DCIT, CIRCLE 4(2), NEW DELHI vs. MS COMMUNIQUE MARKETING SOLUTIONS PVT LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed and cross-objection of Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Ms Commmunique Marketing Tax, Circle 4(2), Solutions (P) Ltd., 5407, Arya Samaj New Delhi. Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005 Pan :Aaccc3432F (Appellant) (Respondent)

69B of the Act. No doubt the assessee had tried to file additional evidence before the CIT (Appeals) in the form of confirmation letters and income- tax returns but these were not admitted by the CIT (Appeals) and no reasons have been shown before us as to why they should have been admitted. In the absence of any clinching evidence

ACIT, CIRCLE-51(1), NEW DELHI vs. NAVEEN BATRA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Cross Objection of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usassessment Year 2017-18

TDS Paid 2,410 To Telephone 28,037 To Water Exps. 3,096 To Net Profit 2,51,85,000 2,74,98,248 2,74,98,248 7.4 The above trading and P&L account clearly depicts the annual accounts of the appellant. The appellant has included excessive stock found during the search of Rs.2

U V BUILDCON (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 27(2), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

TDS 2,00,000/- TOTAL : 5,84,91,000/- 2.2 The ClT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.2,20,00,000 under section 69A of the act, being the undisclosed money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article without appreciating that the appellant has declared the impugned amount as its income in the profit and loss account being

HAZOORILAL JEWELLERS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE-28, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarhazoorilal Jewellers Pvt Ltd, Vs. Acit, M-44, M-Block, Greater Kailash- Central Circle-28, 1, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aadch3922L Dcit, Vs. Hazoorilal Jewellers Pvt Ltd, Central Circle-28, M-44, M-Block, Greater New Delhi Kailash-1, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aadch3922L Assessee By : Shri K. Sampath, Adv Shri Varun Kholi, Ca Revenue By: Ms. Anu Krishna Aggarwal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 16/05/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 13/08/2024

69B, 69C and 69D of the Act. Once, an income was not held to be in the nature as referred under Sections 68 to 69D of the Act, the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act cannot be pressed into service at all. We find that the source of this additional income of Rs. 3,67,13,530/- had emanated

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE-28, NEW DELHI vs. HAZOORILAL JEWELLERS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarhazoorilal Jewellers Pvt Ltd, Vs. Acit, M-44, M-Block, Greater Kailash- Central Circle-28, 1, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aadch3922L Dcit, Vs. Hazoorilal Jewellers Pvt Ltd, Central Circle-28, M-44, M-Block, Greater New Delhi Kailash-1, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aadch3922L Assessee By : Shri K. Sampath, Adv Shri Varun Kholi, Ca Revenue By: Ms. Anu Krishna Aggarwal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 16/05/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 13/08/2024

69B, 69C and 69D of the Act. Once, an income was not held to be in the nature as referred under Sections 68 to 69D of the Act, the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act cannot be pressed into service at all. We find that the source of this additional income of Rs. 3,67,13,530/- had emanated

VIS-A-VIS INDIA PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 26(4), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2015-16 Vis-À-Vis India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito, 90, New Mangla Puri, Ward 26(4), Mg Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaacv8740P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Naresh Samkaria, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ramesh Kumar Date Of Hearing : 23.08.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.10.2021 Order

section 14A r.w.r. 8D, the AO made addition of Rs.67,97,682/- to the total income of the assessee. Similarly, he also disallowed TDS of Rs.526/-. The AO accordingly determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.11,90,910/-. 4.1 In appeal, the ld.CIT(A) gave part relief to the assessee. 5. Aggrieved with such order

MAANYA GOYAL ,UTTAR PRADESH vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD , GZBD

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyaassessment Year: 2018-19 Anil Bala Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Aappb5034N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Maanya Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Blxps7985K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Yugank Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Ahhpg4073H (Appellant) (Respondent)

69B of the Act. The Ld. CIT DR submitted that the learned first appellate authority has granted relief to the assessee by considering the irrelevant facts and circumstances therefore the impugned first appellate order may kindly be set aside by restoring that of the A.O. The Ld. CIT DR also submitted that the learned first appellate authority has restricted

BANKEY BEHARI GOYAL ,AGRA (U.P) vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE GHAZIABAD, UTTARPRADESH

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyaassessment Year: 2018-19 Anil Bala Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Aappb5034N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Maanya Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Blxps7985K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Yugank Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Ahhpg4073H (Appellant) (Respondent)

69B of the Act. The Ld. CIT DR submitted that the learned first appellate authority has granted relief to the assessee by considering the irrelevant facts and circumstances therefore the impugned first appellate order may kindly be set aside by restoring that of the A.O. The Ld. CIT DR also submitted that the learned first appellate authority has restricted

DCIT, CC GZBD , GHAZIABAD vs. YUGANK GOYAL , GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyaassessment Year: 2018-19 Anil Bala Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Aappb5034N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Maanya Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Blxps7985K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Yugank Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Ahhpg4073H (Appellant) (Respondent)

69B of the Act. The Ld. CIT DR submitted that the learned first appellate authority has granted relief to the assessee by considering the irrelevant facts and circumstances therefore the impugned first appellate order may kindly be set aside by restoring that of the A.O. The Ld. CIT DR also submitted that the learned first appellate authority has restricted

ANI BALA GOYAL,AGRA vs. DCIT, CC, GHAIZABAD

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyaassessment Year: 2018-19 Anil Bala Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Aappb5034N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Maanya Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Blxps7985K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Yugank Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Ahhpg4073H (Appellant) (Respondent)

69B of the Act. The Ld. CIT DR submitted that the learned first appellate authority has granted relief to the assessee by considering the irrelevant facts and circumstances therefore the impugned first appellate order may kindly be set aside by restoring that of the A.O. The Ld. CIT DR also submitted that the learned first appellate authority has restricted

DCIT CC, , GZBD vs. BANKEY BEHARI GOYAL, AGRA

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyaassessment Year: 2018-19 Anil Bala Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Aappb5034N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Maanya Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Blxps7985K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Yugank Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Ahhpg4073H (Appellant) (Respondent)

69B of the Act. The Ld. CIT DR submitted that the learned first appellate authority has granted relief to the assessee by considering the irrelevant facts and circumstances therefore the impugned first appellate order may kindly be set aside by restoring that of the A.O. The Ld. CIT DR also submitted that the learned first appellate authority has restricted

YUGANK GOYAL,AGRA vs. DCIT, CC, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyaassessment Year: 2018-19 Anil Bala Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Aappb5034N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Maanya Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Blxps7985K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Yugank Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Ahhpg4073H (Appellant) (Respondent)

69B of the Act. The Ld. CIT DR submitted that the learned first appellate authority has granted relief to the assessee by considering the irrelevant facts and circumstances therefore the impugned first appellate order may kindly be set aside by restoring that of the A.O. The Ld. CIT DR also submitted that the learned first appellate authority has restricted