CIT v. Virgin Securities & Credits (P) Ltd.

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Make My Trip (India) Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

…es filed before the CIT(A) are concerned, he submitted that these are only for the AMP expenditure and the documents are vital. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Virgin Securities and Credits P. Ltd., reported in 332 ITR 396, he submitted that the Hon’ble High Court in the said decision has held that before admitting the additional evidences, the CIT(A) had obtained a remand report from the AO. The additional evidence was crucial to the disposal of the appeal and had a direct bearing on the quantum of the claim made by the assessee. Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules,…

Makemy Trip (India) Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

…es filed before the CIT(A) are concerned, he submitted that these are only for the AMP expenditure and the documents are vital. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Virgin Securities and Credits P. Ltd., reported in 332 ITR 396, he submitted that the Hon’ble High Court in the said decision has held that before admitting the additional evidences, the CIT(A) had obtained a remand report from the AO. The additional evidence was crucial to the disposal of the appeal and had a direct bearing on the quantum of the claim made by the assessee. Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules,…

Niit Technologies Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

…g of additional evidence, is handmade for justice and justice should not be allowed to be choked only because of some inadvertent error or omission on the part of one of the parties to lead evidence. In the case of CIT v. Virgin Securities & Credits (P) Ltd.: 332 ITR 396 (Del), the Hon. jurisdictional High Court held that the CIT(A) may admit additional evidence, after obtaining a remand report from the assessing officer, if the evidence sought to be adduced by the applicant is crucial to the disposal of the appeal. Hon'ble ITAT Delhi have also held in the case of Electra (Jaipur) (P) Ltd. vs. lAC (26 ITO 236) th…

Niit Technologies Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

…g of additional evidence, is handmade for justice and justice should not be allowed to be choked only because of some inadvertent error or omission on the part of one of the parties to lead evidence. In the case of CIT v. Virgin Securities & Credits (P) Ltd.: 332 ITR 396 (Del), the Hon. jurisdictional High Court held that the CIT(A) may admit additional evidence, after obtaining a remand report from the assessing officer, if the evidence sought to be adduced by the applicant is crucial to the disposal of the appeal. Hon'ble ITAT Delhi have also held in the case of Electra (Jaipur) (P) Ltd. vs. lAC (26 ITO 236) th…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Niit Technologies Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

…g of additional evidence, is handmade for justice and justice should not be allowed to be choked only because of some inadvertent error or omission on the part of one of the parties to lead evidence. In the case of CIT v. Virgin Securities & Credits (P) Ltd.: 332 ITR 396 (Del), the Hon. jurisdictional High Court held that the CIT(A) may admit additional evidence, after obtaining a remand report from the assessing officer, if the evidence sought to be adduced by the applicant is crucial to the disposal of the appeal. Hon'ble ITAT Delhi have also held in the case of Electra (Jaipur) (P) Ltd. vs. lAC (26 ITO 236) th…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Niit Technologies Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

…g of additional evidence, is handmade for justice and justice should not be allowed to be choked only because of some inadvertent error or omission on the part of one of the parties to lead evidence. In the case of CIT v. Virgin Securities & Credits (P) Ltd.: 332 ITR 396 (Del), the Hon. jurisdictional High Court held that the CIT(A) may admit additional evidence, after obtaining a remand report from the assessing officer, if the evidence sought to be adduced by the applicant is crucial to the disposal of the appeal. Hon'ble ITAT Delhi have also held in the case of Electra (Jaipur) (P) Ltd. vs. lAC (26 ITO 236) th…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Shri Ramit Vohra, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

…FIT FOR PUBLICATION (JM) (AM) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: ‘F’: NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No:- 4373/Del/2012 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) ACIT, Shri Ramit Vohra, Circle 39(1), Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN No: AAEPV7263Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT Revenue by : Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR Assessee by : Shri G.S. Kohli, CA ORDER Per Anadee Nath Misshra, AM (A) This appeal by Revenue is filed against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XXVIII, New Delhi, [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short], dated 29.06.2012…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Saamag Developers Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal stand dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumaray 2006-07

…d go to the root of the matter, hence, the same were rightly admitted by the Ld. CIT(A) under Rule 46At to decide the issue on merit. We further note that Ld. CIT(A) has relied upon the decision in the case of CIT vs. Virgin Securities Credit P. Ltd. (2011) 332 ITR 396 (Del.) wherein, the jurisdictional High Court has held that, evidence which is crucial in disposing the case can be admitted. Since the documents filed by the assessee as additional evidences are of the nature that may advance the interest of justice and vital to decide the issue under consideration, the same need to be admitted and considered…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Saga Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal stand dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumaray 2006-07

…d go to the root of the matter, hence, the same were rightly admitted by the Ld. CIT(A) under Rule 46At to decide the issue on merit. We further note that Ld. CIT(A) has relied upon the decision in the case of CIT vs. Virgin Securities Credit P. Ltd. (2011) 332 ITR 396 (Del.) wherein, the jurisdictional High Court has held that, evidence which is crucial in disposing the case can be admitted. Since the documents filed by the assessee as additional evidences are of the nature that may advance the interest of justice and vital to decide the issue under consideration, the same need to be admitted and considered…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Saamag Infrastructure Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal stand dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumaray 2006-07

…d go to the root of the matter, hence, the same were rightly admitted by the Ld. CIT(A) under Rule 46At to decide the issue on merit. We further note that Ld. CIT(A) has relied upon the decision in the case of CIT vs. Virgin Securities Credit P. Ltd. (2011) 332 ITR 396 (Del.) wherein, the jurisdictional High Court has held that, evidence which is crucial in disposing the case can be admitted. Since the documents filed by the assessee as additional evidences are of the nature that may advance the interest of justice and vital to decide the issue under consideration, the same need to be admitted and considered…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Saamag Construction Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal stand dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumaray 2006-07

…d go to the root of the matter, hence, the same were rightly admitted by the Ld. CIT(A) under Rule 46At to decide the issue on merit. We further note that Ld. CIT(A) has relied upon the decision in the case of CIT vs. Virgin Securities Credit P. Ltd. (2011) 332 ITR 396 (Del.) wherein, the jurisdictional High Court has held that, evidence which is crucial in disposing the case can be admitted. Since the documents filed by the assessee as additional evidences are of the nature that may advance the interest of justice and vital to decide the issue under consideration, the same need to be admitted and considered…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Niit Technologies Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2006-07

…In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘E’, New Delhi Before : Shri Amit Shukla, Judicial Member And Shri L.P. Sahu, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2006-07 ACIT, Circle 13(1), vs. M/s. NIIT Technologies Ltd., C- New Delhi. 125, Okhla Indl. Area, Phase-1, New Delhi. PAN: AAACN 0332P (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 318/Del/2012 (in ITA No. 3076/Del/2012) Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/s. NIIT Technologies vs. ACIT, Circle 13(1), Ltd., C-125, Okhla Indl. New Delhi. Area, Phase-1, New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by Ms. Rinku Singh, Sr. DR Assessee by Sh. Rohit Jain, Advocate & Ms. Tejas…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Jitf Waterways Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the cross appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit, Vs. Jitf Waterways Ltd., Circle-13(2), Jindal Tif Centre, New Delhi. 28, Najafgarh Road, New Delhi. Pan: Aabcj7845M Assessment Year: 2010-11 Jitf Waterways Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Jindal Tif Centre, Circle-13(2), 28, Najafgarh Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aabcj7845M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate; & Shri Asnshul Sachar & Karan Jain, Cas Revenue By : Shri D.K. Mishra, Sr.Dr & Smt. Naina Soin Kopil, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.11.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.11.2018

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : D : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 DCIT, Vs. JITF Waterways Ltd., Circle-13(2), Jindal TIF Centre, New Delhi. 28, Najafgarh Road, New Delhi. PAN: AABCJ7845M Assessment Year: 2010-11 JITF Waterways Ltd., Vs. DCIT, Jindal TIF Centre, Circle-13(2), 28, Najafgarh Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN: AABCJ7845M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate; and Shri Asnshul Sachar & Karan Jain, CAs Revenue by : Shri D.K. Mishra, Sr.DR & Smt. Naina Soin Kopil, Sr.…

M/S. Jitf Waterways Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the cross appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit, Vs. Jitf Waterways Ltd., Circle-13(2), Jindal Tif Centre, New Delhi. 28, Najafgarh Road, New Delhi. Pan: Aabcj7845M Assessment Year: 2010-11 Jitf Waterways Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Jindal Tif Centre, Circle-13(2), 28, Najafgarh Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aabcj7845M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate; & Shri Asnshul Sachar & Karan Jain, Cas Revenue By : Shri D.K. Mishra, Sr.Dr & Smt. Naina Soin Kopil, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.11.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.11.2018

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : D : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 DCIT, Vs. JITF Waterways Ltd., Circle-13(2), Jindal TIF Centre, New Delhi. 28, Najafgarh Road, New Delhi. PAN: AABCJ7845M Assessment Year: 2010-11 JITF Waterways Ltd., Vs. DCIT, Jindal TIF Centre, Circle-13(2), 28, Najafgarh Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN: AABCJ7845M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate; and Shri Asnshul Sachar & Karan Jain, CAs Revenue by : Shri D.K. Mishra, Sr.DR & Smt. Naina Soin Kopil, Sr.…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Mccain Foods India Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2008-09 Mccain Foods India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, C-6 Sda Commercial Circle-6(1), New Delhi Complex, New Delhi Pan :Aaacm4861G (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2008-09 Dcit, Vs. Mccain Foods India Pvt. Circle -6(1), New Delhi Ltd., C-6 Sda Commercial Complex, New Delhi Pan :Aaacm4861G (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mccain Foods India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, C-6 Sda Commercial Circle -6(1), New Delhi Complex, New Delhi Pan :Aaacm4861G (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ellate stage as the appellant as these documents are crucial for deciding the case. The documents furnished by the appellant can be admitted under Rule 46A to decide the issues involved on merit. In the case of CIT vs. Virgin Securities Credits P. Ltd. (2011) 332 ITR 396 (Del.) the jurisdictional High Court held that evidence crucial in disposal of case can be admitted. Since, the documents filed by the appellant before the CIT(A) are of the nature that may advance the interest of justice and show that there was no justification for addition made, the same need to be admitted and considered. The documents have ev…

M/S. Mccain Foods India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2008-09 Mccain Foods India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, C-6 Sda Commercial Circle-6(1), New Delhi Complex, New Delhi Pan :Aaacm4861G (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2008-09 Dcit, Vs. Mccain Foods India Pvt. Circle -6(1), New Delhi Ltd., C-6 Sda Commercial Complex, New Delhi Pan :Aaacm4861G (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mccain Foods India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, C-6 Sda Commercial Circle -6(1), New Delhi Complex, New Delhi Pan :Aaacm4861G (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ellate stage as the appellant as these documents are crucial for deciding the case. The documents furnished by the appellant can be admitted under Rule 46A to decide the issues involved on merit. In the case of CIT vs. Virgin Securities Credits P. Ltd. (2011) 332 ITR 396 (Del.) the jurisdictional High Court held that evidence crucial in disposal of case can be admitted. Since, the documents filed by the appellant before the CIT(A) are of the nature that may advance the interest of justice and show that there was no justification for addition made, the same need to be admitted and considered. The documents have ev…

M/S. Mccain Foods India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2008-09 Mccain Foods India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, C-6 Sda Commercial Circle-6(1), New Delhi Complex, New Delhi Pan :Aaacm4861G (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2008-09 Dcit, Vs. Mccain Foods India Pvt. Circle -6(1), New Delhi Ltd., C-6 Sda Commercial Complex, New Delhi Pan :Aaacm4861G (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mccain Foods India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, C-6 Sda Commercial Circle -6(1), New Delhi Complex, New Delhi Pan :Aaacm4861G (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ellate stage as the appellant as these documents are crucial for deciding the case. The documents furnished by the appellant can be admitted under Rule 46A to decide the issues involved on merit. In the case of CIT vs. Virgin Securities Credits P. Ltd. (2011) 332 ITR 396 (Del.) the jurisdictional High Court held that evidence crucial in disposal of case can be admitted. Since, the documents filed by the appellant before the CIT(A) are of the nature that may advance the interest of justice and show that there was no justification for addition made, the same need to be admitted and considered. The documents have ev…

ITO, New Delhi vs. Sh. Vikram Krishna, New Delhi

Accordingly, both the grounds of appeal of revenue are allowed

Bench: Sh. S. K. Yadav & Sh. Prashant Maharishiito Vs Vikram Krishna Ward-6(1), Room No. 380C, 12, School Lane C. R. Building New Delhi New Delhi Aadpk4288P (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant By Sh. S. L. Anuragi, Sr. Dr Respondent By Sh. Gagan Kumar, Adv & Mr. Manoj Nagreth, Ca Date Of Hearing 22.05.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 23.08.2018

…the assessing officer, and that it is incumbent on him to exercise the same if the facts and circumstances justify. Further, Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Virgin Page 9 of 23 ITO V Vikram Krishna A Y 2010-11 Securities Credit P. Ltd. (2011) 332 ITR 396 (Del) have held that evidence which is crucial in disposing a case can be admitted. Since the documents filed by the appellant as additional evidences are crucial in nature and go to the root of the matter, in order to adjudicate the issues involved in an effective manner, and in the interest of natural justice, and also because an opportunity ha…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Xo Infotech Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, Appeal of the Department is

Bench: Sh.Bhavnesh Saini & Sh. L.P.Sahu[Assessment Year: 2009-10] Xo Infotech Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, (Now Known As M/S. Saral Mining Ltd.), 304, Saffron Vs. Ward-7(3), Room No.306, Building, Panchvati To Ambawadi Road, Ambawadi C.R.Building, New Delhi. Ellisbeidge,Ahmedabad- 380006.Pan-Aaaxx0059K (Appellant) (Respondent) By Revenue : Shri Vijay Varma, Cit-D.R. By Assessee : Shri S.R. Wadhwa, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 07.06.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.07.2018

…llant which have been properly supported by the appellant during the course of the appellate proceedings. In this regard reliance is placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Virgin Securities and Credits P. Ltd., reported at 332 ITR 396 (Delhi), wherein, Hon'ble Delhi High Court has held as under.- "Held-dismissing the appeal, (i) that before admitting the additional evidence the Commissioner (Appeals) had obtained a remand report from the assessing officer. The additional evidence was crucial to the disposal of the ITA No.3342/Del/2013 XO Infotech Ltd., Ahmedabad. appeal and…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Saga Township Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit, Vs. M/S. Saamag Developers Central Circle -10, New Delhi Pvt. Ltd., B-67, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi Pan : Aajcs4952R (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Saamag Developers Pvt. Vs. Acit, Ltd., Central Circle -10, New Delhi B-67, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi Pan : Aajcs4952R (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2006-07 Acit, Vs. M/S. Saamag Developers Central Circle -10, New Delhi Pvt. Ltd., B-67, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi Pan : Aajcs4952R (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2006-07 Dcit, Vs. M/S. Saga Developers Pvt. Central Circle -10, New Delhi Ltd., B-67, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi Pan : Aajcs4932K (Appellant) (Respondent)

…document in form of exchange deed now furnished by the appellant as additional evidence are vital and go to the root of the matter, the same are admitted under rule 46A to decide the issue on merit. In the case of CIT Vs Virgin Securities Credit P. Ltd. (2011)332 ITR 396(Del) the jurisdictional High Court has held that, evidence which is crucial in disposing the case can be admitted. Since, the document filed by the appellant as additional evidence is of the nature that may advance the interest of justice and show that there was no justification for addition made, the same need to be admitted and considered. Ther…