ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. VALMIK THAPAR, NEW DELHI

Appeals are disposed of by this common order as indicated above

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Acit, 19, Kautilya Marg, Circle-53(1), New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Dcit, M/S. R. N. Khanna & Company, Ca, Circle-32(1), 14-15F, Shivam House, Connaught New Delhi Place, New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Shri Valmik Thapar, Circle-53(1), 19, Kautilya Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Agarwal, Senior Advocate Along With Shri Shailesh Gupta, Shri Mahur Agarwal, Advocates Revenue By: Shri H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 11/06/2021 (Last Hearing) Date Of Pronouncement 11/06/2021. O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, A. M. 1. These Are Three Appeals For Two Assessment Years Pertaining To One Assessee, Mr. Valmik Thapar, A Resident, Individual [Assessee]. Assessee Filed Ita Number

TDS'), any advance tax paid or any amount paid otherwise by way of tax or interest. Further, the first proviso to Section 143 (1) (a) permitted the Department to make adjustments on account of any arithmetical errors, any loss carried forward, deduction, etc. in the income or loss declared in the return. While the AO could pick up the return

SH. VALMIK THAPAR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals are disposed of by this common order as indicated above

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Acit, 19, Kautilya Marg, Circle-53(1), New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Dcit, M/S. R. N. Khanna & Company, Ca, Circle-32(1), 14-15F, Shivam House, Connaught New Delhi Place, New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Shri Valmik Thapar, Circle-53(1), 19, Kautilya Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Agarwal, Senior Advocate Along With Shri Shailesh Gupta, Shri Mahur Agarwal, Advocates Revenue By: Shri H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 11/06/2021 (Last Hearing) Date Of Pronouncement 11/06/2021. O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, A. M. 1. These Are Three Appeals For Two Assessment Years Pertaining To One Assessee, Mr. Valmik Thapar, A Resident, Individual [Assessee]. Assessee Filed Ita Number

TDS'), any advance tax paid or any amount paid otherwise by way of tax or interest. Further, the first proviso to Section 143 (1) (a) permitted the Department to make adjustments on account of any arithmetical errors, any loss carried forward, deduction, etc. in the income or loss declared in the return. While the AO could pick up the return

KUBER FOOD PRODUCTS INDIA P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, NEW DELHI

In the result, both these appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishikuber Khanpan Udyog Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, 1/8, West Patel Nagar, New Central Circle-30, Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Kuber Food Products India Pvt. Vs. Acit, Ltd, Central Circle-30, C/O. Ravi Gupta, Advocate, E- New Delhi 6A, Kailash Colony, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 147. It is relevant to point out that this ground was very much raised before the CIT(A) see Page No17 of the CIT(A) order Para-4. However the CIT(A) has decided the issue subsilentio means without adjudicating the same Ground number-2 Page NO-4 17. Without prejudice to the above it is submitted that information

KUBER KHANPAN UDYOG PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 30, NEW DELHI

In the result, both these appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishikuber Khanpan Udyog Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, 1/8, West Patel Nagar, New Central Circle-30, Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Kuber Food Products India Pvt. Vs. Acit, Ltd, Central Circle-30, C/O. Ravi Gupta, Advocate, E- New Delhi 6A, Kailash Colony, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 147. It is relevant to point out that this ground was very much raised before the CIT(A) see Page No17 of the CIT(A) order Para-4. However the CIT(A) has decided the issue subsilentio means without adjudicating the same Ground number-2 Page NO-4 17. Without prejudice to the above it is submitted that information

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NIIT SMARTSERVE LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowlaand Shri N.K. Billaiya[Assessment Year: 2005-06] The Dy.C.I.T Vs. Niit Smartserve Ltd Circle – 18(2) 8, Balaji Estate New Delhi Guru Ravidas Marg New Delhi Pan: Aabcn 4598 E & Co No. 217/Del/2018 (In Ita No.5173/Del/2015) [Assessment Year: 2005-06] Niit Smartserve Ltd Vs. The Dcit 8, Balaji Estate Circle – 18(2) Guru Ravidas Marg New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aabcn 4598 E [Appellant] [Respondent] Date Of Hearing : 23.07.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2020

Section 147 has not been met. The questionnaire raised by the AO during the course of assessment proceedings categorically adverted to the question of withholding tax. The details of the TDS

BEST REALTRECH INDIA P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-4(3), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanm/S Best Realtrech Income Tax Officer, (India) Pvt. Ltd., Ward-4(3), New Delhi H-8, First Floor, Vs. Best Plaza, Netaji Subhash Place, Pitampura, Delhi-110034 Pan:Aadcb1848D (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 147. Therefore, the assessee cannot be said to M/s Best Realtrech (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO have made true and complete disclosure Hence, the notice for reassessment is justified. 38. From a reading of the reasons recorded, it is clear that there is fresh tangible material in the hands of the Assessing Officer with respect to the dubious nature

ACIT CIRCLE-11(2), NEW DELHI vs. HUMBOLDT WEDAG INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

section 147 of the Act without allowing cross examination of Mr. Praveen Aggarwal whose statement has been used to disallow the expenditure, which is against the principal of natural justice and the action of Ld. AO should have been deleted 3 ITAs No.1299/Del/2020 & 1413/Del/2020 on this ground. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

HUMBOLDT WEDAG INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-11(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

section 147 of the Act without allowing cross examination of Mr. Praveen Aggarwal whose statement has been used to disallow the expenditure, which is against the principal of natural justice and the action of Ld. AO should have been deleted 3 ITAs No.1299/Del/2020 & 1413/Del/2020 on this ground. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

ITO, WARD- 21(4), NEW DELHI vs. RUKMINI IRON PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2009-10 Ito, Vs. Rukmini Iron Pvt. Ltd., Ward-21(4), X-55/102, Loha Mandi, New Delhi. Naraina, Delhi. Pan: Aaccr7910H Co No.66/Del/2018 (Ita No.550/Del/2018) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Rukmini Iron Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito, X-55/102, Loha Mandi, Ward-21(4), Naraina, New Delhi. Delhi. Pan: Aaccr7910H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Suresh Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ramdhan Meena, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.09.2022 Order Per C.M. Garg, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.10.2017 Of The Cit(A)-38, Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2009-10. In This Case, The Assessee Has Filed A Cross Objection. Co No.66/Del/2018 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Read As Under:- “1. "On The Facts & Under The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & Facts In Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 2,40,00,000/- Made By The Ao U/S 68 Of Income Tax Act, 1961, Ignoring The Decision Of The Ld. Cit (A) In The Case Of Surender Kumar Jain (S. K. Jain) Wherein, It Is Held That Jain Brothers Are Equally Involved In The Accommodation Entry Business & Maintain The Documents & Record. " 2. "On The Facts & Under The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & Facts In Deleting The Addition Of Rs 2,40,00,000/- Under Section 68 Of The Act By Ignoring The Ratio Decidendi In The Case Of Cit Vs. M/S N. R. Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. (2014), 2 Itr-Ol-68 & Pcit-7 Vs. Bikram Singh In It A No. 55/2017 Dated 25/08/2017 On Identical Issue Of Addition As Unexplained Share Capital U/S 68 Of The It Act. 3 The Appellant Craves To Be Allowed To Add & Alter Any Fresh Grounds(S) Of Appealand/Or Delete Or Amend Any Of The Ground(S) Of Appeal."

Section 147 has not been met. The questionnaire raised by the AO during the course of assessment proceedings categorically adverted to the question of withholding tax. The details of the TDS

M/S. BOSE CORPORATION INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh[Assessment Year: 2008-09] Bose Corporation India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit 3Rd Floor, Plot No.4, Circle – 5(1), Salcon Aurum, Jasola District New Delhi Centre, New Delhi – 110 025 Pan No. Aaacb 3260 A [Appellant] [Respondent]

Section 147 has not been met. The questionnaire raised by the AO during the course of assessment proceedings categorically adverted to the 15 question of withholding tax. The details of the TDS

CRICKET SOUTH AFRICA (NPC),SOUTH AFRICA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1(2)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal is allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14

TDS returns filed by them.” [Emphasis by us] 12. Thus, facts on record clearly reveal that the Assessing Officer has reopened the assessment under Section 147

CRICKET AUSTRALIA,AUSTRALIA vs. DCIT, INT, TAXATION CIRCLE-1(2)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal is allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14

TDS return in India as it has not remitted any amount out of India to any other party. 10. On the contrary, as the assessment order itself would reveal instead of making any payment, assessee had receipt from Taj Cricket Ltd., another non-resident entity. Thus, the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for reopening of assessment under Section 147

CHAMPION BUILDER PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO,WARD-1(3), GURGAON

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.462 & 463/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17

TDS on the interest has been deducted in respect of the interest payment on such loan and therefore the Income Tax Department was not justified on making addition on such loans. The Tribunal further held that the loans were repaid and therefore the genuineness of the transaction has been established and the assessee had discharged its onus and there

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. BARISTA COFFEE COMPANY LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result cross objection filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, Barista Coffee Company Ltd, Circle-2(1), Room No. 398D, Shop No. 55, Community Centre, Vs. Cr Building, New Delhi Basant Lok Market, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi Pan:Aabcb798A (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS of Rs. 580906/- on its receipt from rent, interest, advertisement etc. however, the rental income shown works out to Rs. 2829976/- has not been offered for taxation. Subsequently, the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act read with Section 147

M/S. BHARTI CELLULAR LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

TDS u/s 194H of the I.T. Act. M/s Bharti Cellular Ltd. vs. DCIT Hence, the sum of Rs.32,60,471/- has escaped escapement within the meaning of clause c(i) of Explanation 2 below 2nd Proviso appended to Section 147

PRAKASH INDUSTRIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CC- 30,, NEW DELHI

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

Section 153 C of the Act but in relation to Section 153A of the Act as well.Consequently, this Court does not find any error having been committed by the ITAT in accepting the plea of the Assessee that there is no 64 I.T.As. No.4039, 4040, 4041, 4042, 4043, 4064, 4065, 4066, 4067, 4068, 4069, 4070/DEL/2017 incriminating document which was seized

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 30, NEW DELHI vs. PRAKASH INDUSTRIES LTD., HISAR

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

Section 153 C of the Act but in relation to Section 153A of the Act as well.Consequently, this Court does not find any error having been committed by the ITAT in accepting the plea of the Assessee that there is no 64 I.T.As. No.4039, 4040, 4041, 4042, 4043, 4064, 4065, 4066, 4067, 4068, 4069, 4070/DEL/2017 incriminating document which was seized

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 30, NEW DELHI vs. PARKASH INDUSTRIES LTD, HISAR

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

Section 153 C of the Act but in relation to Section 153A of the Act as well.Consequently, this Court does not find any error having been committed by the ITAT in accepting the plea of the Assessee that there is no 64 I.T.As. No.4039, 4040, 4041, 4042, 4043, 4064, 4065, 4066, 4067, 4068, 4069, 4070/DEL/2017 incriminating document which was seized