Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. v. CIT

289 ITR 83Supreme Court of India2007#1240 most cited

What is Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Section 271 of the Income-tax Act, being a penal provision, must be construed strictly and narrowly. The case also initially held that a clarificatory amendment was not retrospectively applicable, a view later reversed by a larger bench.

91

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Virtual Soft Systems Ltd v CIT · Section 271 · penal provision · strict interpretation · mens rea · concealment of income penalty · retrospective amendment · Gold Coin Health Food Pvt Ltd · 289 ITR 83 · 159 Taxmann 155

Also reported as

159 Taxmann 155

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBESection 132Section 132ASection 133ASection 135ASection 139Section 140A(4)Section 144C(13)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

employees contribution to pfsection 2(24)(x)section 2(24)section 36(1)(va)concealment of incomesection 43bsection 36(1)section 43section 36section 271(1)section 271section 139(1)

Judgments citing Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. v. CIT

M/S. Eskay Heat Transfers Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 534/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Sri.Prashanth C, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sankar Ganesh K, JCIT-DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…question of whether penalty can be imposed u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of income where returned losses were reduced in assessment and there was no tax payable by the assessee. Earlier, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Virtual Soft Systems in 289 ITR 83 [SC] had taken the view that no penalty could be levied on mere reduction in loss as there would be no tax payable by the assessee, which was a sine-quo-non for imposition of penalty. Amendments were made by the Finance Act, 2002, to Section 271(1)(iii) of the Act by incorporating the expression "if any" and also in Explanation 4 setting out the m…

M/S. Viroka Technology Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 507/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore01 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.R.E.Balasubramanyam, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Chetan R., Addl.CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…question of whether penalty can be imposed u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of income where returned losses were reduced in assessment and there was no tax payable by the assessee. Earlier, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Virtual Soft Systems in 289 ITR 83 [SC] had taken the view that no penalty could be levied on mere reduction in loss as there would be no tax payable by the assessee, which was a sine-quo-non for imposition of penalty. Amendments were made by the Finance Act, 2002, to Section 271(1)(iii) of the Act by incorporating the expression "if any" and also in Explanation 4 setting out the m…

M/S. Shalimar Agarbatti Company, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circel-2(2)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 485/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Smt.Sunaina Bhatia, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, JCIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 36Section 43B

…question of whether penalty can be imposed u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of income where returned losses were reduced in assessment and there was no tax payable by the assessee. Earlier, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Virtual Soft Systems in 289 ITR 83 [SC] had taken the view that no penalty could be levied on mere reduction in loss as there would be no tax payable by the assessee, which was a sine-quo-non for imposition of penalty. Amendments were made by the Finance Act, 2002, to Section 271(1)(iii) of the Act by incorporating the expression "if any" and also in Explanation 4 setting out the m…

M/S. Shalimar Agarbatti Company, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circel-2(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 484/BANG/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Nov 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Smt.Sunaina Bhatia, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, JCIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 36Section 43B

…question of whether penalty can be imposed u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of income where returned losses were reduced in assessment and there was no tax payable by the assessee. Earlier, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Virtual Soft Systems in 289 ITR 83 [SC] had taken the view that no penalty could be levied on mere reduction in loss as there would be no tax payable by the assessee, which was a sine-quo-non for imposition of penalty. Amendments were made by the Finance Act, 2002, to Section 271(1)(iii) of the Act by incorporating the expression "if any" and also in Explanation 4 setting out the m…

Kishan Dutt Sharma, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax (CPC), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 436/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Nov 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Smt.Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 234ASection 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…question of whether penalty can be imposed u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of income where returned losses were reduced in assessment and there was no tax payable by the assessee. Earlier, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Virtual Soft Systems in 289 ITR 83 [SC] had taken the view that no penalty could be levied on mere reduction in loss as there would be no tax payable by the assessee, which was a sine-quo-non for imposition of penalty. Amendments were made by the Finance Act, 2002, to Section 271(1)(iii) of the Act by incorporating the expression "if any" 8 Shri Kishan Dutt Sharma. and also in Exp…

M/S. Sumathi Nursing & Maternity Home, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, Centralized Processing Center, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 434/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Nov 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Sri.Pranav KrishnaFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 234Section 234ASection 250Section 36Section 43B

…question of whether penalty can be imposed u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of income where returned losses were reduced in assessment and there was no tax payable by the assessee. Earlier, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Virtual Soft Systems in 289 ITR 83 [SC] had taken the view that no penalty could be levied on mere reduction in loss as there would be no tax payable by the assessee, which was a sine-quo-non for imposition of penalty. Amendments were made by the Finance Act, 2002, to Section 271(1)(iii) of the Act by incorporating the expression "if any" and also in Explanation 4 setting out the m…

M/S. Synergics, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 506/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Nov 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Sri.R.E.Balasubramaniyam, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…er penalty can be imposed u/s.271(1)(c) of 7 M/s.Synergics. the Act for concealment of income where returned losses were reduced in assessment and there was no tax payable by the assessee. Earlier, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Virtual Soft Systems in 289 ITR 83 [SC] had taken the view that no penalty could be levied on mere reduction in loss as there would be no tax payable by the assessee, which was a sine- quo-non for imposition of penalty. Amendments were made by the Finance Act, 2002, to Section 271(1)(iii) of the Act by incorporating the expression "if any" and also in Explanation 4 setting out the…

M/S Synergics, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 505/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Sri.R.E.Balasubramaniyam, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…er penalty can be imposed u/s.271(1)(c) of 7 M/s.Synergics. the Act for concealment of income where returned losses were reduced in assessment and there was no tax payable by the assessee. Earlier, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Virtual Soft Systems in 289 ITR 83 [SC] had taken the view that no penalty could be levied on mere reduction in loss as there would be no tax payable by the assessee, which was a sine- quo-non for imposition of penalty. Amendments were made by the Finance Act, 2002, to Section 271(1)(iii) of the Act by incorporating the expression "if any" and also in Explanation 4 setting out the…

M/S. Anusha Techno Ventures, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 503/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Nov 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Sri.Ravishankar S.V., AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…question of whether penalty can be imposed u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of income where returned losses were reduced in assessment and there was no tax payable by the assessee. Earlier, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Virtual Soft Systems in 289 ITR 83 [SC] had taken the view that no penalty could be levied on mere reduction in loss as there would be no tax payable by the assessee, which was a sine- quo-non for imposition of penalty. Amendments were made by 8 M/s.Anusha Techno Ventures. the Finance Act, 2002, to Section 271(1)(iii) of the Act by incorporating the expression "if any" and also in…

M/S. P.R. Forgings Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Centralized Processing Centre, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 421/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Sri.Vishal S. Rao, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40A(3)Section 43B

…question of whether penalty can be imposed u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of income where returned losses were reduced in assessment and there was no tax payable by the assessee. Earlier, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Virtual Soft Systems in 289 ITR 83 [SC] had taken the view that no penalty could be levied on mere reduction in loss as there would be no tax payable by the assessee, which was a sine- quo-non for imposition of penalty. Amendments were made by the Finance Act, 2002, to Section 271(1)(iii) of the Act by incorporating the expression "if any" and also in Explanation 4 setting out the…

M/S. Environs Management (Bangalore) Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Centralized Processing Centre, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 420/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Sri.Vishal S. Rao, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234CSection 271(1)(c)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…question of whether penalty can be imposed u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of income where returned losses were reduced in assessment and there was no tax payable by the assessee. Earlier, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Virtual Soft Systems in 289 ITR 83 [SC] had taken the view that no 7 M/s.Environs Management (Bangalore) Pvt. Ltd. penalty could be levied on mere reduction in loss as there would be no tax payable by the assessee, which was a sine- quo-non for imposition of penalty. Amendments were made by the Finance Act, 2002, to Section 271(1)(iii) of the Act by incorporating the expression "if…

M/S. Infobells Inferactive Solutions, Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(3)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 411/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Infobells Interactive Solutions, The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, No.12, 2Nd Floor, 8Th V Block, Circle – 4(3)(1), K R Nanjappa Layout, Vs. Bengaluru. Koramangala, Bengaluru – 560 095. Pan : Aacfi 7614 Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. S. V. Ravishankar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Sankar Ganesh K, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 03.11.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.11.2021

For Appellant: Shri. S. V. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Sankar Ganesh K, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 36Section 43B

…question of whether penalty can be imposed u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of income where returned losses were reduced in assessment and there was no tax payable by the assessee. Earlier, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Virtual Soft Systems in 289 ITR 83 [SC] had taken the view that no penalty could be levied on mere reduction in loss as there would be no tax payable by the assessee, which was a sine-quo-non for imposition of penalty. Amendments were made by the Finance Act, 2002, to Section 271(1)(iii) of the Act by incorporating the expression "if any" and also in Explanation 4 setting out the m…

Suchirindia Infratech Pvt. Ltd vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax

Accordingly, the learned appellate authority has rightly dismissed the

ITTA/15/2021HC Telangana30 Apr 2021

Bench: T.VINOD KUMAR,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

Section 107

…v. Bank of Bihar, AIR 1967 SC 389. Merely describing a provision as an “Explanation” or a “clarification” is not decisive of its true meaning and import. On this aspect, this Court in Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi, (2007) 289 ITR 83 (SC) observed as under : “Even if the statute does contain a statement to the effect that the amendment is declaratory or clarificatory, that is not the end of the matter. The Court will not regard itself as being bound by the said statement in the statute itself, but will proceed to analyse the nature of the amendment and then conc…

Mr. Nikhil Sawhney, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Noida

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1248/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Aug 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishimr. Nikhil Sawhney Acit, 17 – Sunder Nagar, Central Circle, Vs. New Delhi – 110 003. Noida. Pan: Aaups0222Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143

…d to include losses. The expression 'profits and gains' refers to positive income whereas losses represent negative profit or in other words minus income. This aspect does not appear to have been noticed by the Bench in Virtual Soft Systems Ltd.'s case [2007] 289 ITR 83 (SC); [2007] 9 SCC 665. Reference to the order by this court dismissing the Revenue's Civil Appeal No. 7961 of 1996 in CIT v. Prithipal Singh and Co. [2001] 249 ITR 670 (SC) is also not very important because that was in relation to the assessment year 1970-71 when Explanation 4 to section 271(l)(c) was not in existence. The view of this court in…

Rajendra Kumar Sharda, Jaipur vs. ITO, Kota

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 150/JPR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2018AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Adv)For Respondent: Smt. Neene Jeph (JCIT)
Section 133(6)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…a penalty u/s 271(1)(c), it has to be proved that the assessee has consciously made the concealment or furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. The said principle has been reiterated in Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. vs. CIT (2007) 207 CTR (SC) 733: (2007) 289 ITR 83 (SC) held that “24. Sec.271 of the Act is a penal provision and there are well established principles for the interpretation of such a penal provision. Such a provision has to be construed strictly and narrowly and not widely or with the object of advancing the object and intention of the legislature.” 10.2 In the peculiar facts this case, the de…

Sh. Girraj Kishore Agarwal, HUF, Agra vs. Dy.C.I.T., Circle-1, Agra

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2/AGR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

For Appellant: Shri K.K. Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Waseem Arshad, Sr. D.R
Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…ismissing the appeal of Revenue held that where Assessment Year: 2010-11 income returned and assessed is NIL, no penalty is leviable. The Hon’ble Apex Court has followed its own decision rendered in the case of ‘Virtual Soft system Ltd. vs. CIT’ reported in 289 ITR 83 (SC) wherein it was held that penalty for concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars where loss is retruned and assessment made at reduced loss after adding amount sought to be evaded, penalty not leviable. 11.1 The Judgment of Hon’ble Jurisdictional of Allahabad High Court in the case of ‘Cheap Cycle Stores vs. CIT’ reported in 196 CTR 173…

Lala Bhagwan Dass Educational Trust, Delhi vs. ITO (Exemptions), Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6741/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. G.D.Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Sh.K.N.Charrylala Bhagwan Dass Educational Trust, Vs Ito (Exemption), A-52, Jitar Nagar, Opp. Kothi No.299, Trust Ward-Iv, Gagan Vihar, Delhi-110092. Delhi. Pan-Aaatl1870H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 12ASection 271(1)(c)Section 80G(5)(vi)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘D’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. G.D.AGRAWAL, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SH.K.N.CHARRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Lala Bhagwan Dass Educational Trust, vs ITO (Exemption), A-52, Jitar Nagar, Opp. Kothi No.299, Trust Ward-IV, Gagan Vihar, Delhi-110092. Delhi. PAN-AAATL1870H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Ajit Gandhi, CA Respondent by Sh. Arun Kumar Yadav, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 20.09.2017 Date of Pronouncement 09.10.2017 ORDER PER K.N.CHARRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal preferred by the assessee challenging the order dated 17.11.2015 in Appeal No. 310/2014-15 passing by the…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Granite Gate Properties Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2239/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadi N Mishra

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Sapra, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Saroha, CIT (DR)
Section 271

…FIT FOR PUBLICATION (JM) (AM) ITA Nos. 2239, 2240/Del/2014 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH "C", NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADI N MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.:- 2239, 2240/Del/2014 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12 DCIT, Circle 12 (1) M/s. Granite Gate Properties Pvt. New Delhi. Ltd. Vs. C-23, Greater Kailash Part-1, New Delhi - 110 048 PAN AADCR6248M (Appellant) (Respondent) Department by : Shri A.K. Saroha, CIT (DR) Assessee by: Shri Sanjeev Sapra, CA Date of Hearing 19/10/2016 Date of pronouncement 16/12/2016 O R D E R Per ANADI N MISHRA. A.M. (A)These a…

M/S Nicotra India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3954/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Aug 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadi N Mishra

For Appellant: Ms. Vandna Gopal Sharda, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Chander Dubey, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 139(5)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80Section 80I

…ITA Nos. 3953,3954/Del/2013 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “E”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADI N MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.:- 3953, 3954/Del/2013 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07 Nicotra India Pvt. Ltd., ACIT Shop No. 2F-201, IInd Floor, Circle 13(1), Vs. Plot No. 1 & 2 New Delhi. LSC Block G, Kondli, Gharoli, Mayur Vihar, Phase-II, New Delhi – 110 032. PAN AABCN6199B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Ms. Vandna Gopal Sharda, FCA Department by: Shri Umesh Chander Dubey, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 25/07/2016 Date of pronouncement /08/2016 O R D E R PER…

M/S Nicotra India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3953/DEL/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Aug 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadi N Mishra

For Appellant: Ms. Vandna Gopal Sharda, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Chander Dubey, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 139(5)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80Section 80I

…Fit for Publication (AM) (JM) ITA Nos. 3953,3954/Del/2013 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “E”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADI N MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.:- 3953, 3954/Del/2013 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07 Nicotra India Pvt. Ltd., ACIT Shop No. 2F-201, IInd Floor, Circle 13(1), Vs. Plot No. 1 & 2 New Delhi. LSC Block G, Kondli, Gharoli, Mayur Vihar, Phase-II, New Delhi – 110 032. PAN AABCN6199B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Ms. Vandna Gopal Sharda, FCA Department by: Shri Umesh Chander Dubey, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 25/07/2016 Date of pronoun…