“NFAC”

Anil Kumar HUF, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 35(5), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sudhir Kumaranil Kumar Huf, Vs. Ito, 2639/4, Naya Bazar, Ward-35(5), Delhi Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aacha6188H Assessee By : Shri Pranshu Singhal, Ca Shri Rahul Bhardwaj, Adv Revenue By: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 08/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 05/12/2025

No.737/Del/2025 for AY 2013-14, arises out of the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as „ld. NFAC‟, in short] in Appeal No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1071584928(1) dated 26.12.2024 against the order of assessment passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income ... assessment completed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act dated 29.09.2021. This assessment was confirmed by the ld NFAC. Anil Kumar HUF 5. Before the ld CIT(A), the assessee produced a new certificate from the Axis Bank dated 21.10.2021 wherein, the bank had duly rectified its earlier mistake

Turner Recreations (P) Ltd, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 25(3), New Delhi

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Naveen Chandraturner Recreations (P) Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward 25(3) C/O Ca Vaibhav Goel Civic Centre 75 Navyug Market New Delhi – 110001 1St Floor, Ghaziabad Uttar Pradesh – 201002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabct8709K Appellant .. Respondent

ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 27.06.2025 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1077889614(1) arising out of the order dated ... hearing both the sides, we find that the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed by NFAC on the ground of non prosecution. The Ld. Counsel submits that the notices were not served on the email provided in Form 35. 3. Perusal of the impugned order shows that though there

Cambridge Construction (Delhi) Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Naveen Chandracambridge Construction Vs. Ito, Ward 5(3) (Delhi) Private Limited New Delhi – 110002 11, Monnet House, Masjid Moth, New Delhi – 110048 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacc0295N Appellant .. Respondent

ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 10.07.2025 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1078345852(1) arising out of the order dated 29.10.2021 passed

Ramita Chaudhuri, Haryana vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward 69(1), Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwalincome Tax Officer, Ramita Chaudhuri, Ward-69(1), Block C-1, Flat No.1002, Vs. Delhi. The Legend, Sector-57, Gurgaon. Pan-Aappc4405P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Anil Sethi, Ca Department By Shri Krishna Kumar Ramawat, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 05/12/2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Gwalior (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ In Short), Dated 18.03.2025 In Appeal No. Nfac/2020-21/10197234 For Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. From The Perusal Of The Record, It Is Seen That Filing The Appeal Is Delayed By 55 Days, For Which Condonation Application Is Filed. In The Said Application, It Is Stated That When The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) Was Served Upon The Assessee She Was Residing Abroad In Madrid, Spain & Was Not In India. She Returned To India On 20Th June, 2025 From Span. Due To This Reason, The Delay Of 55 Days Was Occurred In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Also Filed An Affidavit In Support Of The Ramita Chaudhuri Vs. Ito Averments Made In The Application For Condonation Of Delay. Considering The Facts & Explanation Given In The Application, We Find That Assessee Has Been Able To Demonstrate That There Is Reasonable Cause In Filing The Appeal Delayed. Considering These Facts, We Condoned The Delay & Admit The Appeal For Adjudication On Merits.

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANISH

Prabha Devi, Saharanpur vs. ITO Ward-3(3)(5), Saharanpur

In the result, appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalprabha Devi Vs. Ito, Ward 3(3)(5) House No. 1/1522, Juneja Income Tax Office, Court Bhawan, Wazeer Vihar, Road, Haqikatnagar, Khalasi Line, Saharanpur Saharanpur, Uttar Pradesh – 247001 Uttar Pradesh – 247001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Agopd6725H Appellant .. Respondent

ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 26.06.2025 of the ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi P a g e | 2 Prabha Devi (AY: 2018-19) (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in DIN & Order

Rajiv Sharma, Nehru Place vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), Delhi

Bench: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

MANISH AGARWAL, AM: This Appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (‘the CIT(A) in short) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 14.07.2025 for Assessment Year

Shri Radha Krishan Mandir Trust, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward Exemp 2(2), Delhi

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Shri Radha Krishan Mandir Vs. Income Tax Officer, Trust, Opposite E Block, Greater Ward Exemption 2(2) Kailsah, Part-1, Delhi Civic Centre, Delhi Pan: Aakts7362K Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Suresh Kumar Gupta, Ca Revenue By Sh. Shankar Lal Verma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 05/12/2025 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.

1 Shri Radha Krishan Mandir Trust Vs. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘E’ NEW DELHI

Income Tax Officer, Delhi vs. Shri Ram Udyog, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalincome Tax Officer, Shri Ram Udyog, Delhi. 1707 Block, E-2, Vs. Civic Centre, Delhi-110002. Pan-Addfs0045F (Appellant) (Respondent)

AGARWAL, AM: This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (‘the CIT(A)’ in short) dated 25.09.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in Appeal No. CIT(A)-Delhi-15/11070/2019-20

Income Tax Officer, Delhi vs. Pankaj Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalincome Tax Officer Vs. Pankaj Enterprises Pvt. Room No.217, Cr Ltd., 130, First Floor, Building, D-Mall, Netaji Subhash New Delhi – 110002 Place, Pitampura, Saraswati Vihar, North West Delhi, Delhi - 110034 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcp9429N Appellant .. Respondent C.O. No.83/Del/2025 (Assessment Year:2015-16) Pankaj Enterprises Pvt. Vs. Ito, Ward 19(3) Ltd., 130, First Floor, Room No.217, Cr D-Mall, Netaji Subhash Building, Place, Pitampura, New Delhi – 110002 Saraswati Vihar, North West Delhi, Delhi - 110034 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcp9429N Appellant .. Respondent

preferred by the Revenue and Cross Objection filed by the assessee against the order dated 09.08.2024 of the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in DIN & Order No: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1067495496(1) arising out of the order dated

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ghaziabad vs. Mahalaxmi Light House, Hapur

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Mahalakshmi Light House, Income Tax 285, Avas Vikas Vihar, Room No. 201, First Floor, Hapur, Uttar Pradesh Cgo Complex, Hapurchungi, Pan: Aatfm3627N Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh Appellant Respondent

109/Del/2024 DCIT Vs. Mahalaxmi Light House “1. 1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 72,21,918/- (Rs.68,78,020/- + GST: Rs.3,43,898/-) as unexplained expenditure on account ... assessee from Zenith Enterprises of entry provider Ankit Karanwal. 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC erred in law and on facts to treat that bogus expenses of Rs.68,78,020/- and bogus GST of Rs.3.43,898/ as genuine, contrary

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ghaziabad vs. Mahalakshmi Light House, Hapur

In the result, Cross Objection filed by the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Mahalakshmi Light House, Income Tax 285, Avas Vikas Vihar, Room No. 201, First Floor, Hapur, Uttar Pradesh Cgo Complex, Hapur Chungi, Pan: Aatfm3627N Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh Appellant Respondent

respective grounds of Appeal/C.O. of the parties as under:- “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.41,82,341/- made under section 69C of the Act, as unexplained expenditure on account ... made by the assessee from Vrindavan International Trade Pvt. Ltd. 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC erred in law and on facts in holding the transactions done by the assessee with shell company Vrindavan International Trade Pvt. Ltd. as genuine business

Tejasvi Singh, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Amtek Transportation Systems Ltd, Haryana

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmadcit, Vs. Amtek Transportation Systems Ltd., Delhi. Begampur Khatoula, Gurgaon Khandsa 104, Gurgaon – 122 004 (Haryana). (Pan : Aahca5047K) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S. Krishnan, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Amit Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 10.09.2025 Date Of Order : 05.12.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 24.01.2024 For The Assessment Year 2021-22 Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 7.86 Crore Made On Account Of Discrepancy Found In The Sales Turnover Reflected In Form 26As Vis-A-Vis Gross Sales Reported In The Profit & Loss Account By Accepting The Additional Evidence Furnished By The Assessee Without Appreciating The Fact The Assessee Has Been Provided Sufficient Opportunity During The Assessment Proceedings To Furnish The Details In This Regard.

MEMBER : 1. This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short] dated 24.01.2024 for the Assessment Year 2021-22 raising following grounds of appeal :- “1. On the facts

JCIT Circle 1(1), New Delhi vs. Awifs Space Solutions Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmajoint Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Awfis Space Income Tax, Circle-1(1) Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 153A, C.R. C-28-29, Kissan Bhawan Building, I.P. Estate, Qutum Institutional Area, New Delhi – 110002 New Delhi- 110016 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aanca1175G Appellant .. Respondent

ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: This appeal is preferred by the Revenue against the order dated 08.03.2023 of the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) (hereinafter P a g e | 2 M/s AWFIS Space Solutions Pvt. Ltd. (AY: 2017-18) referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short