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

2) of the Act was 2015:DHC:9180-DB ITA No. 578 of 2015 & connected matters Page 5 of 15 issued. Subsequently, the assessment was finalised by the AO by passing an order under Section 143 (3) of the Act. The return for AY 2008-09 was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from

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

2) of the Act was 2015:DHC:9180-DB ITA No. 578 of 2015 & connected matters Page 5 of 15 issued. Subsequently, the assessment was finalised by the AO by passing an order under Section 143 (3) of the Act. The return for AY 2008-09 was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from

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

2) of the Act was 2015:DHC:9180-DB ITA No. 578 of 2015 & connected matters Page 5 of 15 issued. Subsequently, the assessment was finalised by the AO by passing an order under Section 143 (3) of the Act. The return for AY 2008-09 was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from

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

2) of the Act was 2015:DHC:9180-DB ITA No. 578 of 2015 & connected matters Page 5 of 15 issued. Subsequently, the assessment was finalised by the AO by passing an order under Section 143 (3) of the Act. The return for AY 2008-09 was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from

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

2) of the Act was 2015:DHC:9180-DB ITA No. 578 of 2015 & connected matters Page 5 of 15 issued. Subsequently, the assessment was finalised by the AO by passing an order under Section 143 (3) of the Act. The return for AY 2008-09 was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from

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

2) of the Act was 2015:DHC:9180-DB ITA No. 578 of 2015 & connected matters Page 5 of 15 issued. Subsequently, the assessment was finalised by the AO by passing an order under Section 143 (3) of the Act. The return for AY 2008-09 was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from

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

2) of the Act was 2015:DHC:9180-DB ITA No. 578 of 2015 & connected matters Page 5 of 15 issued. Subsequently, the assessment was finalised by the AO by passing an order under Section 143 (3) of the Act. The return for AY 2008-09 was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. 4. Information was received from

ADITI INFRABUILD AND SERVICES LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 30, DELHI

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

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

bogus purchases. Accordingly, addition to extent of Rs. 2,67,17,059/- is confirmed and remaining addition of Rs. 18,70,19,413/- is deleted.” 8. With regard to addition of Rs.6.25 crores, ld. CIT (A) has deleted the addition with the following observations :- “12.3 On perusal of the job work receipts for the relevant A.Y. submitted by the appellant

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD vs. MAHALAKSHMI LIGHT HOUSE, HAPUR

In the result, Cross Objection filed by the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Mahalakshmi Light House, Income Tax 285, Avas Vikas Vihar, Room No. 201, First Floor, Hapur, Uttar Pradesh Cgo Complex, Hapur Chungi, Pan: Aatfm3627N Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh Appellant Respondent

section 69C of the Act, as unexplained expenditure on account of bogus purchases made by the assessee from Vrindavan International Trade Pvt. Ltd. 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC erred in law and on facts in holding the transactions done by the assessee with shell company Vrindavan International Trade

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SUKRITI INFORMATION SYSTEMS (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

purchase of cloths and brought to tax u/s 68 of the Act and addition of Rs. 8,38,55,374/- made as bogus inventory shown by the assessee. 2. Heard rival submissions and carefully perused the material available on record before us. 3. Reiterating the grounds of appeal in ITA No. 1515/Del/2017, the Ld. AR submitted that in the appeal

MAHAVIR TRANSMISSION LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CORCLE-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

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

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

MAHAVIR TRANSMISSIN 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

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

RAJESH KUMAR,SONEPAT vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, GURGAON

In the result, cross-appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra[Assessment Year : 2018-19] Rajesh Kumar, Vs Acit, C/O-Shiva Constructions Co., Central Circle-2, Plot No.69, Sidharth Enclave, Gurgaon. Delhi Road Sonipat, Sonipat, Haryana-131001. Pan-Bkspk2518K Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2018-19] Dcit, Vs Rajesh Kumar, Gurgaon. C/O-Shiva Constructions Co., Plot No.69, Sidharth Enclave, Delhi Road,Sonipat, Haryana-131001. Pan-Bkspk2518K Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Umesh Takkar, Ca & Shri Saurabh Nagpal, Ca Respondent By Shri P N Barnwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 03.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 07.08.2024 Order Per Kul Bharat, Jm : These Two Cross-Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue, Are Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-3, Gurgaon Dated 31.10.2022 For The Assessment Year 2018-19. Both Appeals Of The Assessee & The Revenue Are Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By Way Of Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity.

143(2) of the Act on 27.09.2019 and thereafter, notice u/s 142(1) of the Act were issued to the assessee. In response to the notice, Ld. Authorized Representative [“AR”] of the assessee submitted reply on behalf of the assessee. It is noteworthy that the assessee had filed his objections against re-opening of the assessment