“permanent account number”

Smt. Geeta Bhasin, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for these two years also

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

merits of the case it was submitted that assessee has filed the confirmation of the party for Rs.10,00,000/- received mentioning the Permanent Account Number, copy of Memorandum & Article of Association of PACL, copy of the assessment order dated 15.06.2010 in the case of the lender where the original

Smt. Geeta Bhasin, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for these two years also

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

merits of the case it was submitted that assessee has filed the confirmation of the party for Rs.10,00,000/- received mentioning the Permanent Account Number, copy of Memorandum & Article of Association of PACL, copy of the assessment order dated 15.06.2010 in the case of the lender where the original

Smt. Geeta Bhasin, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for these two years also

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

merits of the case it was submitted that assessee has filed the confirmation of the party for Rs.10,00,000/- received mentioning the Permanent Account Number, copy of Memorandum & Article of Association of PACL, copy of the assessment order dated 15.06.2010 in the case of the lender where the original

DCIT, Exemption Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Bhagwati Educational Society, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2010-11

donation amount, mode of donation, date of donation along with copies of the confirmation letter, copies of Income Tax Return, copies of Permanent Account Number etc. 7 ITA No.4258/Del./2017 The Assessing Officer issued notice under section 133(6) of the Act in first week of March

M/S Himalayan Dairies Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

Paper book stating that all these shares have been received from Shri Balaji Traders, A–231,Derawal Nagar, New Delhi, Permanent Account Number ABAFS3304A. He also submitted the statement of loan of shares wherein it is claimed that the shares have been received and returned during the same year ... file of the ld. CIT (Appeals)with the following direction to the assessee to submit necessary details :- i. The name, address, Permanent Account Number, confirmation, demat account of the securities lender along with the Income Tax Returns as how the lender has dealt with the lending of stock

ITO, Ward- 6(3), New Delhi vs. Cozy Footwear Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

applying the above judgement to the facts of the case, it is seen that the appellant has filed sufficient documents e.g. Permanent Account Number, bank statement copy, copy of IT Return of the company, statement from the MCA website showing that the company is live working company, etc. to establish

Sushil Kumar, Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Sh. Prashant Maharishi

belief whether or not any income had escaped assessment. The company was incorporated on 4th January, 1989 and was also allotted a permanent account number in September, 2001. The facts indicated above do not show that SS Ltd is a non existing and a fictitious entity/person. For the reasons stated

Rommana Herbal Care P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle3-21(2), New Delhi

Accordingly appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

that the donee itself has categorically stated that such donations are bogus, the beneficiaries are identified where the list of beneficiaries with their Permanent Account Number, the amount of donation are also annexed to the survey report. He submitted that the survey report itself shows that the beneficiary or bogus

DCIT, Circle- 8(1), New Delhi vs. Enershell Alloys & Steel Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

with respect to the details furnished by the assessee with respect Mrs. Surekha Singh. He referred that the assessee has submitted the permanent account number for the identification of the creditors. He further submitted the land records wherein the holding of the land is certified by the respective authority along ... addition. With respect to both these directors assessee has produced the confirmation of the parties, their identification details in the form of their permanent account number, their balance sheets and confirmation to show that the directors have made the investment in the above companies. In the balance sheet

Ramit Vohra, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-63(1), New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Shri Ramit Vohra, Acit, Prop. M/S. Impact Enterprises, Vs. Circle : 63 (1) 9210/5, Multani Dhanda, New Delhi. Pahar Ganj, New Delhi–110055. Pan: Aagpj0542C (Appellant) (Respondent)

profit of the assessee cannot be upheld. On looking at page number 19 of the paper book the assessee has submitted the permanent account number of all the creditors were doubted by the learned assessing officer. In case of JK since Corporation it was submitted that it is nonavailability ... /52A, Kamal Pura Bari Bazar , Varansi. With respect to Astha Imepex assessee submitted the address of its proprietor and his permanent account number. The learned assessing officer from the records it is apparent that did not try to locate this parties. The confirmations of these parties are placed at page

ACIT, Circle- 31(1), New Delhi vs. Rajat Bhandari, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the LD AO is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharata N D Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

expenditure through his credit card. The assessee submitted that these credit cards expenditure have been incurred on behalf of the employer. Assessee submitted permanent account number of the employer company as well as the copy of account where all those expenditure been incurred, the expenses also been reimbursed

Boysen India Ltd, Noida vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Noida

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh

assessee company has provided fee for technical services payable to M/s. Friedrich Boysen GmbH & Co. KG., Germany who did not have Permanent Account Number. Assessing Officer (AO) noticed that as per Form No.15CB obtained from its statutory auditors, the company was required to deduct tax at source

ACIT, Central Circle- 18, New Delhi vs. Pbil Apex Consortium Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the ld

Bench: Shri Kul Bharata N D Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

Book wherein the details of the loans are mentioned. He explained that all 44 accounts the assessee has given the complete name, address, Permanent Account Number, the year of receipt of loan and the name of the bank from which the loan is received. He submitted that during the year ... Book which gives the names of the lenders, amount of outstanding as on 01st April, 2013, closing balance as on 31st March, 2014, Permanent Account Number of the lender, address, year of receipt of loan and name of the bank. On perusal of the above chart it is found that

Dish Infra Services Private Limited, Noida vs. ACIT Circle-7(2), New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed with above directions for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Dish Infra Services Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, Fc-09, Film City, Sector-16A, Circle-7(2), Noida, Uttar Pradesh New Delhi Pan: Aaacx1546R (Appellant) (Respondent)

114B of 1962 Rules. 2. Because during the relevant FY 2015-16, from 01.04.2015 to 31.12.2015, there was no requirement to quote the Permanent Account Number in the documents pertaining to the transaction of Sales or Purchase of Goods or Services of any nature and no financial limit was also ... Central Government amended the provisions of Rule 114B of 1962 Rules w.e.f. 01.01.2016 whereby the payee is mandated to quote his Permanent Account Number in all the transactions of Sales or purchases when the value of transaction exceeds 2 lakh rupees per transaction as mentioned at Serial

Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 1, Ltu, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed with above direction

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Vs. Dcit, Ltd, Circle-1, Ltu, 5Th Floor, 9, Cgo Complex, New Delhi Lodhi Road, New Delhi Pan: Aaacm0828R (Appellant) (Respondent)

assessee explained that tax deduction at source short deductions are majorly due to clerical/typographical errors for mentioning of the wrong the permanent account number is in TDS returns filed by the assessee, which leads to the same reflected shortfall of TDS. Assessee submitted that it has already filed a rectification ... mismatch of permanent account number. The learned assessing officer considered the explanation of the assessee and carried out verification from the office of income tax officer (TDS) LTU New Delhi. He further noted that assessee has not been able to show with evidence that the default was on account

Naveen Infradevelopers & Engineers Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-17(2), New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Naveen Infradevelopers & Vs. Dcit, Engineers Pvt. Ltd, Circle-17(2), Sardar Patel Marg, New Delhi Diplomatic Enclave, New Delhi Pan: Aadcn2121M (Appellant) (Respondent)

assessee in annexure – 6 also gave details of loan obtained stating that name of the parties i.e. Infotel technologies Ltd having a permanent account number AACCD 8086E. The assessee also submitted that during the year the assessee company has received 6,70,000 debentures of ₹ 1000 each to M/s Infotel

ITO, Ward-17(1), New Delhi vs. Momentum Technologies P.Ltd, New Delhi

In the result ground number 1, 2 of the appeal are dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

transaction report [ STR] was received in the case of the assessee with the allegation that assessee is having three accounts with the same permanent account number and it was triggered for the large value cash transaction in those account. The transaction pattern shows high amounts of transfer and cash deposits

M/S Super Industries, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2006-07 Super Industries, Vs Ito, Prop. S. Jagjit Singh, Ward-33(3), L/H Shri Joginder Singh, New Delhi. N.7, Gali No.9, Anand Parbat Industrial Area, New Delhi. Pan: Aasps8033M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ramesh Goyal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Ranu Mukherjee, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 17.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.03.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 15Th September, 2015 Of The Cit(A)-17, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2006- 07. 2. This Appeal Was Earlier Dismissed By The Tribunal For Non-Appearance. Subsequently, The Tribunal, Vide Ma No.118/Del/2017, Order Dated 16Th February, 2018, Recalled Its Earlier Order. Hence, This Is A Recalled Matter. 3. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & The Proprietor Of M/S Super Industries. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 27Th October, 2006 Declaring The Total Income At Rs.1,89,640/-. Subsequently, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened On The Basis Of Information Obtained That The Assessee Indulged In Bogus Purchases/Accommodation Entries Provided By Shri Rakesh Gupta, Shri Vishesh Gupta, Shri Navneet & Shri Vaibhav Jain. Accordingly, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened After Recording Reasons As Per The Provisions Of Section 147 Of The Act. Notice U/S 148 Dated 28Th March, 2013 Was Issued & Served Upon The Assessee. The Ao, Thereafter, Issued Statutory Notices. Rejecting The Various Explanations Given By The Assessee & Observing That The Assessee Has Made Bogus Purchase Of Rs.13,03,692/- From Shree Bankey Bihari Trading Co. & Shree Shyam Trading Co., Which Are Owned By The Persons Named Earlier, Made Addition Of Rs.13,03,692/- U/S 69C Of The It Act.

company, S, had a paid-up capital of Rs. 90 lakhs and was incorporated on January 4, 1989, and was also allotted a permanent account number in September, 2001. Thus, it could not be held to be a fictitious person. The reassessment proceedings were not valid and were liable

Reeta Singhal, Meerut vs. ITO, Ward- 2(2), Meerut

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya

Department that the Faridabad Income-tax Officer 10 ITA.No.156/Del./2018 Smt. Reeta Singhal, Meerut. was empowered to issue notice according to the permanent account number or that the notice was issued according to the computerised system of the Department was not tenable, because it was against the provisions

M/S. Aarya Organic Foods & Ayurvedic Industries Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No.3004/Del/2017 For A.Y. 2012-13 M/S. Aarya Organic Vs. Ito Foods & Ayurvedic Ward – 1(1), Industries Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi 504, Pratap Chamber-2, Saraswati Marg, Karol Bagh, New Delhi - 110005 Pan- Aahca 9363 J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ved Jain, Adv. Revenue By Smt. Alka Gautam, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 27/01/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 05/02/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 09.03.2017 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-I, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under:

Rs.4,34,400/- as share application money and premium thereon. The amount has been paid by way of cash. Though he has got Permanent Account Number as AIJPK5734C, however, he has not filed return of income for AY 2012-13. In the remand proceedings, he has filed confirmation and copy