PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX FARIDABAD vs. M/S NHPC LTD

The appeals stand disposed of

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL

2. “Whether, on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble ITAT was right in law in deleting the addition of Rs.131,75,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) (and not under section 115JB) on account of “Advance Against Depreciation

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SWARAJ ENGINES LTD MOHALI

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN

depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year): Provided that where an assessment under sub- section (3) of section 143 or this section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall

MANGE RAM MITTAL vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

143 or section 144 been concluded "[prior to the nt of the search or the date of asis of such assessments; me have been filed under section e to a notice issued under sub- on 142 or section 148] but ot been made till the date of n, on the basis of the income rns; or filing a return

CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OSD LUDHIANA vs. M/S CEIGALL INDIA LTD

Bench: Cit(A). The Same Was Partly Allowed. The Addition Made By Applying Net Profit Dinesh Kumar 2022.10.16 16:54 I Attest To The Accuracy & Integrity Of This Document

143(3) of the Act, the assessee filed an appeal before CIT(A). The same was partly allowed. The addition made by applying net profit DINESH KUMAR 2022.10.16 16:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document ITA-61-2021 (O&M) 2 rate of 12% on the total gross receipt was reduced