ITAT Delhi Judgments — August 2025

ALOK KUMAR AGARWAL,NEW DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI

ITA 6194/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2016-17Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ALANKIT ASSIGNMENTS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI

ITA 6195/DEL/2024[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2010-11Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ALOK KUMAR AGARWAL,NEW DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI

ITA 6196/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2020-21Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ANKIT AGARWAL,DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, DELHI

ITA 6197/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2019-20Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ALANKIT ASSIGNMENTS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI

ITA 6198/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2013-14Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ANKIT AGARWAL,DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, DELHI

ITA 6199/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2012-13Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

JAYPEE INFRATECH LIMITED,NOIDA vs PCIT , NOIDA

ITA 2641/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2014-15Partly Allowed

The Tribunal restored the appeals back to the PCIT to await the final outcome of proceedings for assessment year 2012-13, which are pending before the Supreme Court. The assessee is at liberty to raise all contentions in the subsequent proceedings.

SOFTWAREONE INDIA PVT. LTD. (AS SUCCESSOR OF COMPAREX INDIA PVT. LTD.),NEW DELHI vs ACIT, CIRCLE 22(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 4287/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2020-21Allowed

The Tribunal held that an assessment framed in the name of a non-existent entity, after being informed of a merger, is a curable defect and is void ab initio. The assessment proceedings are to be treated as non-existent in the eyes of law.

ADDI. CIT SPL. RANGE-8, NEW DELHI vs SHRI LAL MAHAL LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 4844/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2014-15Dismissed

The Tribunal noted that the assessee's prior appeals were dismissed with liberty to revive after moratorium. Given this context and the submission regarding the commencement of liquidation, the Tribunal found the Revenue's appeal deserved dismissal, with liberty to revive.

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15, NEW DELHI vs GAURAV CHOUDHARY, NEW DELHI

ITA 1699/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2017-18Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the source of the cash was explained as it was withdrawn by LLPs and kept with the assessee's father. The addition made by the AO was not sustainable and was deleted.

RBA BUILDTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,UTTAR PRADESG vs DCIT,ACIT, CEN CIRCLE, NOIDA

ITA 4651/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2017-18Allowed

The Tribunal held that the notice issued under the unamended Section 148, served after the effective date of the amended provisions, was invalid. Consequently, the assessment framed based on this defective notice was void ab initio.

MCG MANUFACTURING CO PRIVATE LIMITED,ZAKIR NAGAR, SOUTH EAST DELHI vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 16(3), DELHI

ITA 1255/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2017-18Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A), being a quasi-judicial authority, was duty-bound to decide the jurisdictional issues raised by the assessee before adjudicating on merits. The Tribunal restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for deciding the jurisdictional grounds before considering the additions.

ALANKIT LIMITED,DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, DELHI

ITA 6209/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2018-19Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

IHHR HOSPITALITY PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs THE ACIT, CIRCLE 12(1), DELHI, NEW DELHI

ITA 443/DEL/2025[2017-2018]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2017-2018Partly Allowed

The Tribunal allowed the appeal regarding the disallowance under Section 14A, stating the Assessee did not earn dividend income and there was no finding that expenditure was incurred to earn exempt income. The disallowance for delayed employee contribution was dismissed as not pressed. The disallowance of interest on unsecured loan was allowed, following the Tribunal's own order for a prior assessment year.

ALANKIT LIMITED,DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, DELHI

ITA 6208/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2017-18Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ITO, WARD-24(1), NEW DELHI vs SOUTHEND INFRASTRUCTURE P.LTD, NEW DELHI

ITA 5977/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2013-14Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in deleting additions for certain investors as complete documentation regarding the genuineness of transactions and creditworthiness was not provided. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) confirmed additions for other investors correctly due to incomplete or missing documentation.

ALOK KUMAR AGARWAL,NEW DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI

ITA 6207/DEL/2024[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2010-11Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

COUNCIL OF ARCHITECTURE,NEW DELHI vs ITO (EXEMPTION), WARD-1(3) , NEW DELHI

ITA 952/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2014-15Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the one-time life membership fee received by the assessee should not be treated as a revenue receipt. The consistent practice of the assessee and the principles of real income theory support its treatment as a capital receipt with a portion recognized over time.

ANKIT AGARWAL,DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, DELHI

ITA 6205/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2013-14Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ANKIT AGARWAL,DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, DELHI

ITA 6204/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2017-18Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs PATANJALI AYURVED LTD., DELHI

ITA 605/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2014-15Remanded

The Tribunal noted that the appeals stem from a common search action and subsequent section 153C proceedings. The Assessing Officer's assessment order indicated that non-genuine bills were provided to the assessee by another party.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs PATANJALI AYURVED LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 606/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2013-14Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that since the section 153C notice was issued in 2021, the assessment years were unabated. The Revenue's contentions supporting the impugned assessments lacked merit, and the assessments were quashed.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs PATANJALI AYURVED LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 607/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2015-16Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that since the section 153C notice was issued in 2021, the assessment years were unabated. The Revenue's contentions supporting the impugned assessments lacked merit, and the assessments were quashed.

ALANKIT ASSIGNMENTS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI

ITA 6203/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2019-20Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ALANKIT LIMITED,DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, DELHI

ITA 6202/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2012-13Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

RAM KUMAR TYAGI,GHAZIABAD vs ITO, GHAZIABAD

ITA 2676/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2008-09Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the grounds related to the validity of the assessment order due to the issuance of the notice under Section 143(2) on the same day as the return filing were legal in nature and admitted for adjudication. However, the judgment does not explicitly detail the finding on these specific legal grounds concerning the procedural validity of the notice under Section 143(2) and the initiation of proceedings under Section 147. Regarding the addition of INR 8,89,37,168/- as LTCG, the Tribunal held that the ancestral lands were inherited by the assessee's family from their forefathers and were thus HUF property. The sale consideration was received by the assessee on behalf of the smaller HUF of his family. Therefore, the capital gains should be assessed in the hands of the HUF, not the assessee in his individual capacity. The Tribunal directed the AO to delete the additions made in the assessee's individual hands and take necessary action in the hands of the HUF. Regarding the addition of INR 75,000/- for agricultural income, the Tribunal found no infirmity in the lower authorities' order as the assessee failed to produce any evidence, and thus dismissed this ground. The appeal was partly allowed.

ALANKIT ASSIGNMENTS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI

ITA 6201/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2018-19Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ALANKIT LIMITED,DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, DELHI

ITA 6162/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2014-15Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ANKIT AGARWAL,DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, DELHI

ITA 6163/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2016-17Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ANKIT AGARWAL,NEW DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI

ITA 6164/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2011-12Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ANKIT AGARWAL,DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, DELHI

ITA 6165/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2014-15Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ANKIT AGARWAL,DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, DELHI

ITA 6166/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2015-16Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ANKIT AGARWAL,DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, DELHI

ITA 6167/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2018-19Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ANKIT AGARWAL,DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, DELHI

ITA 6168/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2020-21Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ALANKIT LIMITED,DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, DELHI

ITA 6169/DEL/2024[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2010-11Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ALANKIT ASSIGNMENTS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI

ITA 6170/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2012-13Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ALANKIT LIMITED,DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, DELHI

ITA 6171/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2011-12Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ANKIT AGARWAL,NEW DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI

ITA 6172/DEL/2024[2010-11]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2010-11Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ALOK KUMAR AGARWAL,NEW DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI

ITA 6174/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2017-18Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ALOK KUMAR AGARWAL,NEW DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI

ITA 6177/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2019-20Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ALOK KUMAR AGARWAL,NEW DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI

ITA 6178/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2018-19Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ALANKIT ASSIGNMENTS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI

ITA 6179/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2011-12Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ALANKIT LIMITED,DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, DELHI

ITA 6180/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2013-14Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ALANKIT LIMITED,DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, DELHI

ITA 6181/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2016-17Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ALANKIT LIMITED,DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, DELHI

ITA 6182/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2015-16Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ALANKIT ASSIGNMENTS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI

ITA 6183/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2015-16Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ALANKIT ASSIGNMENTS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI

ITA 6184/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2014-15Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ALANKIT LIMITED,DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, DELHI

ITA 6185/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2019-20Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ALANKIT ASSIGNMENTS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI

ITA 6186/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2016-17Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ALANKIT ASSIGNMENTS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI

ITA 6187/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2025AY 2017-18Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeals for AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12, as they were self-explanatory and the CIT-DR had no objection. Consequently, these appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.