VASHISTH BUILDERS AND ENGINEERS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 26(1), NEW DELHI
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed
ITA 6934/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2024AY 2012-13
Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Judicialmember Vashisth Builders & Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle-26(1), A-52, 2Nd Floor, Fiee Complex, New Delhi Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-2, New Delhi. (Pan: Aabcv3687L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate Revenue By : Shir Vivek K. Upadhyay, Sr. Dr. Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2024 Date Of Order : 11.10.2024 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman, Am : 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals-10), New Delhi Dated 13.08.2018 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. Aggrieved With The Above Order, Assessee Is In Appeal Before Us By Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- I) The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Upholding The Assessment Order Passed By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 26(1), New Delhi Under Section 143(3) Of The Act, By Making An Addition Of Rs. 7,23,72,000/- Without Appreciating The Facts & 2 Circumstances Of The Case, The Law As Applicable & The Submissions & The Supporting Evidence Produced By The Appellant. Ii) The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Upholding The Disallowance / Addition Of Rs. 3,72,000/- Made By The Dcit As Notional Interest On Interest Free Loans Granted By The Appellant Out Of The Interest Expense Claimed By The Appellant Without Appreciating The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Law As Applicable & The Submissions & The Supporting Evidence Produced By The Appellant. Iii) The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Upholding The Addition Of Rs. 7,20,000/- Made By The Dcit By Treating The Share Capital Received By The Appellant During The Year As Unexplained Cash- Credit, Without Appreciating The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Law As Applicable & The Submissions & The Supporting Evidence Produced By The Appellant.
For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shir Vivek K. Upadhyay, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)
…njectures and thus, deserves to be deleted. Further reliance is placed on the following judicial decision: M/s. Mantram Commodities Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO, ITA.No.l05/Del./2021 dated 25.04.2022, ITAT Delhi Bench. CIT vs. Bwarkadhish Investment Pvt. Ltd., (2011) 330 ITR 298, High Court of Delhi. Pr.CIT-8 vs Softline Creations Pvt. Ltd., ITA 504/2016 dated 31.08.2016, the High Court of Delhi. Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. vs. Five Vision Promoters PVT. Ltd. & Ors., (2016) 380 ITR 0289, High Court of Delhi. CIT vs Goel Sons Golden Estate (P) Ltd., ITA No. 212/2012, Date of order 11.04.2012, High Court of Del…
