Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.58 seconds)The Dy Cit1 (1), Indore vs M/S M.P. Paschim Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran ... on 10 April, 2024
"8. Ground No. (i)
It is observed that assessee during year under consideration
received a sum of Rs. 19,65,18,794/- as service line deposits
from customers for setting up service line which include cost of
GI pipes, bricks sand etc. The said charges have been received
by assessee as per provisions of Electricity Act, 2003, and
regulations framed thereunder, by DERC from time to time. It is
observed that said issue has been considered by this Tribunal,
in assessee's own case DCIT vs. BSES Yamuna Power Ltd. in
consolidated order dated 05/10/15 for Assessment Years
2005- 06 to 2008-09 as under:
M.P.Pashchim Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Co ... vs The Dy Cit 1(1), Indore on 10 April, 2024
"8. Ground No. (i)
It is observed that assessee during year under consideration
received a sum of Rs. 19,65,18,794/- as service line deposits
from customers for setting up service line which include cost of
GI pipes, bricks sand etc. The said charges have been received
by assessee as per provisions of Electricity Act, 2003, and
regulations framed thereunder, by DERC from time to time. It is
observed that said issue has been considered by this Tribunal,
in assessee's own case DCIT vs. BSES Yamuna Power Ltd. in
consolidated order dated 05/10/15 for Assessment Years
2005- 06 to 2008-09 as under:
The Dy Cit 1(1), Indore vs M/S M.P. Paschim Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran ... on 10 April, 2024
"8. Ground No. (i)
It is observed that assessee during year under consideration
received a sum of Rs. 19,65,18,794/- as service line deposits
from customers for setting up service line which include cost of
GI pipes, bricks sand etc. The said charges have been received
by assessee as per provisions of Electricity Act, 2003, and
regulations framed thereunder, by DERC from time to time. It is
observed that said issue has been considered by this Tribunal,
in assessee's own case DCIT vs. BSES Yamuna Power Ltd. in
consolidated order dated 05/10/15 for Assessment Years
2005- 06 to 2008-09 as under:
The Dy Cit 1(1), Indore vs M/S M.P. Paschim Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran ... on 10 April, 2024
"8. Ground No. (i)
It is observed that assessee during year under consideration
received a sum of Rs. 19,65,18,794/- as service line deposits
from customers for setting up service line which include cost of
GI pipes, bricks sand etc. The said charges have been received
by assessee as per provisions of Electricity Act, 2003, and
regulations framed thereunder, by DERC from time to time. It is
observed that said issue has been considered by this Tribunal,
in assessee's own case DCIT vs. BSES Yamuna Power Ltd. in
consolidated order dated 05/10/15 for Assessment Years
2005- 06 to 2008-09 as under:
The Dy Cit 1(1), Indore vs M/S M.P. Paschim Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran ... on 10 April, 2024
"8. Ground No. (i)
It is observed that assessee during year under consideration
received a sum of Rs. 19,65,18,794/- as service line deposits
from customers for setting up service line which include cost of
GI pipes, bricks sand etc. The said charges have been received
by assessee as per provisions of Electricity Act, 2003, and
regulations framed thereunder, by DERC from time to time. It is
observed that said issue has been considered by this Tribunal,
in assessee's own case DCIT vs. BSES Yamuna Power Ltd. in
consolidated order dated 05/10/15 for Assessment Years
2005- 06 to 2008-09 as under:
Standard Chartered Investments & Loans ... vs Dcit 1(3), Mumbai on 29 January, 2020
28. We have noted that Hon'ble Delhi High Court in DCIT vs. BSES
Rajdhani Powers Ltd. (supra) and in CIT vs. Bonanza Portfolio Ltd.
(supra) held that computer peripherals and accessories form an integral
part of computer system and eligible for depreciation @ 60%.
Considering the decision of Tribunal, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court is
directed the Assessing Officer to allow the depreciation @ 60% on
printers, cable lines and other connected peripherals. Hence, this
ground of appeal is allowed.
Ge Asset Management Incorporated, ... vs Department Of Income Tax
), Hoogly Mills Co. Ltd. DCIT, 74 ITD 309[Cal
ITAT] and Mumbai ITAT decision in the case of DCIT vs. BSES Ltd., 113 TTJ
227 (Mum).
Orbit Corporation Ltd, Mumbai vs Department Of Income Tax
2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the assessee a domestic company filed its return of income declaring an income under section 115JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) amounting to Rs. 84,38,098/- claiming refund of Rs. 2,23,31,925/-. Subsequently the assessee filed revised return claming the same amount of Refund of Rs. 2,23,31,925/-. The revised return was processed but the assessee was not allowed interest under section 244A of the Act. By an application under section 154 the assessee requested to grant of interest on the refund arising due to excess of payment of self assessment tax of Rs. 3.00 crores deposited on 5.4.2007. However, the A.O after referring to the provisions of section 244A(1) of the Act was of the view that as per explanation to clause (b), the interest under section 244A(1) is not allowable on the self assessment tax paid by the assessee and accordingly he rejected the assessee's petition under section 154 of the Act vide order dated 17.4.2009. On appeal ld. CIT(A) following the decision in DCIT vs. BSES Ltd. (113 TTJ 227), Addl.
1