“rule 46A”

Shivank Dua, Uttar Pradesh vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, ITO Ward 1(2)(5), Meerut

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara[Assessment Year: 2021-22

order to avail. 4. The Appellant reserves his right to submit all the details in connection with the addition as fresh evidence as per Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 at the time of hearing of this appeal. Being aggrieved by the dismissal of rectification made under section

DCIT, Circle-7(1), Delhi vs. E R M India Pvt Ltd, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

appeal (supra) and submitted that the ground raised by the Revenue challenging admission of additional evidences by the CIT(A) in violation of Rule 46A of the IT Rules is totally misconceived and opposed to the material on record. The learned counsel pointed out that no additional evidences were filed ... remand report dated 02.04.2019, in this respect, the AO has submitted as under 7.4 Based on the examination of additional evidence filed under Rule 46A and the discussion held, I am satisfied that the services against which the payment of Group Cost was incurred were availed by the assessee

S.D. Auto Components Private Limited, Haryana vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad

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

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri M. Balaganeshs. D. Auto Components Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Dy. Cit, Plot No. 177, Sector 24, Faridabad Faridabad, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aakcs1406P Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv Revenue By: Shri Mritunjay Prasad Dwivedi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23/10/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 14/11/2024

Auto Components Pvt. Ltd grounds stating that the ld NFAC erred in not accepting the additional evidences filed by the assessee under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The Assessee Company for the assessment ... Before the Learned NFAC, the Assessee furnished additional evidences furnishing all the requisite details with regard to each of the investor companies under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules. These additional evidences are enclosed in pages 479 to 485 of the paper book filed before us. The Learned NFAC

Chandra Pal, Gurugram vs. ITO, Ward 1(3), Gurugram

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.3117/िद"ी/2024 (िन.व. 2010-11) Chandra Pal, Village Badha, Sikenderpur, Haryana 122401 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Bczpp-1373-H बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3), Hsiidc Building, Vanijya Nikunj, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Udhyog Vihar, Phase-V, Gurugram अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Shri Mahfuzur Rahman, Chartered Accountant "ितवादी"ारा/Respondent By : Shri Amitabh Sah, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 13/11/2024 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 13/11/2024 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Cit(A)') Dated 30.04.2024, For Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Shri Mahfuzur Rahman, Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Submits That The Cit(A) Has Passed Impugned Order Without Considering Submissions Of The Assessee.

assessee responded to notice issued by the CIT(A) on 05.02.2024. In response to said notice, the assessee filed written submissions, application under Rule 46A, paper book, bank statement, financial statements for Financial Year 2009-10, sales register, purchase register, cash book, ledger of suppliers, etc. He referred to acknowledgement ... assessee also remained un-responded. In First Appellate proceedings, the assessee furnished evidences alongwith application under Rule 46A and submissions before the CIT(A). To substantiate filing of application under Rule 46A and various documents, the assessee has placed on record acknowledgment of documents uploaded. The CIT(A) without taking

Addl. CIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Nortel Networks India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2011-12

Whether in facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is legally justified in admitting additional evidence under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules 1962 (the Rule) even when the case of the assessee did not fall in clause (a) to (D) of Rule

A.O. Ward-21(8) vs. Santosh Singhla

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 1997-98

Assessing Officer The 1d.CIT (A) has entertained additional evidence in the form of confirmation, bank pass book etc. in violation of provisions of Rule 46A without allowing an opportunity to the A.O. 4. The ld. CIT(A) has failed to record reasons in writing for entertaining additional evidence ... provisions of Rule 46A (2)". 2.1. On perusal of the above grounds, it was noticed that in the appeal filed by the Revenue, admittedly, has a tax less than Rs.60 lakhs and the same falls into the category of low tax effect appeals after the enhanced monetary limits of Rs.60

Mihir Bhoj Post Graduate College, Dadri, Gautambudh Nagar vs. Income Tax Officer Exemption Ward, Ghaziabad

Bench: Ms Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2010-11 Mihir Bhoj Post Vs. Income Tax Officer Graduate College, C/O Exemption Ward, Sanjeev Anand & Ghaziabad Associates, 136, Navyug Market, Uttar Pradesh- 201001 Pan :Aaajm0461D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Somil Aggarwal, Advocate & Shri Deepesh Garg, Advocate Department By Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr, Dr

Assessing Officer has been confirmed. 2. The assessee before us, filed an application for additional evidences before the Learned CIT(A) under Rule 46A of the Act. As the assessee was given sufficient opportunity by the Assessing Officer to explain its case, notice under section ... file the return of income nor made sufficient compliance, the Learned CIT(A) rejected the application for admission of additional evidences under Rule 46A of the Act. 3. Under this facts and circumstances of the matter, the Learned counsel appearing for the assessee submitted before us that the additional evidence

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Vireet Investments Private Limited, Delhi

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

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumaracit, Circle 17 (1) Vs. Vireet Investments Pvt. Ltd., Delhi. 21D, Friends Colony West, New Delhi – 110 065. (Pan : Aaacv2033M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manish Jain, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2024 Date Of Order : 06.11.2024 Order Per S.Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. The Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 28.12.2023 For The Assessment Year 2004-05. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2004-05 On 31.10.2004 Declaring Income Of Rs.34,80,69,911/-. The Same Was Processed Under Section 143 (1) Of The 2 Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’) On 28.12.2004. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & Notices U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act Were Issued & Served On The Assessee. In Response, Ld. Ar For The Assessee Attended From Time To Time & Submitted Relevant Information As Called For. 3. The Assessee Was Incorporated On 03.10.1983 With The Main Objects, As Per Memorandum Of Association, To Acquire & Hold Shares, Stocks, Debentures, Debenture Stocks, Bonds, Obligations & Securities Issued Or Guaranteed By Any Company Constituted Or Carried On Business In The Republic Of India. After Considering The Submissions Of The Assessee, The Assessing Officer Proceeded To Make The Following Additions In The Assessment Completed U/S 143 (3) Of The Act :-

cannot treat the same as business income of the appellant company. Further, it is important to mention here that an application under rule 46A has been filed by the appellant furnishing the additional evidence to establish the fact that Directors of the appellant company were also the promotor ... appellant has contended that above mentioned additional evidence has become redundant now therefore the appellant withdraws the application under rule 46A and has requested to decide the issue as per the present position of law considering the CBDT circular binding on IT authority. In this connection, it is important

Simmi Madan, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-45(1), New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for

Bench: Before Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No. 1339/Del/2024, (A.Y.2012-13)

Assessee 3 Simmi Madan Vs. ITO preferred an Appeal before the CIT(A). During the First Appellate Proceedings, the Assessee filed an application under Rule 46A of the Income TaxRules, 1962 (‘Rule’ for short) by producing certain documents as additional evidence. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the application filed ... Assessee under Rule 46A of the Rules and also dismissed the Appeal. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Assessee preferred the present Appeal on the grounds mentioned above. 4. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee vehemently submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) committed error