“appeal before the tribunal”

Chhavi Anand, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-06, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda[Assessment Year: 2017-18]

Ground Nos. 1 to 3 of appeal are dismissed.” 6. Aggrieved with such order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds of appeal:- i. “On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed

Vrindavan International Trade Pvt Ltd, Greater Noida vs. ITO Ward - 26(4), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda

ground taken by appellant fails.” 3. Aggrieved with such Order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following revised grounds : “1. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred both in law as well as on facts in upholding

Karamvir Singh, New Delhi vs. AO Ward 32(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda

upheld the action of the A.O. 4.4. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Learned Counsel for the Assessee strongly challenged the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the action of the A.O. in reopening

Ved Prakash Gupta, Meerut vs. ITO, Ward-2(4), Meerut

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda

ITA.No.5402/Del./2018 Shri Ved Prakash Gupta, Meerut. 4. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds : “1. That the Ld. CIT(A) has not appreciated the legal infirmity of the action

Chandeep Leasing & Finance Co. (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 6(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda

Chandeep Leasing & Finance Co. (P). Ltd., New Delhi. 4.2. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that there was no such addition in the preceding or subsequent assessment years. He submitted that during

ACIT, Circle- 1(2)(2), Intl. Taxation, New Delhi vs. Everest Global Inc., Us

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri O.P. Kanta.Y. 2013-14

brought to our attention that CBDT, vide Circular No.17/2019 dated 08th August, 2019, has decided that the Revenue would not prefer any appeal before the Tribunal, if the tax effect is less than Rs.50 lakhs. Therefore, he 1 pleaded that the appeal of the Revenue be decided

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

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed partly for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri K.N. Chary[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2007-08

appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) allowed partly to the assessee. Aggrieved with the finding of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the grounds as reproduced above. 4 3. Before us, the parties appeared through Video Conferencing facility. The assessee filed a paper-book

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Louis Dreyfur Commodities India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

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

learned DRP, the Assessing Officer passed the impugned final assessment order against which both the assessee and the Revenue are in appeal before the Tribunal raising the grounds as reproduced above. 4. Before us, the parties appeared through Video Conferencing facility and filed paper-book and another documents electronically (through

M/S. Louis Dreyfus Commodities, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

learned DRP, the Assessing Officer passed the impugned final assessment order against which both the assessee and the Revenue are in appeal before the Tribunal raising the grounds as reproduced above. 4. Before us, the parties appeared through Video Conferencing facility and filed paper-book and another documents electronically (through

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. New India City Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sanjay Garg

deserves to be deleted. 4. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds : 1. On the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made

Nitin Bajaj, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 50(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sanjay Garg

upheld the various additions made by the A.O. 5. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds : “On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) was incorrect

Dhanyata Enterprises Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-7(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda

confirmed and the ground of appeal is dismissed.” 3. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds : “1. That on the facts & in the circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed by Learned

Ashok Kumar & Family, Delhi vs. ITO Ward-36(2), New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda

ITA.No.8839/Del./2019 M/s. Ashok Kumar & Family, Delhi. 3. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds : “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not treating

DCIT, Circle- 1, Ltu, New Delhi vs. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the order passed by the tribunal dated 09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2015-16 Dcit, Vs The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Circle-1, Ltu, A-25/27, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaact0627R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tarandeep Singh, Ca & Shri Pulkit Verma, Advocate Revenue By : Shri H.K. Chaudhary, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 20.09.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.09.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29Th June, 2018 Of The Cit(A)-22, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Ground Of Appeal No.1 Raised By The Revenue Reads As Under:- “1. On The Facts & The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit (A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.25,85,81,755/- Made By The Ao U/S 14A Of The I.T. Act.” 3. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Public Sector Undertaking Of Government Of India & Is In The Business Of Non-Life Insurance. It Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Under Normal Provisions Of The Income-Tax Act At A Loss Of Rs.186,97,30,289/- & Book Profit U/S 115Jb I.E., Mat Scheme Of Rs.565,63,58,876/-. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Ao Noted That The Assessee Has Claimed The Following Income As Exempt:- S. No. Particulars Amount ( □) 1. Interest On Tax Free Public Sector Bonds Exempt Under 4,59,58,525/- Section 10 (15) (Iv) (H) Of The Act 2,04,22,38,227/- 2. Dividend Exempt U/S 10(34) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Total 2,08,81,96,752/-

r.w.r. 8D of the IT Act, 1961. 6. Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 2 7. The ld. DR heavily relied on the order of the AO. He submitted that there cannot be two different views that section ... computation of book profit u/s 115JB of the IT Act. 16. Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 17. The ld. DR heavily relied on the order of the AO. 18. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, on the other hand

Jmw India Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 13(2), New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2013-14 Jmw India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, C-498, 1St Floor, Jojna Vihar, Circle-13(2), Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaacj3260C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri C.S. Anand, Advocate & Shri Sankalp Anand, Advocate Revenue By : Ms Anima Barnwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 26.08.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.09.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 8Th March, 2018 Of The Cit(A)-5, Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case , The Ld Cit(A) Had Erred In Not Allowing Exclusion Of Interest Subsidy Amounting To Rs. 30,01,143/- & Of Excise Duty Refund Amounting To Rs. 4,98,49,144/-, Being Capital In Nature, In Computing Book Profit U/S 115Jb . 2. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case ,The Book Profit U/S 115Jb Ought To Had Been Computed At A Negative Figure, As Per The Revised Computation Of Income Filed By The Assessee.”

compute the reduced credit of MAT eligible to the appellant.” 5. Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. The ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue stands squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision

Addl. CIT, Spl. Range- 9, New Delhi vs. Thomson Press (India) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the Departmental appeal is not maintainable as the appeal is filed against the Board Instruction referred to above and, therefore, the appeal of the Department is liable to be dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Vijay Pal Raoआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5864/Del/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 बनाम Addl. Cit, Thomson Press (India) Ltd., Special Range-9, Vs. K-9, Connaught Circus, Room No. 193B, C.R. Building, New Delhi. New Delhi.

3/18 dated 11.07.2018 issued by CBDT u/s 268A of the I.T. Act, it has been directed that the Department shall not file appeal before the Tribunal in case where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limit of Rs. 20 lakhs. It is also directed that this Instruction will ... withdrawn/not pressed. The aforesaid circular has been amended by issuing further Circular No. 17/2019, whereby the monetary limit for filing Income-tax appeals before the Tribunal has been enhanced to Rs. 50 lakhs. 4. Ld. DR in view of the above Board Circular did not press the Departmental appeal

Rita Madan, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2017-18 Rita Madan, Vs. Ito, Shop Cum Residence No.3, Civic Centre, Vijay Nagar, Silver Storey Market, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aldpm7163L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kailash Khimani, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 26.07.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.09.2021 Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 5Th March, 2021 Of The Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre.

Hence, the addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- is deleted.” 6. Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds:- “1 That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT-A has erred in incorrectly confirming

Deepak Tyagi (L/H of Late Gopal Singh), Ghaziabad vs. ITO Ward - 1(2), Ghaziabad

In the result, both the appeal filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda

Singh, which, according to her, is a non-curable defect. 6. Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. The ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that notice in this case was issued in the name of a dead person

Kohinoor Crafts, Moradabad vs. ACIT Central Circle, Moradabad

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2017-18 Kohinoor Crafts, Vs. Acit, Turki Estate, Kohinoor Tiraha, Central Circle, Sambhal Road, Moradabad. Moradabad. Pan: Aadfk7275N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mayank Patawari, Ca Revenue By : Shri R.K. Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.09.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.09.2021 Order

assessee to establish that earlier admission is wrong. 7. Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds:- “ 1. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and under the law in confirming the addition

Rajesh Kumar, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward - 3(4), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2016-17 Rajesh Kumar, Vs. Ito, C/O H.No.651, Ff, Sec.10A, Ward-3(4), Near Meenakshi Public School, Gurgaon. Gurgaon, Haryana. Pan: Bgwpk8807L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.R. Sahu, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ramesh Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.08.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.09.2021 Order

order passed by him, upheld the action of the AO. 3. Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds:- “1. Legal Ground: AO had exceeded his jurisdiction in exercising his power under section