GEORGE KUTTY,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-13(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2010-11] George Kutty, Vs Dcit, C/O-M/S. Oasis Tours India (P.) Circle-13(1), Ltd., C-40, Middle Circle, Dwarka New Delhi. Sadan, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001. Pan-Aajpk4005H Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Manish Malik, Adv. Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 11.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 24.08.2022

bogus, it would be treated as a case of concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars and penalty proceeding would be justified 9. CIT Vs R.M.P. Plasto (P.) Ltd H84 Taxman 372 (SC)/[2009] 313 ITR 397 (SC)/[2009] 227 CTR 635] where Hon’ble Supreme Court held that Confirmed penalty upon assessee for concealment of income under section 271(1

KUSUM,DELHI vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, VIKAS BHAWAN, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

bogus purchases, levied penalty under Section 271(1)(b) for non-compliance with notices, and the NFAC dismissed the assessee

AMAR NATH TYAGI,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, GHAZIABAD

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

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2009-10

purchase as 1980 for the purpose of indexation and after claiming exemption u/s. 54F of the Act for construction of existing residential accommodation, declared the long-term capital gains at Rs. Nil. The Assessing Officer by observing that the bills and vouchers furnished by the Assessee in support of the construction made by Assessee are bogus and fictitious and, therefore

VIVAAN INFOTEL PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 26(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2015-16

271(1)(c) was neither criminal nor quasi criminal in nature. 4 It was a civil liability and therefore, presence of mens rea was not essential. 5.9 Reference can be made to the case of CIT vs. Escorts Finance Ltd. 226 CTR 105 (Del) Where the jurisdictional High Court hold that, "Even if there is no concealment of income

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD vs. SUBHASH TYAGI PROP. M/S KRISHANA CONSTRUCTION, MEERUT

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA 1342/Del/21 is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sudhir Kumarassessment Year 2016-17

bogus creditors towards material purchases during the year was apparently quizzed and the assessee was found blank and wanting. The name of beneficiary creditors were not revealed despite pointed enquiry. The ‘manner’ giving rise to such credits thus did not surface in the course of enquiry. The next step of ‘substantiation’ of such entries was never achieved by the assessee

SHRI SUBHASH TYAGI,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA 1342/Del/21 is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sudhir Kumarassessment Year 2016-17

bogus creditors towards material purchases during the year was apparently quizzed and the assessee was found blank and wanting. The name of beneficiary creditors were not revealed despite pointed enquiry. The ‘manner’ giving rise to such credits thus did not surface in the course of enquiry. The next step of ‘substantiation’ of such entries was never achieved by the assessee

AVTEC LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT (LTU), CIRCLE-1, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

purchases and sales made by the MEPZ unit. 7. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeal. 8. Before us, the ld. counsel for the assessee vehemently contended that this issue has been decided by the co-ordinate bench in assessee’s own case

AVTEC LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

purchases and sales made by the MEPZ unit. 7. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeal. 8. Before us, the ld. counsel for the assessee vehemently contended that this issue has been decided by the co-ordinate bench in assessee’s own case

AVTEC LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (LTU), CIRCLE-1 , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

purchases and sales made by the MEPZ unit. 7. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeal. 8. Before us, the ld. counsel for the assessee vehemently contended that this issue has been decided by the co-ordinate bench in assessee’s own case

M/S. AVTEC LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

purchases and sales made by the MEPZ unit. 7. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeal. 8. Before us, the ld. counsel for the assessee vehemently contended that this issue has been decided by the co-ordinate bench in assessee’s own case

AVTEC LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (LTU), CIRCLE-1 , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

purchases and sales made by the MEPZ unit. 7. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeal. 8. Before us, the ld. counsel for the assessee vehemently contended that this issue has been decided by the co-ordinate bench in assessee’s own case

AVTEC LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT (LTU), CIRCLE-1, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

purchases and sales made by the MEPZ unit. 7. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeal. 8. Before us, the ld. counsel for the assessee vehemently contended that this issue has been decided by the co-ordinate bench in assessee’s own case

AVTEC LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT (LTU), CIRCLE-1 , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

purchases and sales made by the MEPZ unit. 7. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeal. 8. Before us, the ld. counsel for the assessee vehemently contended that this issue has been decided by the co-ordinate bench in assessee’s own case

PRATEEK GUPTA,GHAZIABAD vs. PR, CIT, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2015-16 Prateek Gupta, Vs. Pr. Cit 152, Chanderpuri, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201001 Pan Atbpg8602J (Appellant) (Respondent)

b) Penalty proceedings are penal in nature. Elementary principles of criminal law will apply. It is a quasi-criminal proceedings. There should be conscious concealment - Dy, CIT v. Mahadik Bros. [2003] 84 ITD 1 (Pune). The apex court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts (c) Pvt. Ltd. 322ITR 158 reiterated that disallowance of claim of expenditure does

CHIRANJEEV KUMAR VINAYAK,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-47(5), NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

bogus long term capital gain and commission thereon respectively. The Assessing officer also initiated penalty proceedings. Thereafter the Assessing Officer vide order dated 28.12.2018 imposed penalty of Rs. 9,02,488/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4. Aggrieved against this the assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(Appeals), who after considering the submissions dismissed the appeal

SANDEEP GUPTA,GHAZIABAD vs. PR, CIT, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2015-16 Sandeep Gupta, Vs. Pr. Cit 152, Chanderpuri, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201009 (Appellant) (Respondent)

b) Penalty proceedings are penal in nature. Elementary principles of criminal law will apply. It is a quasi-criminal proceedings. There should be conscious concealment - Dy, CIT v. Mahadik Bros. [2003] 84 ITD 1 (Pune). The apex court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts (c) Pvt. Ltd. 322ITR 158 reiterated that disallowance of claim of expenditure does

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

1) read with Section\n158B(b) of the Act, it is at once clear that a statement\nrecorded under Section 132(4) of the Act can be used in\nevidence for making a block assessment only if the said\nstatement is made in the context of other evidence or\nmaterial discovered during the search. A statement of a\nperson, which

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

1 concerning the scope of\nassessment under Section 153A, has laid out and\nsummarized the legal position after taking into account the\nearlier decisions of this court as well as the decisions of\nother High Courts and Tribunals. In the said case, it was\nheld that the existence of incriminating material found\nduring the course of the search