DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. VICTORY PORTFOLIO LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed with above direction

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishivictory Portfolio Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 209, Gupta Towers, Azardpur Circle-17(1), Commercial Complex, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaafv9634K (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Vs. Victory Portfolio Ltd, Circle-17(1), 209, Gupta Towers, Azardpur New Delhi Commercial Complex, New Delhi Pan: Aaafv9634K (Appellant) (Respondent)

88E of the act. The learned assessing officer worked out 30% of the interest income of INR 8 90692/– as ineligible sum for rebate. The learned CIT – A deleted the above addition and directed the learned assessing officer to grant rebate giving a finding and relying upon the judgment of Kerala High Court in case of CIT vs Producin private

PAWAN KUMAR AGGARWAL vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

TDS, it cannot be inferred by the Assessing Officer that it is STT. Moreover, as we have already mentioned that for the purpose of Section 88E

AMBIENCE DEVELOPERS AND INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), DELHI-2 JHANDEWALAN, NEW DELHI, DELHI

TDS\nGST Late Filing Fee\nDisallowance U/s.40(a)(ia)\n100,742,016\n3,397,000\n5,215,103\n19,150\n60,000\nGross Total\n602,589,316\nLess:\nDepreciation as per Income Tax Act\n541,726,557\nRevised Profit & Loss as per Section 263 of the\n60,862,759\nAct\nLess:\nB/F Losses from A.Y. 2018-19\n134

AMBIENCE DEVELOPERS AND INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. PCIT (CENTRAL) DELHI-2, JHANDEWALAN NEW DELHI, DELHI

88E of the Act after\nholding that the same needs more careful examination on\nthe part of the Assessing Officer. This itself indication of the\nfact that this is not the case of lack of enquiry, but at the\nhighest it can be a case of inadequate enquiry. It is settled\nposition in law that inadequate enquiry by itself would