ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ACCURATE TRANSFORMERS LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: : Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

section 37(1) of the IT Act. The ld. CIT(A) has allowed the deduction u/s. 80IC on the scrap sales of Rs.87,270/- and bogus purchase of Rs.4,86,408/- not eligible for deduction u/s. 80IC because it was not recorded in the books of account. The ld. CIT(A) has also committed a mistake while allowing deduction

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1)(2), NOIDA, NOIDA vs. BHAVYA PIPE INDUSTRY, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and Cross Objection of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalincome Tax Officer, Bhavya Pipe Industry Ward-5(1)(2), Plot No. F-39, Site- C, Noida. Vs. Upsidc, Industrial Area, Surajpur ,Gautam Buddha Nagar, Gr. Noida-201306 Uttar Pradesh. Pan-Aatfb2209D (Appellant) (Respondent)

340/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny for examination of the creditors and during the course of assessment proceedings, the AO issued notice u/s 136(6) to the 11 parties from whom purchases have been made and balance were outstanding at the year end. However, none of the party appeared except in case of the two parties

THREE C UNIVERSAL DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 6, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee for AYs 2010-11,

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandra

section 142(1) of the Act was issued on 23.12.2014. The assessee submitted a copy of return filed on 30.11.2014 declaring income of Rs. 39,22,37,340/-. 5. During assessment proceedings, the Ld. Assessing Officer (“AO”) found that the assessee made purchases from the following parties in AY 2010-11, 2011-12, 2013-14 and 2014-15 which according

THREE C UNIVERSAL DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 6, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee for AYs 2010-11,

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandra

section 142(1) of the Act was issued on 23.12.2014. The assessee submitted a copy of return filed on 30.11.2014 declaring income of Rs. 39,22,37,340/-. 5. During assessment proceedings, the Ld. Assessing Officer (“AO”) found that the assessee made purchases from the following parties in AY 2010-11, 2011-12, 2013-14 and 2014-15 which according

THREE C UNIVERSAL DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 6, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee for AYs 2010-11,

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandra

section 142(1) of the Act was issued on 23.12.2014. The assessee submitted a copy of return filed on 30.11.2014 declaring income of Rs. 39,22,37,340/-. 5. During assessment proceedings, the Ld. Assessing Officer (“AO”) found that the assessee made purchases from the following parties in AY 2010-11, 2011-12, 2013-14 and 2014-15 which according

THREE C UNIVERSAL DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 6, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee for AYs 2010-11,

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandra

section 142(1) of the Act was issued on 23.12.2014. The assessee submitted a copy of return filed on 30.11.2014 declaring income of Rs. 39,22,37,340/-. 5. During assessment proceedings, the Ld. Assessing Officer (“AO”) found that the assessee made purchases from the following parties in AY 2010-11, 2011-12, 2013-14 and 2014-15 which according

INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI vs. AKASH DEEP SETHI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and at the same time, the cross objections filed by the assessee are also dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanincome Tax Officer, Vs. Akash Deep Sethi, Delhi. B-236, Derawal Nagar, Model Town, Delhi – 110 009. (Pan : Abyps8933P) Co No.26/Del/2025 (In Ita No.4973/Del/2024) (Assessment Year: 2021-22) Akash Deep Sethi, Vs. Income Tax Officer, B-236, Derawal Nagar, Delhi. Model Town, Delhi – 110 009. (Pan : Abyps8933P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Advocate Shri Aman Garg, Ca Ms. Kirti, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.05.2025 Date Of Order : 16.07.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi

340-349 • All submissions were made timely in response to notices under Sections 142(1) and the Show Cause Notice dated 02.12.2022. These are already placed on record before the Ld. CIT(A) and form part of the Paper Book. • Therefore, the observation that documents were not provided is contrary to the record and cannot form the basis for adverse

PARAM DAIRY LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 14, NEW DELHI

In the result, for both the years, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

bogus milk tanki purchases. Since similar facts are permeating in this year also and exactly the same nature of findings, therefore, our decision in respect of the appeal for assessment year 2013-14 shall apply mutandis mutandis herein. 42 I.T.As. No.3993 & 3994/DEL/2019 54. Ground of Appeal No.3 was not pressed by the appellant and thus, dismissed as not pressed

PARAM DAIRY LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 14, NEW DELHI

In the result, for both the years, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

bogus milk tanki purchases. Since similar facts are permeating in this year also and exactly the same nature of findings, therefore, our decision in respect of the appeal for assessment year 2013-14 shall apply mutandis mutandis herein. 42 I.T.As. No.3993 & 3994/DEL/2019 54. Ground of Appeal No.3 was not pressed by the appellant and thus, dismissed as not pressed

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 had been made through bank account of assessee. All the transactions appeared in books of accounts of the assessee which were accepted by the Ld. AO. So section 69C could not have been applied in the case of the assessee. 8. Ld. AO had invoked section 68 for making addition of Rs.1,47,20,000/- for alleged bogus sales

RAWAT METALS,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri J.S. Reddy & Shri Kuldip Singh

340/- which was processed under section 143 (1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) on 18.01.2007. Subsequently, on receiving information from CIT, Central – II, New Delhi in the form of Compact Disk (CD) containing list of the parties to whom the bogus purchases

ORIENT CRAFT LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -II, GURGAON

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

340/- as business income in terms of section 45(2) and section 28, is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in making addition of Rs.7

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -II, GURGAON vs. ORIENT CRAFT LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

340/- as business income in terms of section 45(2) and section 28, is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in making addition of Rs.7

HAZARI LAL KESARI CHAND,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-48(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

bogus purchase entries provided by Sh. Rajender Jain Group to the assessee during the year under consideration through shell companies, M/s Vitrag Jewels, Moulimani Impex Pvt. Ltd. and Avi Export. The case of the assessee was reopened after recordings the reasons and the notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued. The Ld. A.O found that the assessee was beneficiary

M/S. MEROFORM (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,UTTAR PRADESH vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

bogus purchases in all the assessment years from the said party stands decided in favour of the assessee and the grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed. 27. The next issue relates to addition on account of unexplained purchases made from M/s. Kiran Furnitures. The facts in brief are that in the course of assessment proceedings, notices

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MEROFORM INDIA PVT LTD., NOIDA

In the result appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

bogus purchases in all the assessment years from the said party stands decided in favour of the assessee and the grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed. 27. The next issue relates to addition on account of unexplained purchases made from M/s. Kiran Furnitures. The facts in brief are that in the course of assessment proceedings, notices

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MEROFORM INDIA PVT LTD., NOIDA

In the result appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

bogus purchases in all the assessment years from the said party stands decided in favour of the assessee and the grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed. 27. The next issue relates to addition on account of unexplained purchases made from M/s. Kiran Furnitures. The facts in brief are that in the course of assessment proceedings, notices

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MEROFORM INDIA PVT LTD., NOIDA

In the result appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

bogus purchases in all the assessment years from the said party stands decided in favour of the assessee and the grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed. 27. The next issue relates to addition on account of unexplained purchases made from M/s. Kiran Furnitures. The facts in brief are that in the course of assessment proceedings, notices