose name the TCS was collected by the Excise department and deposited to the Government account have not claimed the credit of the said TCS as the income from the transactions

MILLION TRADERS BHOPAL P LTD,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT,CPC,BENGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

2 of 24 ITA No.124/Ind/2023 & ITANo.35/Ind/2023 Million Trader Bhopal Page 3 of 24 also assessed to tax. Thus, Ld. Sr. counsel has submitted that the individual license holders in whose name the TCS was collected by the Excise department and deposited to the Government account have not claimed the credit of the said TCS as the income from the transactions

SOM DISTILLERIES PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. ITO-1(3), BHOPAL

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

section 80G of the Act and hence, the appellant is eligible for deduction of 50% of Rs. 4,01,000/- i.e. Rs. 2,00,500/-. The appellant could not establish the nexus between the donation and its business activities. Therefore, expenditure claimed on account of donation to above institutions cannot be allowed u/s 37(1) of the Act. Accordingly

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-I, BHOPAL , BHOPAL vs. SOM DISTILLERIES PRIVATE LIMITED, BHOPAL

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

section 80G of the Act and hence, the appellant is eligible for deduction of 50% of Rs. 4,01,000/- i.e. Rs. 2,00,500/-. The appellant could not establish the nexus between the donation and its business activities. Therefore, expenditure claimed on account of donation to above institutions cannot be allowed u/s 37(1) of the Act. Accordingly

MS MAPAEX REMEDIES PVT LTD,BHOPAL vs. ACIT 2 (1) BHOPAL, BHOPAL MADHYA PRADESH

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of Ld. CIT(A) is perverse in so much so that the Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition amounting to Rs. 1,62,04,760/- as disallowance of deduction u/s 80-IC of the Act made in the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s

MS MAPAEX REMEDIES PVT LTD,BHOPAL vs. ACIT 2 (1) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of Ld. CIT(A) is perverse in so much so that the Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition amounting to Rs. 1,62,04,760/- as disallowance of deduction u/s 80-IC of the Act made in the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 5 1, BHOPAL , BHOPAL MADHYA PRADESH vs. MAPAEX REMEDIES PVT LTD, BHOPAL MADHYA PRADESH

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of Ld. CIT(A) is perverse in so much so that the Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition amounting to Rs. 1,62,04,760/- as disallowance of deduction u/s 80-IC of the Act made in the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 5(1), BHOPAL , BHOPAL MADHYA PRADESH vs. MAPAEX REMEDIES PVT LTD, BHOPAL MADHYA PRADESH

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of Ld. CIT(A) is perverse in so much so that the Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition amounting to Rs. 1,62,04,760/- as disallowance of deduction u/s 80-IC of the Act made in the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s