DHARAMVIR KHOSLA ,. vs. DCIT CC-5, NEW DELHI , .

The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes and ld

32(1)(iia) of the Act.\n3.1 Subsequently, search and seizure operation was carried out on\n22.10.2020 on Shri Imtiyaz Ahmad Shah for which the case of assessee was\nopened vide notice u/s 153C of the Act, in response to which assessee filed\nreturn of income on 01.09.2022 declaring total income at Rs.98,25,914/- as\nwas filed in original

DCIT, INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, GURGAON vs. CAIRN ENERGY HYDROCARBON LTD. , GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6357/Del/2013: Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., C/O. Cairn India Ltd., 3Rd & 4Th Circle-3(2), International Taxation, Floor, Vipul Plaza, Suncity, Sector- New Delhi 54, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc3279J

iia) con not be the basis for non applicability of explanation 5 to the said clause because if the intention of the parliament was there to restrict the explanation to a particular clause only, it would have amended the phrase "sub-section" to "clause" or "sub-clause" as the case may be. It may be interesting to note that explanation

DDIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. CAIRN ENERGY HYDROCARBONS LTD., GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6357/Del/2013: Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., C/O. Cairn India Ltd., 3Rd & 4Th Circle-3(2), International Taxation, Floor, Vipul Plaza, Suncity, Sector- New Delhi 54, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc3279J

iia) con not be the basis for non applicability of explanation 5 to the said clause because if the intention of the parliament was there to restrict the explanation to a particular clause only, it would have amended the phrase "sub-section" to "clause" or "sub-clause" as the case may be. It may be interesting to note that explanation

CAIRN ENERGY HYDROCARBON LTD. ,GURGAON vs. DCIT, INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6357/Del/2013: Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., C/O. Cairn India Ltd., 3Rd & 4Th Circle-3(2), International Taxation, Floor, Vipul Plaza, Suncity, Sector- New Delhi 54, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc3279J

iia) con not be the basis for non applicability of explanation 5 to the said clause because if the intention of the parliament was there to restrict the explanation to a particular clause only, it would have amended the phrase "sub-section" to "clause" or "sub-clause" as the case may be. It may be interesting to note that explanation

CAIRN ENERGY HYDROCARBONS LTD.,GURGAON vs. DDIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6357/Del/2013: Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., C/O. Cairn India Ltd., 3Rd & 4Th Circle-3(2), International Taxation, Floor, Vipul Plaza, Suncity, Sector- New Delhi 54, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc3279J

iia) con not be the basis for non applicability of explanation 5 to the said clause because if the intention of the parliament was there to restrict the explanation to a particular clause only, it would have amended the phrase "sub-section" to "clause" or "sub-clause" as the case may be. It may be interesting to note that explanation

CAIRN ENERGY HYDROCARBON LTD. ,GURGAON vs. DCIT, INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6357/Del/2013: Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., C/O. Cairn India Ltd., 3Rd & 4Th Circle-3(2), International Taxation, Floor, Vipul Plaza, Suncity, Sector- New Delhi 54, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc3279J

iia) con not be the basis for non applicability of explanation 5 to the said clause because if the intention of the parliament was there to restrict the explanation to a particular clause only, it would have amended the phrase "sub-section" to "clause" or "sub-clause" as the case may be. It may be interesting to note that explanation

DCIT, INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, GURGAON vs. CAIRN ENERGY HYDROCARBON LTD. , GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6357/Del/2013: Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., C/O. Cairn India Ltd., 3Rd & 4Th Circle-3(2), International Taxation, Floor, Vipul Plaza, Suncity, Sector- New Delhi 54, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc3279J

iia) con not be the basis for non applicability of explanation 5 to the said clause because if the intention of the parliament was there to restrict the explanation to a particular clause only, it would have amended the phrase "sub-section" to "clause" or "sub-clause" as the case may be. It may be interesting to note that explanation

CAIRN ENERGY HYDROCARBON LTD. ,GURGAON vs. JCIT,(OSD) INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, GURGAON

In the result, all the appeals preferred by the assessee as well as the Revenue

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganesh[A.Y.: 2015-16] & [A.Y.: 2016-17]

iia) con not be the basis for non applicability of explanation 5 to the said clause because if the intention of the parliament was there to restrict the explanation to a particular clause only, it would have amended the phrase "sub- section" to "clause" or "sub-clause" as the case may be. It may be interesting to note that explanation

DCIT, INT. TAX. CIRCLE, GURGAON vs. CAIRN ENERGY HYDROCARBONS LIMITED, GURGAON

In the result, all the appeals preferred by the assessee as well as the Revenue

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganesh[A.Y.: 2015-16] & [A.Y.: 2016-17]

iia) con not be the basis for non applicability of explanation 5 to the said clause because if the intention of the parliament was there to restrict the explanation to a particular clause only, it would have amended the phrase "sub- section" to "clause" or "sub-clause" as the case may be. It may be interesting to note that explanation

DHARAMVIR KHOSLA,. vs. DCIT CC-5, NEW DELHI , .

The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes and ld

32(1)(iia) of the Act.\n3.1 Subsequently, search and seizure operation was carried out on\n22.10.2020 on Shri Imtiyaz Ahmad Shah for which the case of assessee was\nopened vide notice u/s 153C of the Act, in response to which assessee filed\nreturn of income on 01.09.2022 declaring total income at Rs.98,25,914/- as\nwas filed in original

IILM FOUNDAION,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT (EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

TDS Aarti Rai 29,750/- Dr. 6. From the above details, Assessing Officer inferred that these payments are in violation of Section 13(1)(c) read with section 13(3) and on these account the assessee is liable to lose its exemption. He further noted the name of these two persons does not appear as employee of the Banyan Tree

ADIT(E), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. IILM FOUNDATION, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

TDS Aarti Rai 29,750/- Dr. 6. From the above details, Assessing Officer inferred that these payments are in violation of Section 13(1)(c) read with section 13(3) and on these account the assessee is liable to lose its exemption. He further noted the name of these two persons does not appear as employee of the Banyan Tree

ADIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. IILM FOUNDATION, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

TDS Aarti Rai 29,750/- Dr. 6. From the above details, Assessing Officer inferred that these payments are in violation of Section 13(1)(c) read with section 13(3) and on these account the assessee is liable to lose its exemption. He further noted the name of these two persons does not appear as employee of the Banyan Tree

ADIT(E), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. IILM FOUNDATION, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

TDS Aarti Rai 29,750/- Dr. 6. From the above details, Assessing Officer inferred that these payments are in violation of Section 13(1)(c) read with section 13(3) and on these account the assessee is liable to lose its exemption. He further noted the name of these two persons does not appear as employee of the Banyan Tree

ITO (E), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. IILM FOUNDATION, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

TDS Aarti Rai 29,750/- Dr. 6. From the above details, Assessing Officer inferred that these payments are in violation of Section 13(1)(c) read with section 13(3) and on these account the assessee is liable to lose its exemption. He further noted the name of these two persons does not appear as employee of the Banyan Tree

ACIT, CIRCLE- 17(2), , NEW DELHI vs. NATIONAL FERTILIZERS LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeal are dismissed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Sh. Prashant Maharishi

32 (1) (iia) of the Act without considering the fact that the relevant provisions are affected w.e.f. 01.04.2013. 8. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) is legally justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,42,^01- on account of accrued mercantile system of accounting? 9. Whether on the facts and circumstances

NATIONAL FERTILIZERS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 17(2), , NEW DELHI

Appeal are dismissed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Sh. Prashant Maharishi

32 (1) (iia) of the Act without considering the fact that the relevant provisions are affected w.e.f. 01.04.2013. 8. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) is legally justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,42,^01- on account of accrued mercantile system of accounting? 9. Whether on the facts and circumstances

NATIONAL FERTILIZERS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 17(2), , NEW DELHI

Appeal are dismissed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Sh. Prashant Maharishi

32 (1) (iia) of the Act without considering the fact that the relevant provisions are affected w.e.f. 01.04.2013. 8. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) is legally justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,42,^01- on account of accrued mercantile system of accounting? 9. Whether on the facts and circumstances