DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

section 43B of the Act. He similarly noted that the assessee had also made payment of Rs.6.40 crores to LIC on account of employees’ gratuity fund from the date of its incorporation till 31.03.2003 whereas the expenses for the year was only Rs.1.10 crores. Thus the assessee has made additional claim of Rs.5.30crores. According to the Assessing Officer since

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

section 43B of the Act. He similarly noted that the assessee had also made payment of Rs.6.40 crores to LIC on account of employees’ gratuity fund from the date of its incorporation till 31.03.2003 whereas the expenses for the year was only Rs.1.10 crores. Thus the assessee has made additional claim of Rs.5.30crores. According to the Assessing Officer since

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

section 43B of the Act. He similarly noted that the assessee had also made payment of Rs.6.40 crores to LIC on account of employees’ gratuity fund from the date of its incorporation till 31.03.2003 whereas the expenses for the year was only Rs.1.10 crores. Thus the assessee has made additional claim of Rs.5.30crores. According to the Assessing Officer since

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

section 43B of the Act. He similarly noted that the assessee had also made payment of Rs.6.40 crores to LIC on account of employees’ gratuity fund from the date of its incorporation till 31.03.2003 whereas the expenses for the year was only Rs.1.10 crores. Thus the assessee has made additional claim of Rs.5.30crores. According to the Assessing Officer since

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

section 43B of the Act. He similarly noted that the assessee had also made payment of Rs.6.40 crores to LIC on account of employees’ gratuity fund from the date of its incorporation till 31.03.2003 whereas the expenses for the year was only Rs.1.10 crores. Thus the assessee has made additional claim of Rs.5.30crores. According to the Assessing Officer since

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

section 43B of the Act. He similarly noted that the assessee had also made payment of Rs.6.40 crores to LIC on account of employees’ gratuity fund from the date of its incorporation till 31.03.2003 whereas the expenses for the year was only Rs.1.10 crores. Thus the assessee has made additional claim of Rs.5.30crores. According to the Assessing Officer since

INDUS BIOTECH LIMITED,PUNE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

depreciation after\ncompletion and on commencement of its use for business and that stage\nhaving not reached and no asset having come into existence, the capital\nwork-in-progress had to be written off as such.\n30. In the case of Asia Power Projects (P.) Ltd. (supra), the High Court\nof Karnataka held that, if the assessee incurs a liability

SILVER OAK BUILDCON PVT. LTD.,PUNE vs. ACIT-6, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2017-18

43B of the Act reported in the tax audit report which was by mistake not added back to the total income of the assessee while filing of the return of income. It was submitted that this mistake was an apparent casting and error effect by the tax auditor and the company never had any intention of evading

DANA INDIA PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(2),, PUNE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.473/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

depreciation on the same will warrant inclusion in the operating costs. The impugned order on this issue is set aside. The AO/TPO is directed to verify this aspect and then decide accordingly. II. Prior period expenses 11.1. The next operating cost disputed by the assessee is `Prior period expenses’. The ld. AR stated that the assessee incurred Administrative expenses

ARISTO FOILS MFG CO., ,PUNE vs. DCIT CIRCLE 8, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1922/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Aristo Foils Mfg. Co., Vs. Dcit, Circle-8, Pune. W-229, S Block, Midc, Bhosari, Pune- 411026. Pan : Aabfa8946L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Hanmant Dattatray Dhavle Revenue By Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde : Date Of Hearing : 16.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.12.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 03.01.2024 Passed By Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-12, Delhi [‘Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Fact & In The Circumstance Of The Case & In Law Of The Learned Addl/Jcit (A)-12 Delhi Has Grievously Erred In Deciding The Appeal Ex-Parte, Without Providing Sufficient Opportunity To Appellate. 2. On The Fact & In The Circumstance Of The Case & In Law Of The Learned Addl/Jcit (A) 12 Delhi Has Ought To Have Decided The Appeal On Merits Instead Of Dismissing The Appeal For Non- Attendance.

Depreciation. 4. On the fact and in the circumstance of the case and in law of the learned Addl / JCIT (A) 12 Delhi, has erred in disallowing and adding back an amount of Rs.24,635/- on account of Vehicle Insurance. 5. On the fact and in the circumstance of the case and in law of the learned Addl / JCIT