KOHINOOR FOODS LTD.,FARIDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-14(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal as well as Assessee’s Appeal stand dismissed in the aforesaid manner

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahay, Accoutant Member Dcit, Circle-14(2), New Delhi Vs. M/S Kohinoor Foods Ltd. 10Th Floor, Pinnacle Room No. 323, C.R. Building, New Delhi – 2 Business Tower, Suraj Kund Road, Faridabad Haryana-121001 (Pan: Aaacs2470D) (Appellant) (Respondent) & M/S Kohinoor Foods Ltd. Vs. Acit, Circle 14(2), 10Th Floor, Pinnacle New Delhi Business Tower, Suraj Kund Road, Faridabad, Haryana-121001 (Pan: Aaacs2470D) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : S/Sh. Salil Kapoor, Utkarsha Kumar Gupta, Ms. Soumya Singh, Advocates Department By : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 28.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17.09.2025

bogus purchases, despite of confirming that the assessee has neither substantiate the purchase nor the sales of specific purchase made from M/s Rajdhani Sales Corporation. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed its return of income for the assessment year 2011-12 declaring loss at Rs. 33,05,69,071/- on 30.11.2011 which was later

M/S DHADDA INTERNATIONAL,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

bogus unsecured loans and sales were being routed in benami concerns. Assessee in response responded that these are genuine transactions of the purchases which have been then sold to customers on which assessee has paid the tax. Further, it was submitted that all the payments made against these purchases were through account payee cheques which were duly reflected

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DHADDA INTERNATIONAL, DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

bogus unsecured loans and sales were being routed in benami concerns. Assessee in response responded that these are genuine transactions of the purchases which have been then sold to customers on which assessee has paid the tax. Further, it was submitted that all the payments made against these purchases were through account payee cheques which were duly reflected

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DHADDA INTERNATIONAL, DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

bogus unsecured loans and sales were being routed in benami concerns. Assessee in response responded that these are genuine transactions of the purchases which have been then sold to customers on which assessee has paid the tax. Further, it was submitted that all the payments made against these purchases were through account payee cheques which were duly reflected

M/S DHADDA INTERNATIONAL,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

bogus unsecured loans and sales were being routed in benami concerns. Assessee in response responded that these are genuine transactions of the purchases which have been then sold to customers on which assessee has paid the tax. Further, it was submitted that all the payments made against these purchases were through account payee cheques which were duly reflected

SAKET AGARWAL,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -45(2), DELHI , DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2017-18] Shri Saket Agrawal, Vs Ito, 392/1, 2Nd Floor, Ward-45(2), Sainik Vihar, Pitam Pura, Delhi Delhi-110085. Pan-Aavpa3410D Appellant Respondent Appellant By Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv., Shri Somil Aggarwal, Adv. & Shri Saksham Aggarwal, Ca Respondent By Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 26.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.09.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Present Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 10.12.2024 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“Nfac”), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Cit(A), Delhi-15/10489/2019-20 U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act,1961 [“The Act”] Arising Out Of Assessment Order Dated 31.12.2019 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Is An Individual & Filed His Return Of Income On 26.03.2018, Declaring Total Income Of Inr 10,02,940/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Complete Scrutiny For The Reason That Assessee Has Deposited Cash In Specified Bank Notes (Sbn) During Demonetization & Due To The Survey Carried Out At The Business Premises Of The Assessee.

bogus sales proceeds used to deposit unaccounted cash during demonetization. c. Rs. 2,71,29,237/- as unexplained credit u/s 68, being the unexplained difference between sundry creditors and purchases. (v) The total assessed income was computed at Rs. 9,25,81,239/- and taxed under section 115BBE of the Act. Penalty

PBG INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , DELHI, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarpbg International Private Income Tax Officer, Limited, Ward-19(1), C.R. Building, Cb-4B, Dda Flats, Vs. Delhi-110002. Munirka, Delhi-110067. Pan-Aabcp8752E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Anil Goyal, Ca Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra Sr. Dr Department By 20.01.2026 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 13.03.2026 O R D E R Per Vimal Kumar, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against Order Dated 29.04.2024 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Ld. Cit(A)'] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, [Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Act'] Arising Out Of Assessment Order Dated 25.03.2022 Of The Ld. Assessing Officer U/S 147 R.W.S 144B Of The Act For Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed His Original Return Of Income On 14.10.2016 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.4,42,670/- Along With Computation Of Income, Auditors' Report & Audited Accounts Of The Assessee. Ld. Ao On Basis Of Incriminating & Tangible Information & After Following Due Process, Re-Opened Pbg International Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito

purchases of Rs. 1,38,32,272/- and bogus sales of Rs 1,47,20,000/-even without rejecting the books of accounts under section 145(3). Therefore, the entire assessment order is bad in law and deserves to be quashed. 6.5 The learned AO has erred in giving only two days time to the assessee to give the reply

ACIT, CIRCLE 16(1), DELHI vs. MY PAPER MERCHANTS PVT. LTD , DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

bogus purchases\nfrom M/s S.K. Agencies u/s 69 C of the Act, these are being\nadjudicated together.\nThe assessment order of Ld. A.O, the written submissions filed\nby the Appellant and the facts and circumstances of case have\n7\nbeen perused in this matter and my findings and decision are\nbeing discussed in the succeeding paras.\nBefore going into

DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(2), NEW DELHI vs. ADVENTURE RESORTS AND CRUISES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the revenue’s appeal as well Assessee’s cross objection both are dismissed in the aforesaid manner

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhdcit, Circle 1(2), Vs.Adventure Resorts Room No. 368, C.R. Building & Cruises Pvt. Ltd. I.P. Estate, New Delhi 611, Surya Kiran Building, Kg Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001 (Pan:Aaacf6111G) (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.198/Del/2022 (Asstt. Year : 2014-15) Adventure Resorts Vs. Dcit, Circle 1(2) & Cruises Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi 611, Surya Kiran Building, Kg Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001 (Pan: Aaacf6111G) (Appellant) (Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By :Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 22.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30.09.2025

bogus purchase claimed as deduction which is disallowed and the receipts side of the P&L account has not been disturbed because admittedly the entire receipts i.e. Rs. 6,15,07,898/- are 'revenue from operations'. Accordingly, the sham purchase of textiles is disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee. I am satisfied that the assessee

M/S LS CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 30, DELHI, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are partly

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.2207 & 2208/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2019-20 & 2020-21 बनाम M/S Ls Contractors Dcit, Private Limited Vs. Central Circle-30, H-12, Tropical Building, E-2, Ground Floor, Connaught Place, New Delhi. Ara Centre, Pan No.Aabcl8541R Jhandewalan Extension Karol Bagh, New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

purchases made by the assessee as non genuine and bogus. The assessee has raised the following common grounds except for the figures for these assessment years: - M/S LS CONTRACTORS PVT. LTD. 1. “That the CIT(A) grossly erred in law and on the facts and circumstances of the case in dismissing the appeal of the Appellant by confirming the order

M/S LS CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 30, DELHI, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are partly

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.2207 & 2208/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2019-20 & 2020-21 बनाम M/S Ls Contractors Dcit, Private Limited Vs. Central Circle-30, H-12, Tropical Building, E-2, Ground Floor, Connaught Place, New Delhi. Ara Centre, Pan No.Aabcl8541R Jhandewalan Extension Karol Bagh, New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

purchases made by the assessee as non genuine and bogus. The assessee has raised the following common grounds except for the figures for these assessment years: - M/S LS CONTRACTORS PVT. LTD. 1. “That the CIT(A) grossly erred in law and on the facts and circumstances of the case in dismissing the appeal of the Appellant by confirming the order

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

bogus. Further, the Delhi Bench in ACIT v.\nMy Paper Merchants Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 226/Del/2024, dated\n20.08.2025) reiterated that additions made on assumptions,\nwithout verification or tangible material, are unsustainable.\nXXX\n29. In view of the above discussions, we find merit in the Ground\nNo. 6 of the Assessee, accordingly, we delete the selective\ndisallowance of Rs.88.95 lakh

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 05, DELHI

bogus. Further, the Delhi Bench in ACIT v.\nMy Paper Merchants Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 226/Del/2024, dated\n20.08.2025) reiterated that additions made on assumptions,\nwithout verification or tangible material, are unsustainable.\nXXX\n29. In view of the above discussions, we find merit in the Ground\nNo. 6 of the Assessee, accordingly, we delete the selective\ndisallowance of Rs.88.95 lakh

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 05, DELHI

bogus. Further, the Delhi Bench in ACIT v.\nMy Paper Merchants Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 226/Del/2024, dated\n20.08.2025) reiterated that additions made on assumptions,\nwithout verification or tangible material, are unsustainable.\nXXX\n29. In view of the above discussions, we find merit in the Ground\nNo. 6 of the Assessee, accordingly, we delete the selective\ndisallowance of Rs.88.95 lakh

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-05, DELHI

bogus. Further, the Delhi Bench in ACIT v.\nMy Paper Merchants Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 226/Del/2024, dated\n20.08.2025) reiterated that additions made on assumptions,\nwithout verification or tangible material, are unsustainable.\nXXX\n29. In view of the above discussions, we find merit in the Ground\nNo. 6 of the Assessee, accordingly, we delete the selective\ndisallowance of Rs.88.95 lakh

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-05, DELHI

bogus. Further, the Delhi Bench in ACIT v.\nMy Paper Merchants Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 226/Del/2024, dated\n20.08.2025) reiterated that additions made on assumptions,\nwithout verification or tangible material, are unsustainable.\nXXX\n29. In view of the above discussions, we find merit in the Ground\nNo. 6 of the Assessee, accordingly, we delete the selective\ndisallowance of Rs. 88.95 lakh

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

bogus. Further, the Delhi Bench in ACIT v.\nMy Paper Merchants Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 226/Del/2024, dated\n20.08.2025) reiterated that additions made on assumptions,\nwithout verification or tangible material, are unsustainable.\nXXX\n29. In view of the above discussions, we find merit in the Ground\nNo. 6 of the Assessee, accordingly, we delete the selective\ndisallowance of Rs.88.95 lakh

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

bogus. Further, the Delhi Bench in ACIT v.\nMy Paper Merchants Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 226/Del/2024, dated\n20.08.2025) reiterated that additions made on assumptions,\nwithout verification or tangible material, are unsustainable.\nXXX\n29. In view of the above discussions, we find merit in the Ground\nNo. 6 of the Assessee, accordingly, we delete the selective\ndisallowance of Rs.88.95 lakh

SAIMANDEEP INDUSTRIES OF INDIA ,GHAZIABAD vs. AO-WARD-51(92), FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

bogus purchases in the year. We observe that on this point alone, the imposition of penalty towards disallowance of bogus