CIT vs. TRANSCEIVERS INDIA LTD

Bench: The Appellate Commissioner

section 276C of the Income-tax Act.” 5. Before us, learned counsel for the Revenue relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi v. Atul Mohan Bindal, (2009) 9 SCC 589 and urged that to determine whether the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars, mens rea is irrelevant. Counsel urged that being a strict liability

DCIT, CIRCLE 22(2), NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs. SAHIL VACHANI, DELHI

Appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice Presdient (), Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shriavdhesh Kumar Mishraआअसं.2604/िद"ी/2023(िन.व. 2016-17)

TDS certificate for Rs. 7,00,000/- issued to Trophy Estates Pvt, Ltd.. 8.1 From the above details filed by the assesse vide letter dated 02.11.2018 before the AO during the course of assessment proceedings, it is clear that the assessee has filed evidences for claim of deduction u/s. 54F of the Act and furnished the explanation in relation

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 13(1), NEW DELHI, I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI vs. LOGIC EASTERN (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, NOIDA, UTTAR PRADESH

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2016-17] Deputy Commissioner Of Logic Eastern (India) Private Income Tax, Circle-13(1), Limited, Room No.316A, 3Rd Floor, Vs C-56/39, 5Th Floor, Sector-62, C.R. Building, I.P. Estate, Noida, Uttar Pradesh-201301 New Delhi-110002 Pan-Aaacl3539Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Ms. Amisha S. Gupta, Cit(Dr) Respondent By None Date Of Hearing 07.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 07.07.2025 Order Per Brajesh Kumar Singh, Am

TDS on certain payments amounting to Rs.63,65,815/- and explained as under:- “This amount of Rs. 63,65,815/- has also been disallowed by the assessee in its computation of income furnished in this regard and as a result, the total income (loss) reported by the assessee under the head "Profits and gains from business or profession

SHRI ADITYA MALLA,NOIDA vs. ITO, NOIDA

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

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

TDS deducted from such omitted salary amounting to Rs.7,8,334/-. He placed reliance upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Price Waterhouse Coopers Vs CIT 211 7 I.T.A.No.2457./Del/2016 Taxmann 40. Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in para 19 “that even professionals can commit bona-fide inadvertent errors. This can only

DCIT, SONEPAT vs. SHRI ATLAS CYCLES HARYANA LTD., SONEPAT

In the result ITA Nos. 2484/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

TDS is also duly deducted. Considering the finding of fact recorded by the ld. CIT (A) which could not be controverted by the Department, we find no reason to interfere on this issue as well. Ground no. 5 of the department’s appeal is accordingly dismissed. 7.5 Ground no. 6 pertains to deletion of addition of Rs. 114,210/- under

DCIT, SONEPAT vs. M/S ATLAS CYCLES (HARYANA) LTD.,, SONEPAT

In the result ITA Nos. 2489/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

TDS is also duly deducted. Considering the finding of fact recorded by the ld. CIT (A) which could not be controverted by the Department, we find no reason to interfere on this issue as well. Ground no. 5 of the department’s appeal is accordingly dismissed. 7.5 Ground no. 6 pertains to deletion of addition of Rs. 114,210/- under

DCIT, SONEPAT vs. M/S ATLAS CYCLES (HARYANA) LTD.,, SONEPAT

In the result ITA Nos. 2484/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

TDS is also duly deducted. Considering the finding of fact recorded by the ld. CIT (A) which could not be controverted by the Department, we find no reason to interfere on this issue as well. Ground no. 5 of the department’s appeal is accordingly dismissed. 7.5 Ground no. 6 pertains to deletion of addition of Rs. 114,210/- under

DCIT, SONEPAT vs. M/S ATLAS CYCLES (HARYANA) LTD.,, SONEPAT

In the result ITA Nos. 2484/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

TDS is also duly deducted. Considering the finding of fact recorded by the ld. CIT (A) which could not be controverted by the Department, we find no reason to interfere on this issue as well. Ground no. 5 of the department’s appeal is accordingly dismissed. 7.5 Ground no. 6 pertains to deletion of addition of Rs. 114,210/- under

ACIT, SONEPAT vs. M/S. ATLAS CYCLES HARYANA LTD., SONEPAT

In the result ITA Nos. 2484/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

TDS is also duly deducted. Considering the finding of fact recorded by the ld. CIT (A) which could not be controverted by the Department, we find no reason to interfere on this issue as well. Ground no. 5 of the department’s appeal is accordingly dismissed. 7.5 Ground no. 6 pertains to deletion of addition of Rs. 114,210/- under

ACIT, SONEPAT vs. M/S. ATLAS CYCLES (HARYANA) LTD., SONEPAT

In the result ITA Nos. 2484/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

TDS is also duly deducted. Considering the finding of fact recorded by the ld. CIT (A) which could not be controverted by the Department, we find no reason to interfere on this issue as well. Ground no. 5 of the department’s appeal is accordingly dismissed. 7.5 Ground no. 6 pertains to deletion of addition of Rs. 114,210/- under

ACIT, SONEPAT vs. M/S. ATLAS CYCLES (HARYANA) LTD., SONEPAT

In the result ITA Nos. 2484/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

TDS is also duly deducted. Considering the finding of fact recorded by the ld. CIT (A) which could not be controverted by the Department, we find no reason to interfere on this issue as well. Ground no. 5 of the department’s appeal is accordingly dismissed. 7.5 Ground no. 6 pertains to deletion of addition of Rs. 114,210/- under

ACIT, SONEPAT vs. M/S ATLAS CYCLES (HARYANA) LTD.,, SONEPAT

In the result ITA Nos. 2484/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

TDS is also duly deducted. Considering the finding of fact recorded by the ld. CIT (A) which could not be controverted by the Department, we find no reason to interfere on this issue as well. Ground no. 5 of the department’s appeal is accordingly dismissed. 7.5 Ground no. 6 pertains to deletion of addition of Rs. 114,210/- under

ACIT, SONEPAT vs. M/S. ATLAS CYCLES (HARYANA) LTD., SONEPAT

In the result ITA Nos. 2484/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

TDS is also duly deducted. Considering the finding of fact recorded by the ld. CIT (A) which could not be controverted by the Department, we find no reason to interfere on this issue as well. Ground no. 5 of the department’s appeal is accordingly dismissed. 7.5 Ground no. 6 pertains to deletion of addition of Rs. 114,210/- under

M/S. ATLAS CYCLES (HARYANA) LTD.,SONEPAT vs. ACIT, HARYANA

In the result ITA Nos. 2484/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

TDS is also duly deducted. Considering the finding of fact recorded by the ld. CIT (A) which could not be controverted by the Department, we find no reason to interfere on this issue as well. Ground no. 5 of the department’s appeal is accordingly dismissed. 7.5 Ground no. 6 pertains to deletion of addition of Rs. 114,210/- under

ADDL. CIT, SONEPAT vs. M/S ATLAS CYCLES HARYANA LTD., SONEPAT

In the result ITA Nos. 2484/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

TDS is also duly deducted. Considering the finding of fact recorded by the ld. CIT (A) which could not be controverted by the Department, we find no reason to interfere on this issue as well. Ground no. 5 of the department’s appeal is accordingly dismissed. 7.5 Ground no. 6 pertains to deletion of addition of Rs. 114,210/- under