PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI - 02 vs BEST CITY DEVELOPERS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

$-14 to 18; * . IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI -h :ITA9QO/20i^^ PR. COMIVflSSIONER OFINCOME TAX,DELHI - 02 Appellant Through Mr. Rahul Kaushik, Advocate. versus best INFRASTRUCTURE INDIA<P) LTD. ..... Respondent Through Mr. Ved Jain with Mr. Pranjal Srivastava, Advocates. . * ITA 90.1/20,17; - PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI 02 Appellant Through Mr. Rahul Raushik, Advocate. • versus : . BEST INFRASTRUCTURE INDIA (P) LTD Respondent Through Mr. Ved Jain with Mr. Pranjal Srivastava, Advocates. + ITA 902/2017 PR. COIS^ISSIQ^ROF INCOME TAX, DELHI - 02.... Appellant : : ' : y Through Mr. Rahul Kaushik, Advocate. versus BEST 'j';'"-,., , Respondent 1 Through Mr, Ved Jain with Mr. Pranjal 7 . Srivastava, Advocates. + ITA 903/2017 -V ; PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI - 02.... Appellant Through Mr. Rahul Kaushik, Advocate. versus ITA 900/2017, 901/2017, Pagel ITA902/2017, 903/2017 iSt 904/2017 Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Signature Not Verified

BEST INFRASTRUCTURE INDIA (P) LTD. ..... Respondent Through Mr. Ved Jain with Mr. Pranjal Srivastava, Advocates. -• ------ . PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI - 02.... Appellant Through Mr. Rahul Kaushik, Advocate. : ' ••.r versus BEST CITY DEVELOPERS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Resi^|ndent Through Mr. Ved Jain with Mr. Pranjal Srivastava, Advocates. CORAM: • HON'BLEMR.JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA ORB ER % 30.10.2017 CM No.38779/2017 rexemption^ in ITA No.900/2ni7 CM No.3878i/2017 (exemption^ inITA No.901/2017 CMNo.38783/2017 (exemption^ in ITA No.902/2017 CM No.38785/2017 (exemption^ in ITA No.903/2fl17 CM No.38787/2017Yexemption) in ITA No.904/2ni7 j> Exemptions are allowed subject to all just exceptions. CM No.38780/2017 (delay in re-j51ingVin ITA No.900/2017 CM No.38782/2017 (delay iii re-filing^ in ITANo.901/2017 CM No.38784/2017 (delay in re-filing^ in ITANo.902/2017 CMNo.38786/2017 (delay in re-filing^ inITANo.903/2017 CMNd.38788/2017 (delay in re-filing^ in TTA No.904/2017 For the reasons stated in the applications, the applications are allowed. The delay inre-filing the appeals is condoned; ITA 900/2017,901/2017, ' ' p _ ITA 902/2017, 903/2017&904/2017 fage^

y4' TTA No.9nn/2017. ITA No.901/2017. ITA No.902/2017, ITA Nn Qnm0i7 <S^TTA No.904/2017 The additions under Section 153A assessment pursuant to search^made under Section 68 ofthe Income Tax Act, was directed to be deleted in these cases on an appeal by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) urging that the CIT(A) erred in law. Revenue is in appeal before us under Section 260A ofthe Inconie Tax Act. This Court notices that the ITAT followed the rule of Commissioner ofIncome Tax vs. Kabul Chawla, (2016) 380 ITR 573 (del.) decided for previous years - in respect of the same search assessment. The setting aside ofthe additions under Section 68 ofthe Income Tax by the ITAT was upheld in the Pr. Commissioner of Income offax vs. Best Infrastructure India (P.) Ltd, ITA 869/2017, decided on 13.10.2017. No questionofl^,therefo¥e, arises in these appe They are, consequently, dismissed. OCTOBER 30,2017 st mm/20i7^m/20i7, ITA 902/2017, 903/2017 &904/2017 S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J <r EVSACHDEVA,J

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI - 02 vs. BEST CITY DEVELOPERS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED