DCIT,CIRCLE-1,RANCHI, RANCHI vs. CENTRAL COALFIELD LTD, RANCHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahaym/S Central Coalfields Ltd., D.C.I.T., Darbhanga House, Kutchery Road, Circle-1, Vs. Ranchi-834001 (Jharkhand) Ranchi. Pan No. Aaacc 7476 R Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue D.C.I.T., Central Coalfield Ltd., Circle-1, 4Th Floor, Central Revenue Building Vs. Ranchi. Annexee, 5A, Main Road, Ranchi-834001 (Jharkhand) Pan No. Aaacc 7476 R Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee

Depreciation on Lease Hold Land ₹ 39,98,32,440/- (iii) Land & Crop Compensation ₹ 24,09,000/- (iv) Grants to Sports Recreation & Grants of ₹ 11,67,32,000/- School & Institutions (v) Community Development & Environmental ₹ 12,24,87,000/- Expenditure (vi) Mines Closure Expenses ₹ 47,39,30,000/- (vii) CMPDIL expenses ₹ 56,93,18,000/- (viii) IICM Charges

M/S. CENTRAL COALFIELDS LTD.,,RANCHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahaym/S Central Coalfields Ltd., D.C.I.T., Darbhanga House, Kutchery Road, Circle-1, Vs. Ranchi-834001 (Jharkhand) Ranchi. Pan No. Aaacc 7476 R Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue D.C.I.T., Central Coalfield Ltd., Circle-1, 4Th Floor, Central Revenue Building Vs. Ranchi. Annexee, 5A, Main Road, Ranchi-834001 (Jharkhand) Pan No. Aaacc 7476 R Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee

Depreciation on Lease Hold Land ₹ 39,98,32,440/- (iii) Land & Crop Compensation ₹ 24,09,000/- (iv) Grants to Sports Recreation & Grants of ₹ 11,67,32,000/- School & Institutions (v) Community Development & Environmental ₹ 12,24,87,000/- Expenditure (vi) Mines Closure Expenses ₹ 47,39,30,000/- (vii) CMPDIL expenses ₹ 56,93,18,000/- (viii) IICM Charges

M/S. HIMACHAL CONSTRUCTION CO. PVT. LTD,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ITO, WARD NO.1(5), JAMSHEDPUR

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

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

depreciation. In other words the net addition sustained is Rs.26,34,060/-(Rs.41,43,171 - 15,09,111) as against addition made of Rs.55,24,228/- and the appellant gets a part relief of Rs. 28,90,168/-. Accordingly, this ground is partly allowed.” 6. Now, before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee has referred to the decision of this

JHARKHAND ROAD PROJECTS IMPLEMENTATION CO. LTD,RANCHI vs. DCIT CENT. CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. The appellant submitted that it had constructed the road as a part of the concessionaire agreement entered into between the government of Jharkhand and Jharkhand Accelerated Road Development company Limited and the assessee company and the project was awarded to the appellant on BOT and annuity basis. The appellant also placed reliance

JHARKHAND ROAD PROJECTS IMPLEMENTATION COMPANY LIMITED,RANCHI vs. DCIT,C.C.-1, RANCHI

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. The appellant submitted that it had constructed the road as a part of the concessionaire agreement entered into between the government of Jharkhand and Jharkhand Accelerated Road Development company Limited and the assessee company and the project was awarded to the appellant on BOT and annuity basis. The appellant also placed reliance

CCL,RANCHI vs. DCIT CIR-1, RANCHI

13,47,37,752\n3. The first issue is with regard to disallowance of Lease\nRent/Depreciation Forest Land expenses. It was submitted that the\nassessee in some years has paid and some years been treated as the\namortisation over the period of lease and in some years the depreciation\nhas been claimed treating the forest land lease as an intangible

ACIT CIR-1 , DHANBAD vs. M/S BHARAT COOKING COAL LTD , DHANBAD

section 37(1) of Income-tax\nAct. 1961 which lays down that \"any expenditure laid out or expended\n113/15 Wholly and exclusively for the purposes of business\" shall be allowed in\nANDRANATH GOOL, computing the income. It may not be out of place to note here that every year M/s\nBCCL, incurs expenses of over Rs. 700 crs under

DCIT CIR-1 , RANCHI vs. M/S CENTRAL COALFIELDS LTD, RANCHI

13,47,37,752\n3. The first issue is with regard to disallowance of Lease\nRent/Depreciation Forest Land expenses. It was submitted that the\nassessee in some years has paid and some years been treated as the\namortisation over the period of lease and in some years the depreciation\nhas been claimed treating the forest land lease as an intangible

ACIT CIR-1 , DHANBAD vs. M/S BHARAT COKING COAL LTD, DHANBAD

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and appeal by the assessee is partly allowed as well as cross-objection by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

1 Disallowance of depreciation 33,77,40,312/- 2 Stock difference 49,47,59,000/- 3 Disallowance out of repairs & maintenance 7,41,75,000/- 4 Repair of building and plant & machinery for pay 2,62,24,766/- office 5 Repairs and maintenance 2,06,44,292/- 6 Store purchase 6,78,69,000/- 7 Explosive purchases

M/S BHARAT COOKING COAL LIMITED ,DHANBAD vs. ACIT CIRCLE-1 , DHANBAD

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and appeal by the assessee is partly allowed as well as cross-objection by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

1 Disallowance of depreciation 33,77,40,312/- 2 Stock difference 49,47,59,000/- 3 Disallowance out of repairs & maintenance 7,41,75,000/- 4 Repair of building and plant & machinery for pay 2,62,24,766/- office 5 Repairs and maintenance 2,06,44,292/- 6 Store purchase 6,78,69,000/- 7 Explosive purchases

ITO WARD-2(1), JAMSHEDPUR vs. M/S OM DAYAL INGOTS&STEEL CO. PVT LTD , JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, application u/s 27 filed by the assessee is allowed and both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

1) and sub-section (2), the Principal Chief Commissioner or the Chief Commissioner or the Principal Commissioner or the Commissioner or the Joint Commissioner, as the case may be, being satisfied on the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer about fitness of a case for the issue of notice under Section 148, need not issue such notice himself.” 8. Having

ITO WD -2(1), JAMSHEDPUR vs. M/S OM DAYAL INGOTS &STEEL CO. PVT LTD , JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, application u/s 27 filed by the assessee is allowed and both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

1) and sub-section (2), the Principal Chief Commissioner or the Chief Commissioner or the Principal Commissioner or the Commissioner or the Joint Commissioner, as the case may be, being satisfied on the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer about fitness of a case for the issue of notice under Section 148, need not issue such notice himself.” 8. Having

DCIT CIRCLE-1 , RANCHI vs. CCL LTD , RANCHI

13,47,37,752\n3.\nThe first issue is with regard to disallowance of Lease\nRent/Depreciation Forest Land expenses. It was submitted that the\nassessee in some years has paid and some years been treated as the\namortisation over the period of lease and in some years the depreciation\nhas been claimed treating the forest land lease as an intangible

DCIT CIR-1, RANCHI vs. CCL, RANCHI

13,47,37,752\n3.\nThe first issue is with regard to disallowance of Lease\nRent/Depreciation Forest Land expenses. It was submitted that the\nassessee in some years has paid and some years been treated as the\namortisation over the period of lease and in some years the depreciation\nhas been claimed treating the forest land lease as an intangible

M/S. CENTRAL COAL FIELDS LTD.,,RANCHI vs. ACIT/DCIT CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

13,47,37,752\n3.\nThe first issue is with regard to disallowance of Lease\nRent/Depreciation Forest Land expenses. It was submitted that the\nassessee in some years has paid and some years been treated as the\namortisation over the period of lease and in some years the depreciation\nhas been claimed treating the forest land lease as an intangible

DCIT CIR-1,, RANCHI vs. CCL, RANCHI

13,47,37,752\n3. The first issue is with regard to disallowance of Lease\nRent/Depreciation Forest Land expenses. It was submitted that the\nassessee in some years has paid and some years been treated as the\namortisation over the period of lease and in some years the depreciation\nhas been claimed treating the forest land lease as an intangible

ACIT CIRCLE-1 , DHANBAD vs. M/S BHARAT COOKING COAL LTD , DHANBAD

section 37(1) of Income-tax\nAct. 1961 which lays down that \"any expenditure ... laid out or expended\nwholly and exclusively for the purposes of business\" shall be allowed in\ncomputing the income. It may not be out of place to note here that every year M/s\nANDRANATH GOOL, incurs expenses of over Rs. 700 crs under the head \"contractual

CCL,RANCHI vs. ACIT CIR-1, RANCHI

13,47,37,752\n3. The first issue is with regard to disallowance of Lease\nRent/Depreciation Forest Land expenses. It was submitted that the\nassessee in some years has paid and some years been treated as the\namortisation over the period of lease and in some years the depreciation\nhas been claimed treating the forest land lease as an intangible