TAPI JWIL JV,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-62(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6722/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 4873/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Tapi Jwil Jv, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/O C. S. Anand, Adv., Ward-62(4), 104, Pankaj Tower, 10, L.S.C. New Delhi Savita Vihar, Delhi-110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadat3744J Assessee By : Sh. C. S. Anand, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Amitabh K. Sinha, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2023 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:

TDS 5188 Sundry Balances written off 70 Net Profit 170416 The assessee JV had filed its ITR declaring total income of Rs. 1,75,600/- (Rs. 1,70,416/- plus Rs.5,188/- being the amount disallowable). The AO had passed the assessment order dated 29.12.2016 u/s 143(3) in the status of AOP, determining the total income

AVAYA INTERNATIONAL SALES LIMITED,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- INT. TAXATION 1(1)(1), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharmaavaya International Sales Ltd, Vs. Acit, C/O. Mr. Rohit Verma Ernst & Circle-International Young Llp, 1St Floor, Tower B, Taxation 1(1)(1), Dlf Centre Court Building, New Delhi Sector-42, Gold Course, Gurgaon-122002 (Assessee ) (Respondent) Pan: Aakca7138A Dcit, Vs. Avaya International Sales Ltd, Circle-1(1)(1), C/O. Mr. Rohit Verma Ernst & Young Llp, 1St Floor, Tower B, International Taxation, New Delhi Dlf Centre Court Building, Sector-42, Gold Course, Gurgaon-122002 (Assessee ) (Respondent) Pan: Aakca7138A Assessee By : Dr. Shashwat Bajpai, Adv Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv Revenue By: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 16/02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 07/03/2023

271F of the Act for delay in filing of return of income. Your Appellant prays that the penalty proceedings be dropped. Ground No 11 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in initiating penalty proceedings under section 271BA of the Act for non-filing of report from an accountant

DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1)(1), INT. TAXN., NEW DELHI vs. AVAYA INTERNAIONAL SALES LIMITED, IRELAND

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

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharmaavaya International Sales Ltd, Vs. Acit, C/O. Mr. Rohit Verma Ernst & Circle-International Young Llp, 1St Floor, Tower B, Taxation 1(1)(1), Dlf Centre Court Building, New Delhi Sector-42, Gold Course, Gurgaon-122002 (Assessee ) (Respondent) Pan: Aakca7138A Dcit, Vs. Avaya International Sales Ltd, Circle-1(1)(1), C/O. Mr. Rohit Verma Ernst & Young Llp, 1St Floor, Tower B, International Taxation, New Delhi Dlf Centre Court Building, Sector-42, Gold Course, Gurgaon-122002 (Assessee ) (Respondent) Pan: Aakca7138A Assessee By : Dr. Shashwat Bajpai, Adv Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv Revenue By: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 16/02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 07/03/2023

271F of the Act for delay in filing of return of income. Your Appellant prays that the penalty proceedings be dropped. Ground No 11 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in initiating penalty proceedings under section 271BA of the Act for non-filing of report from an accountant

TRANS WORLD INTERNATIONAL LLC,WILMINGTON, DELAWARE, USA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA, CIRCLE 3(1)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIVIC CENTRE, NEAR MINTO ROAD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

TDS') amounting to INR 1,77,696/- and self-assessment tax credit of INR 31,22,870/- whilst computing the tax liability of the Appellant for the year under consideration. 9. That in the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. AO has erred in initiating penalty proceedings under section 274 read with 271F

INCOME TAX OFFICER, GURGAON vs. DISCOVERI MEDIA GROUP, GURGAON

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us[Assessment Year : 2014-15] Ito, Vs Discoveri Media Group, Gurgaon. 97B, Udyog Vihar, Phase-V, Gurgaon-122002. Pan-Aaifd8766G Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2014-15] Discoveri Media Group Vs Ito, C/O-S.L.Poddar & Co., Ward-1(4), Gokul Apartment, E-3A, Kantichandra Gurugram. Road, Bani Park, Jaipur, Rajasthan-302016. Pan-Aaifd8766G Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Ito, Vs Discoveri Media Group, Gurgaon. 97B, Udyog Vihar, Phase-V, Gurgaon-122002. Pan-Aaifd8766G Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Discoveri Media Group, Vs Ito, 97B, Udyog Vihar, Phase-V, Ward-1(4), Gurgaon-122002. Gurugram. Pan-Aaifd8766G Appellant Respondent

TDS has been made, i.e. 194H, 194 I (a), 194 1 (b) and 194 J have been wrongly quoted and the nature of entire receipts is one and the same, i.e. contractual receipts. 5.6. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Williamson Financial Services & Ors (SLP(C) 2275/2007, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under

DISCOVERI MEDIA GROUP,GURGAON HARYANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1(4),, GURUGRAM, HARYANA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us[Assessment Year : 2014-15] Ito, Vs Discoveri Media Group, Gurgaon. 97B, Udyog Vihar, Phase-V, Gurgaon-122002. Pan-Aaifd8766G Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2014-15] Discoveri Media Group Vs Ito, C/O-S.L.Poddar & Co., Ward-1(4), Gokul Apartment, E-3A, Kantichandra Gurugram. Road, Bani Park, Jaipur, Rajasthan-302016. Pan-Aaifd8766G Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Ito, Vs Discoveri Media Group, Gurgaon. 97B, Udyog Vihar, Phase-V, Gurgaon-122002. Pan-Aaifd8766G Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Discoveri Media Group, Vs Ito, 97B, Udyog Vihar, Phase-V, Ward-1(4), Gurgaon-122002. Gurugram. Pan-Aaifd8766G Appellant Respondent

TDS has been made, i.e. 194H, 194 I (a), 194 1 (b) and 194 J have been wrongly quoted and the nature of entire receipts is one and the same, i.e. contractual receipts. 5.6. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Williamson Financial Services & Ors (SLP(C) 2275/2007, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under

INCOME TAX OFFICER, GURGAON vs. DISCOVERI MEDIA GROUP, GURGAON

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us[Assessment Year : 2014-15] Ito, Vs Discoveri Media Group, Gurgaon. 97B, Udyog Vihar, Phase-V, Gurgaon-122002. Pan-Aaifd8766G Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2014-15] Discoveri Media Group Vs Ito, C/O-S.L.Poddar & Co., Ward-1(4), Gokul Apartment, E-3A, Kantichandra Gurugram. Road, Bani Park, Jaipur, Rajasthan-302016. Pan-Aaifd8766G Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Ito, Vs Discoveri Media Group, Gurgaon. 97B, Udyog Vihar, Phase-V, Gurgaon-122002. Pan-Aaifd8766G Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Discoveri Media Group, Vs Ito, 97B, Udyog Vihar, Phase-V, Ward-1(4), Gurgaon-122002. Gurugram. Pan-Aaifd8766G Appellant Respondent

TDS has been made, i.e. 194H, 194 I (a), 194 1 (b) and 194 J have been wrongly quoted and the nature of entire receipts is one and the same, i.e. contractual receipts. 5.6. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Williamson Financial Services & Ors (SLP(C) 2275/2007, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under

DISCOVERI MEDIA GROUP,HARYANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(4) GURUGRAM, GURUGRAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us[Assessment Year : 2014-15] Ito, Vs Discoveri Media Group, Gurgaon. 97B, Udyog Vihar, Phase-V, Gurgaon-122002. Pan-Aaifd8766G Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2014-15] Discoveri Media Group Vs Ito, C/O-S.L.Poddar & Co., Ward-1(4), Gokul Apartment, E-3A, Kantichandra Gurugram. Road, Bani Park, Jaipur, Rajasthan-302016. Pan-Aaifd8766G Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Ito, Vs Discoveri Media Group, Gurgaon. 97B, Udyog Vihar, Phase-V, Gurgaon-122002. Pan-Aaifd8766G Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Discoveri Media Group, Vs Ito, 97B, Udyog Vihar, Phase-V, Ward-1(4), Gurgaon-122002. Gurugram. Pan-Aaifd8766G Appellant Respondent

TDS has been made, i.e. 194H, 194 I (a), 194 1 (b) and 194 J have been wrongly quoted and the nature of entire receipts is one and the same, i.e. contractual receipts. 5.6. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Williamson Financial Services & Ors (SLP(C) 2275/2007, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under

DEEP KOTHARI,USA vs. ASSSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIVIC CENTRE NEW DELHI

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman

271F of the Act.” 4 Deep Kothari 4. Learned counsel very fairly submits that the assessee does not wish to press for his foregoing legal ground challenging validity of the reopening. Rejected in very terms. 5. Next comes the sole substantive ground between the parties on merits wherein the learned lower authorities have held that the assessee to have made

TRANS WORLD INTERNATIONAL LLC,WILMINGTON, DELAWARE, USA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(1)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

271F of the Act and section 271(1)(c) of\nthe Act for the subject year as the same is bad in law.\n\n10.\nThat in the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the\nLd. AO erred in levying interest under section 234A and 234B of\nthe Act.\"\n\n6.\nAt the time of hearing

TRANS WORLD INTERNATIONAL LLC,DELAWARE, USA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) - 3(1)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

271F of the Act and section 271(1)(c) of\nthe Act for the subject year as the same is bad in law.\n\n10.\nThat in the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the\nLd. AO erred in levying interest under section 234A and 234B of\nthe Act.\n\nAt the time of hearing

PROMILLA MATHUR,DELHI vs. AO, CIVIC CENTRE,NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Bleasstt. Year : 2012-13 Promilla Mathur, Vs. Cit(A)/Nfac D-55, Gulmohar Park, Delhi New Delhi (Pan: Afkpm7548E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Alok Mital, Ca Respondent By : Shri Sangeet Bansal, Sr. Dr. Date Of Hearing 06.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06.08.2025 Order This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 15.04.2025 Passed By The Nfac, Delhi For The Assessment Year 2012-13 On The Following Ground:- 1. The Order Passed By The Ai/Cit(A) Is Bad In Law, Wrong On Facts & Against The Principles Of Natural Justice. 2. That In View Of The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ao/Cit(A) Has Erred, Both On Facts & In Law, In Assessing / Upholding The Income Of The Assessee At Rs. 14,25,293/- As Unexplained Despite Producing Documents On Record.

section 271(1)(c) and 271F of the Act. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and did not file her return of income for the assessment year 2012-13 despite making payment of Rs. 2,21,174/- against credit card of Kotak Mahindra Bank, investing RS. 12,00,000/- in mutual funds

JOGINDER DAHIYA,DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Amit Shukla

section 139(4) of the Income Tax Act, the assessee was required to furnish the return upto 31.03.2012 alongwith penalty u/s 271F & other consequential actions. However, since the assessee failed to stick any of the above mandatory schedule of filing of her Income Tax return the above mentioned return was treated as invalid being time-barred. Penalty Notice u/s 271F

SMT. RAJ BALA,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Amit Shukla

section 139(4) of the Income Tax Act, the assessee was required to furnish the return upto 31.03.2012 alongwith penalty u/s 271F & other consequential actions. However, since the assessee failed to stick any of the above mandatory schedule of filing of her Income Tax return the above mentioned return was treated as invalid being time-barred. Penalty Notice u/s 271F

AISHANI CONSULTANTS PVT LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 2(1), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

271F for non filing of ITR. 6. Aggrieved, the assessee went in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). 7. After consideration of the facts and submissions, the ld. CIT(A) did not admit the appeal of the assessee u/s 249(4)(b) holding that the assessee had not filed return of income as well as not paid an amount equal

MATHUR UGAM AND ASSOCIATES,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD-61(2), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Mathur Ugam & Associates, Vs Ito, A-1/294, Safdarjung Enclave, Ward-61(2), New Delhi-110092. New Delhi. Pan-Aajfm9097N Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Ramdhan Meena, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 12.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30.01.2023

271F and 271(1)(c) no fault on his part despite having paid full tax as applicable under the provisions of the Income Tax Act. 7. The Assessee craves leave to put, alter and/or amend the ground(s) at the time of hearing.” 2. At the time of hearing, no one attended the proceedings on behalf of the assessee

UNICARE DEVELOPER & INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 27(1), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2014-15 Unicare Developer & Infrastructure Vs. Ito, Pvt. Ltd., Ward-27(1), 71/7A, Ff, Rama Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aabcu3616N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K.R. Manjani, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Om Parkash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.11.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2021 Order

271F of the IT Act have been initiated separately.” He accordingly submitted that in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd. vide ITA No.426/2019, order dated 02.08.2019 the penalty levied by the AO and sustained by the CIT(A) being not in accordance with

NUSRAT BANKA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 61(5), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Sh. R. K. Pandaassessment Year: 2010-11 Dr. Nusrat Banka Income Tax Officer C/O. Sh. Amar Mittal Vs Ward – 61 (5) D-815, 3Rd Floor, Ratan Mani, New Delhi New Friend’S Colony, New Delhi-110065 Pan No.Alypb4979L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Nem Singh, Advocate Respondent By Shri S. L. Anuragi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 01/08/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: /08/2019

TDS. 4. Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds of appeal :- 1(a). That on facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) is not justified and correct in rejecting the ground taken by the appellant that the AO has erred