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

bogus purchases. 72. Thus, considering the above mentioned facts and circumstances of the case and the abundant evidences furnished by the assessee in order to substantiate the genuineness of the purchases, there was nothing whatsoever for the ld. CIT(A) to sustain gross profit addition on alleged purchases over and above the gross profit declared by the assessee. In view

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

bogus purchases. 72. Thus, considering the above mentioned facts and circumstances of the case and the abundant evidences furnished by the assessee in order to substantiate the genuineness of the purchases, there was nothing whatsoever for the ld. CIT(A) to sustain gross profit addition on alleged purchases over and above the gross profit declared by the assessee. In view

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

bogus purchases. 72. Thus, considering the above mentioned facts and circumstances of the case and the abundant evidences furnished by the assessee in order to substantiate the genuineness of the purchases, there was nothing whatsoever for the ld. CIT(A) to sustain gross profit addition on alleged purchases over and above the gross profit declared by the assessee. In view

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

bogus purchases. 72. Thus, considering the above mentioned facts and circumstances of the case and the abundant evidences furnished by the assessee in order to substantiate the genuineness of the purchases, there was nothing whatsoever for the ld. CIT(A) to sustain gross profit addition on alleged purchases over and above the gross profit declared by the assessee. In view

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

bogus purchases. 72. Thus, considering the above mentioned facts and circumstances of the case and the abundant evidences furnished by the assessee in order to substantiate the genuineness of the purchases, there was nothing whatsoever for the ld. CIT(A) to sustain gross profit addition on alleged purchases over and above the gross profit declared by the assessee. In view

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

bogus purchases. 72. Thus, considering the above mentioned facts and circumstances of the case and the abundant evidences furnished by the assessee in order to substantiate the genuineness of the purchases, there was nothing whatsoever for the ld. CIT(A) to sustain gross profit addition on alleged purchases over and above the gross profit declared by the assessee. In view

SMT. RANJANA GARG,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the CO of the assessee is allowed and

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaranjana Garg, Vs Dcit 141, Sunder Nagar, Central Circle 12, New Delhi. Jhandewalan Aanpg3625Q Extn., New Delhi. Ranjana Garg, Vs Dcit 141, Sunder Nagar, Central Circle 12, New Delhi. Jhandewalan Aanpg3625Q Extn., New Delhi. Acit Vs Amita Garg, Central Circle 12, G-15, Maharani Bagh, New Delhi. New Delhi. Aadpg0990L Acit Vs Amita Garg, Central Circle 12, G-15, Maharani Bagh, New Delhi. New Delhi. Aadpg0990L

bogus accommodation entry, disallowance of expenses to the extent of Rs. 1,00,000 and addition of Rs. 3,21,317/- on account of section Page 13 23(1)(c) of the Act. It is most humbly submitted that appeal filed by the revenue against the aforesaid order of the learned CIT(A) has also been dismissed

ITO, WARD- 41(1), NEW DELHI vs. AASTHA GOEL, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year : 2014-15 Ito, Ward- 41(1), Aastha Goel, New Delhi. 28/42, West Punjabi Bagh, Vs. New Delhi.

50C(2) of the Act. In view of the above discussion, provisions of the Act and respectfully following the judicial pronouncements mentioned above in my opinion the addition of Rs.1,02,50,000/- u/s 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act on account of difference between value of property as per stamp valuation and value as per purchase deed

PRADEEP WIG,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-5, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharma

bogus entity. Hon’ble Gujrat High Court in the case of Ajay Surendra Patel V/s Dy. CIT, (2017) 394 ITR 321 (Guj), while examining the issue of piercing of veil for imposing tax liability has extensively examined the issue as to under what circumstances piercing the corporate veil in tax matter is permissible and it will be beneficial to reproduce

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT ANJU GUPTA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

bogus expenditure and illegal payments in CWG (common wealth games project). e) The wordings of Section 69 are such that they, in fact, do not permit any assumption of understatement of amount; rather it requires AO to exactly point out the precise amount paid or received. AO is not only required to prove understatement of purchase price, but also

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT. ANJU GUPTA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

bogus expenditure and illegal payments in CWG (common wealth games project). e) The wordings of Section 69 are such that they, in fact, do not permit any assumption of understatement of amount; rather it requires AO to exactly point out the precise amount paid or received. AO is not only required to prove understatement of purchase price, but also

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SATYA REALTORS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

bogus expenditure and illegal payments in CWG (common wealth games project). e) The wordings of Section 69 are such that they, in fact, do not permit any assumption of understatement of amount; rather it requires AO to exactly point out the precise amount paid or received. AO is not only required to prove understatement of purchase price, but also

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT USHA GUPTA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

bogus expenditure and illegal payments in CWG (common wealth games project). e) The wordings of Section 69 are such that they, in fact, do not permit any assumption of understatement of amount; rather it requires AO to exactly point out the precise amount paid or received. AO is not only required to prove understatement of purchase price, but also

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT ANJU GUPTA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

bogus expenditure and illegal payments in CWG (common wealth games project). e) The wordings of Section 69 are such that they, in fact, do not permit any assumption of understatement of amount; rather it requires AO to exactly point out the precise amount paid or received. AO is not only required to prove understatement of purchase price, but also

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT ANJU GUPTA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

bogus expenditure and illegal payments in CWG (common wealth games project). e) The wordings of Section 69 are such that they, in fact, do not permit any assumption of understatement of amount; rather it requires AO to exactly point out the precise amount paid or received. AO is not only required to prove understatement of purchase price, but also

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. HI- TECH RESIDENCY PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

50C(1) of the Act. 8. The appellant craves leave, to add, alter-or amend any ground of appeal raised aboverat the time of the hearing. 2 2. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessee Company is engaged in the business of Real Estate and also shown interest income on loans and advances given. The Assessee filed

QUETZAL BUILDTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,HARYANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, HARYANA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly\nallowed as indicated above

bogus\nmoney/loan amounting to Rs.20,00,000/- for the year\nunder consideration.\n5. I have carefully perused the facts of the case. I have\napplied my mind to the material on record that is report\nof the Inv. Wing, Analysis of data provided by the Wing\nand statements of the assessee. In view of these facts I\nhave no hesitation

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT vs. BDR BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed for the Asst Year

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharma

bogus and non-genuine. c. That the bank statement of shareholder shows a peculiar pattern of huge sums that are being credited and debited continuously throughout the year. d. That the audited balance sheet of the shareholder shows that it has no real business activities and that its heavy balance sheet without underlying operation shows that it is meant