JUDGEMENTopens in new window

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereafter referred to as "the Act"] and are directed against a common order dated 31.10.2019, passed by the 2022:DHC:234-DB ITA No.68/2021 & connected matters Page 4 of 53 Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short "the Tribunal"]. 1.1 The Tribunal, via the impugned order, rendered a decision in twelve appeals

JUDGEMENTopens in new window

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereafter referred to as "the Act"] and are directed against a common order dated 31.10.2019, passed by the 2022:DHC:234-DB ITA No.68/2021 & connected matters Page 4 of 53 Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short "the Tribunal"]. 1.1 The Tribunal, via the impugned order, rendered a decision in twelve appeals

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -CENTRAL LUDHIANA vs. M/S. GARG ACRYLICS LTD

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act], inter alia, impugning an order dated 27.10.2020 [impugned order] passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [ITAT] in ITA No.6834/Del/2014, in respect of Assessment Year [AY] 2011-12. 2. The impugned order is a common order in respect of ITA No.6834/Del/2014 as well as ITA No.4713/Del/2015 in respect

AGSON GLOBAL PVT. LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT CC-28, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and 6 appeals of the ld AO are dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 132(4) of the Act of Sri Sampat Shrama is incriminating material found during the course of search. We have observed that said statement of Sh. Sampat Sharma was recorded at his residential premises during search proceeding carried out separately. In our opinion, the statement of Sh. Sampat Sharma was not recorded in search proceeding of the assessee

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 28 , NEW DELHI vs. AGSON GLOBAL PVT. LTD., DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and 6 appeals of the ld AO are dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 132(4) of the Act of Sri Sampat Shrama is incriminating material found during the course of search. We have observed that said statement of Sh. Sampat Sharma was recorded at his residential premises during search proceeding carried out separately. In our opinion, the statement of Sh. Sampat Sharma was not recorded in search proceeding of the assessee

AGSON GLOBAL PVT. LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and 6 appeals of the ld AO are dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 132(4) of the Act of Sri Sampat Shrama is incriminating material found during the course of search. We have observed that said statement of Sh. Sampat Sharma was recorded at his residential premises during search proceeding carried out separately. In our opinion, the statement of Sh. Sampat Sharma was not recorded in search proceeding of the assessee

AGSON GLOBAL PVT. LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT CC-28, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and 6 appeals of the ld AO are dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 132(4) of the Act of Sri Sampat Shrama is incriminating material found during the course of search. We have observed that said statement of Sh. Sampat Sharma was recorded at his residential premises during search proceeding carried out separately. In our opinion, the statement of Sh. Sampat Sharma was not recorded in search proceeding of the assessee

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 28 , NEW DELHI vs. AGSON GLOBAL PVT. LTD., DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and 6 appeals of the ld AO are dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 132(4) of the Act of Sri Sampat Shrama is incriminating material found during the course of search. We have observed that said statement of Sh. Sampat Sharma was recorded at his residential premises during search proceeding carried out separately. In our opinion, the statement of Sh. Sampat Sharma was not recorded in search proceeding of the assessee

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 28 , NEW DELHI vs. AGSON GLOBAL PVT. LTD., DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and 6 appeals of the ld AO are dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 132(4) of the Act of Sri Sampat Shrama is incriminating material found during the course of search. We have observed that said statement of Sh. Sampat Sharma was recorded at his residential premises during search proceeding carried out separately. In our opinion, the statement of Sh. Sampat Sharma was not recorded in search proceeding of the assessee

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 28 , NEW DELHI vs. AGSON GLOBAL PVT. LTD., DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and 6 appeals of the ld AO are dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 132(4) of the Act of Sri Sampat Shrama is incriminating material found during the course of search. We have observed that said statement of Sh. Sampat Sharma was recorded at his residential premises during search proceeding carried out separately. In our opinion, the statement of Sh. Sampat Sharma was not recorded in search proceeding of the assessee

AGSON GLOBAL PVT. LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and 6 appeals of the ld AO are dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 132(4) of the Act of Sri Sampat Shrama is incriminating material found during the course of search. We have observed that said statement of Sh. Sampat Sharma was recorded at his residential premises during search proceeding carried out separately. In our opinion, the statement of Sh. Sampat Sharma was not recorded in search proceeding of the assessee

AGSON GLOBAL PVT. LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT CC-28, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and 6 appeals of the ld AO are dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 132(4) of the Act of Sri Sampat Shrama is incriminating material found during the course of search. We have observed that said statement of Sh. Sampat Sharma was recorded at his residential premises during search proceeding carried out separately. In our opinion, the statement of Sh. Sampat Sharma was not recorded in search proceeding of the assessee

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 28 , NEW DELHI vs. AGSON GLOBAL PVT. LTD., DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and 6 appeals of the ld AO are dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 132(4) of the Act of Sri Sampat Shrama is incriminating material found during the course of search. We have observed that said statement of Sh. Sampat Sharma was recorded at his residential premises during search proceeding carried out separately. In our opinion, the statement of Sh. Sampat Sharma was not recorded in search proceeding of the assessee

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 28 , NEW DELHI vs. AGSON GLOBAL PVT. LTD., DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and 6 appeals of the ld AO are dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 132(4) of the Act of Sri Sampat Shrama is incriminating material found during the course of search. We have observed that said statement of Sh. Sampat Sharma was recorded at his residential premises during search proceeding carried out separately. In our opinion, the statement of Sh. Sampat Sharma was not recorded in search proceeding of the assessee

AGSON GLOBAL PVT. LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT CC-28, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and 6 appeals of the ld AO are dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 132(4) of the Act of Sri Sampat Shrama is incriminating material found during the course of search. We have observed that said statement of Sh. Sampat Sharma was recorded at his residential premises during search proceeding carried out separately. In our opinion, the statement of Sh. Sampat Sharma was not recorded in search proceeding of the assessee

LILLIPUT KIDWEARS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4103/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Lilliput Kidwears Ltd., Vs Dcit, D-95, Okhla Industrial Area, Circle-4(1), Phase-1, New Delhi-110020 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaeca3031E Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. Manvendra Goyal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 01.08.2022

bogus. 3.4. Keeping in view the detailed discussion in the preceding paragraphs, it is held that the purchases in question debited to the P&L account amounting to Rs.1,22,68,401/- are not genuine and the AO's findings in this regard deserve to be confirmed. Ground no.3 is dismissed.” 5. The alleged purchases made in the month

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4 DELHI vs. KRBL INFRASTRUCTURE LTD

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act, hereinafter) against the order dated 08.06.2024 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, (“ITAT”) in ITA No.3963/DEL/2019 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15 whereby Signed By:PRADEEP SHARMA Signing Date:13.11.2025 16:16:54 Signature Not Verified ITA No.494/2024 Page 2 of 34 the ITAT has dismissed the appeals filed

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 7 vs. MLS PARAMOUNT RESIDENCY LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter the Act) impugning an order dated 13.08.2018 (hereafter the impugned order) passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereafter the ITAT) in ITA No. 4907/Del/2014 captioned M/s Paramount Residency Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy CIT and ITA No. 6102/Del/2014 captioned Deputy CIT v. M/s Paramount Residency Pvt. Digitally Signed By:DUSHYANT