ACIT CIRCLE-1(2), NEW DELHI vs. ASSOCIATED TECHNO PLASTICS PVT LTD, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh(), Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishrakusum Dube Vs. Ito Ward 2(3) C/O Kapil Goel Adv. Gurgaon, Income Tax F-26/124 Sector 7, Rohini Department, Phase V, Delhi - 110085 Udyog Vihar, Sector 19, Gurugram, Haryana 122016 Haryana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aewpd9787R Appellant .. Respondent

capital gain rejecting the claim under Section 54F of the Act. The Ld.CIT(A) restricted the said addition to the tune of Rs.15,63,566/-. 3. The case of the assessee before us is this that the order passed by the Ld. AO being ITO, Ward -2(3), Gurgaon under Section 143(3) is without appreciating the fact that

OUTSOURCEPARTNERS INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE- 19(1), DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Vs. Outsourcepartners Circle-19(1), International Pvt. Ltd., Delhi 414, 4Th Foor, Dlf Jasola Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre Jasola, New Delhi Pan: Aaaco5734C (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2018-19 Outsourcepartners Vs. The Assessment Unit, International Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Department 414, 4Th Foor, Dlf Jasola [Jao-Dcit, Circle-19(1), Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Delhi] Dda District Centre Jasola, New Delhi Pan: Aaaco5734C (Appellant) (Respondent)

capital gains but also there is no denial to the fact that the impugned 4 | P a g e ITA Nos.5808/Del/2024 & 5975/Del/2024 computation formula prescribed under Rule 8D(2)(iii) stands rendered unapplicable here (supra). We thus find no reason to interfere with the lower appellate findings deleting section 14A read with Rule 8D disallowance in very terms. The Revenue

DCIT, CIRCLE- 19(1), DELHI vs. OUTSOURCEPARTNERS INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD., DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Vs. Outsourcepartners Circle-19(1), International Pvt. Ltd., Delhi 414, 4Th Foor, Dlf Jasola Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre Jasola, New Delhi Pan: Aaaco5734C (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2018-19 Outsourcepartners Vs. The Assessment Unit, International Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Department 414, 4Th Foor, Dlf Jasola [Jao-Dcit, Circle-19(1), Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Delhi] Dda District Centre Jasola, New Delhi Pan: Aaaco5734C (Appellant) (Respondent)

capital gains but also there is no denial to the fact that the impugned 4 | P a g e ITA Nos.5808/Del/2024 & 5975/Del/2024 computation formula prescribed under Rule 8D(2)(iii) stands rendered unapplicable here (supra). We thus find no reason to interfere with the lower appellate findings deleting section 14A read with Rule 8D disallowance in very terms. The Revenue

ITO, WARD-52(1), NEW DELHI vs. ARTI JINDAL , DELHI

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

246A of the Act. Section 250 of the Act lays down procedure in such appeal. Section 251 concerns the power of the Commissioner in such appellate proceedings. As per subsection (1) of section 251, while disposing of the appeal, the Commissioner would have powers to confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment. Thus, while disposing of an appeal filed

MADHULIKA MISHRA,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 5(1)(5), NOIDA

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

Bench: Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usvs. Ito Madhulika Mishra B-1501, Tower-4, Enchante, Ward – 5(1)(5) Lodha New Cuffe Parade, Noida Wadala East, Mumbai-400 022 Pan No. Asppm 9325 H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ganesh Raj Gopalen, C.A. & Shri Kirit Vasan. R. C.A. Revenue By Shri Jatender Kumar Kale, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 01.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 01.08.2024 Order Per Pradip Kumar Kedia, Am :

246A of the Act and further erred in holding that the said appeal as not fit for admission in terms of section 249 of the Act. 2. On facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A)/NFAC erred in not granting sufficient opportunity to the Appellant to make an application under proviso

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. ABHINANDAN INVESTMENT LTD

gains‟ and „Income from other sources‟ or of income by way of interest on securities.” It was highlighted that in the present case, money which had flowed from JISCO came back to it with financing from the UTI and the assessee also claimed loss in the year under consideration, to claim set off against an income of the present year

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. ABHINANDAN INVESTMENT LTD

gains‟ and „Income from other sources‟ or of income by way of interest on securities.” It was highlighted that in the present case, money which had flowed from JISCO came back to it with financing from the UTI and the assessee also claimed loss in the year under consideration, to claim set off against an income of the present year

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. ABHINANDAN INVESTMENT LTD

gains‟ and „Income from other sources‟ or of income by way of interest on securities.” It was highlighted that in the present case, money which had flowed from JISCO came back to it with financing from the UTI and the assessee also claimed loss in the year under consideration, to claim set off against an income of the present year

ARVIND CHERAMBATH NAIR,GURGAON vs. CIRCLE-1(1), GURGAON

Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn

Bench: Sh. Chandra Mohan Garg & Sh. Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2017-18 Arvind Cherambath Nair Vs. Circle -1 (1) 507A, Dlf Golf Links, Gurgaon Phase-5, Gurgaon Pan No.Aakpn5463A (Appellant) (Respondent)

246A(l)(c) of the Act. 2. That the order passed by the Ld. DCIT, CPC under Section 154 of the Act dated 20/11/2019 is erroneous and perverse to facts of the case and deserves to be quashed and the requested mistakes being apparent from record shall be directed to be rectified. 3. That the Ld. DCIT, CPC grossly erred