RICHMOND EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,NOIDA vs. DCIT/ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

section 10 of the Act that where a reference,\nunder the first proviso to sub-section (3) of section 143, has been made on or before\nthe 31st March, 2022 by the Assessing Officer for the contravention of certain\nprovisions of clause (23C) of section 10 of the Act, such references shall be dealt with\nin the manner provided under

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)

bogus claim, levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) read with Explanation 1 is justified. 19. I find that while imposing penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, the AO did not categorically mention the Explanation 1 to section 271(1)(c) of the Act though he mentioned that the explanation offered by the assessee was not found

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 vs. SILVER LINE

Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from the Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Jaipur by letter dated 10th May 2010 that the Assessee was making bogus purchases

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 vs. SILVER LINE

Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from the Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Jaipur by letter dated 10th May 2010 that the Assessee was making bogus purchases

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 vs. SILVER LINE

Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from the Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Jaipur by letter dated 10th May 2010 that the Assessee was making bogus purchases

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 vs. SILVER LINE

Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from the Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Jaipur by letter dated 10th May 2010 that the Assessee was making bogus purchases

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 vs. SILVER LINE

Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from the Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Jaipur by letter dated 10th May 2010 that the Assessee was making bogus purchases

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 vs. SILVER LINE

Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from the Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Jaipur by letter dated 10th May 2010 that the Assessee was making bogus purchases

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 vs. SILVER LINE

Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from the Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Jaipur by letter dated 10th May 2010 that the Assessee was making bogus purchases

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -18 vs. SILVER LINE

Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from the Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Jaipur by letter dated 10th May 2010 that the Assessee was making bogus purchases

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-19, NEW DELHI vs. M/S K.R. PULP & PAPERS LTD,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri N.K. Choudhry

143(3) on 22.11.2011 determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.5,84,39,170/- wherein the A.O. made disallowance of Rs.3,88,42,025/- by rejecting the claim of deduction under section 80IA made by the assessee. 2.1. The Assessee challenged the order of the Ld. CIT(A) who allowed the claim of deduction under section 80IA

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. THE INDURE PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Department of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14 Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. The Indure Private Limited, Income Tax, Indure House, Greater Kailash Part Ii, Delhi South Delhi 1100 48 Pan :Aaact0121C (Appellant) (Respondent)

143(2) of the Act copies under Section 142(1) of the Act as well as show-cause- notice were issued. The assessee filed reply. Notices under Section 142(1) dated 27.12.2022 and 11.02.2023 were issued asking various details. The assessee filed part details on 20.02.2023. In response to notice under Section 148 of the Act, the assessee filed reply

CONE CRAFT PAPER PVT LTD,DELHI vs. PCIT-1, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

143(1)(a) Rs. 82,84,260/- 3. Disallowance of bogus purchase Rs. 30,99,366/- discussed above para 1 4. Disallowance of bogus purchase Rs. 17,66,305/- discussed above para 2 5. Total income/loss determined as per Rs. 1,31,49,931/- the above proposal 6. Total income/loss determined (R/o) Rs. 1,31,49,930/- 7. The assessment

ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-18, NEW DELHI vs. JAGANANTH HEMCHAND JAIN, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

1. CIT(A)-18, New AO Order Assessment order under Delhi order dated dated Section 143(3)/147 of 28.09.2018 31.12.2017 the I.T. Act, 1961 2. CO No.15/Del/2023 -do- -NA- -NA- (in ITA No.7754/Del/2018) 3. -do- AO Order Assessment order under dated Section 143(3)/147 of 31.12.2017 the I.T. Act, 1961 4. CO No.16/Del/2023

ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-18, NEW DELHI vs. JAGANANTH HEMCHAND JAIN, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

1. CIT(A)-18, New AO Order Assessment order under Delhi order dated dated Section 143(3)/147 of 28.09.2018 31.12.2017 the I.T. Act, 1961 2. CO No.15/Del/2023 -do- -NA- -NA- (in ITA No.7754/Del/2018) 3. -do- AO Order Assessment order under dated Section 143(3)/147 of 31.12.2017 the I.T. Act, 1961 4. CO No.16/Del/2023

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. S S PULSES MANUFACTURING PVT LTD, DELHI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

1 above, wherein Hon'ble High Court, relying on the findings of the Hon'ble ITAT, Ahmedabad, that the suppliers are bogus, has given a finding that once the suppliers are held bogus, then it is not correct Page 10 of 16 DCIT Vs. S.S. Pulses [A.Y 2012-13] to tax only 25% of the bogus claims? This is further

ACIT,CIRCLE-10(1) , NEW DELHI vs. INDEX SECURITIES & RESEARCH PVT LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Department of Revenue is dismissed

1)(vii) alone governs the issue, and the\ndeduction has rightly been denied.\n7.\nLearned Authorized Representative for the assessee submitted that\nHon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi in ITA No.4224/Del/2019 titled\nas “Ankita Aggarwal Vs. ITO” in order dated 06.08.2024 by referring to the\naccommodation entries in favour of the assessee and granted relief to the\nassessee

MAHAVIR TRANSMISSION LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the all appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

143(3) are in ITA Nos. 2844 to 2846/Del/2022 Mahavir Transmission Ltd. violation of mandatory provisions of Section 153D of the Act and as such the same is bad in eyes of law. (ii) That the CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the contention of the assessee that the purported approval u/s 1530 of the Act is illegal

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI vs. MAHAVEER TRANSMISSION LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the all appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

143(3) are in ITA Nos. 2844 to 2846/Del/2022 Mahavir Transmission Ltd. violation of mandatory provisions of Section 153D of the Act and as such the same is bad in eyes of law. (ii) That the CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the contention of the assessee that the purported approval u/s 1530 of the Act is illegal