YKK INDIA (P) LTD vs. ACIT CICLE-18 (1),

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

delay itself. In view of these discussions, in our considered view, the condonation petition does not deserve to be accepted. We reject the same. The appeal is dismissed as time barred. Having held so, we may also add that even on merits grievance of the Assessing Officer is that “On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S YKK INDIA PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

delay itself. In view of these discussions, in our considered view, the condonation petition does not deserve to be accepted. We reject the same. The appeal is dismissed as time barred. Having held so, we may also add that even on merits grievance of the Assessing Officer is that “On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

NARESH KUMAR,SHANTI NAGAR, MODEL TOWN, PANIPAT, HARYANA, INDIA vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, WARD ONE, PANIPAT, HARYANA, INDIA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

condoning the delay is also erroneous illegal and against the principals of Natural Justice and Equity and the well settled laws of the land. Thus, the department has not demonstrated that there was misuse of funds in disallowed the same. .” 17.1 No specific submission was made in respect of this ground. Hence, this ground of appeal is dismissed

NARESH KUMAR,SHANTI NAGAR, MODEL TOWN, PANIPAT, HARYANA, INDIA vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, WARD NO. ONE, PANIPAT HARYANA, INDIA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

condoning the delay is also erroneous illegal and against the principals of Natural Justice and Equity and the well settled laws of the land. Thus, the department has not demonstrated that there was misuse of funds in disallowed the same. .” 17.1 No specific submission was made in respect of this ground. Hence, this ground of appeal is dismissed

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. V.L.S.FINANCE LTD.

delay of 135 days in refiling the appeal stands condoned. Accordingly, application stands disposed of. . ITA 846/2010 The present appeal preferred under Section

MOHAMMAD ASHFAQ,MEERUT vs. ITO WARD-2(2)(2), HAPUR

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Naveen Chandra

condone the delay of 167 days in filing the present Appeal. 6. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 27/03/2023 under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 27/03/2023, the Assessee preferred Mohammad Ashfaq

DHANANJAY SANJOGTA FOUNDATION,NOIDA vs. CIT EXEMPTION, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, CIT EXEMPTION, LUCKNOW

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Naveen Chandra

condone the delay of 167 days in filing the present Appeal. 6. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 27/03/2023 under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 27/03/2023, the Assessee preferred Mohammad Ashfaq

SANJEEV MEHTA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-70(1), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma, Judicialmember Sa No.49/Del./2024 (In Ita No.353/Del/2024) (Assessment Year : 2019-20) & Sanjeev Mehta Vs. Acit, Circle 70(1), G-1, Vishwa Apartment, New Delhi. 3, Shankaracharya Marg, Civil Lines, New Delhi – 110 054. (Pan: Aaapm5622L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Prem Lata Bansal, Adv. Revenue By : Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. Dr. Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Order : 13.09.2024 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman, Am : This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (For Short ‘Ld. Cit (A)’)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dated 20.03.2023 For The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2 Since We Have Disposed Off The Appeal In The Instant Case By This Order, The Stay Application Filed By The Assessee Has Become Infructuous, Hence Dismissed.

condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Brief facts of the case are, assessee is an individual filed its return of income and while processing the return of income under section 143(1) of the Act claimed tax relief on the income earned outside India and assessee has submitted details of income earned outside India

HS FINISH PROFILES INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-11(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

condonation of delay filled by the assessee as the assessment order was misplaced by the advocate. 3. That the Order of the CIT(A) is bad in law and on the facts of the case. 4. That we will be allowed to alter, amend or add fresh ground of appeal at the time of hearing. 5. The appellant prays that

INDIAN NATIONAL CONG. (I) AICC vs. C.I.T.- XI

Section 57(iii) of the Act and this cannot be granted since the INC did not place on record the factual basis for such a claim. 124. The legal position is that no deduction can be allowed with respect to the expenditure incurred by the political party for any purpose whatsoever if it fails to comply with the basic requirements

INDIAN NATIONAL CONG. (I) AICC vs. C.I.T.- XI

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

Section 57(iii) of the Act and this cannot be granted since the INC did not place on record the factual basis for such a claim. 124. The legal position is that no deduction can be allowed with respect to the expenditure incurred by the political party for any purpose whatsoever if it fails to comply with the basic requirements

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI-XI vs. INDIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS/ALL INDIA CONGRESS COMMITTEE

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

Section 57(iii) of the Act and this cannot be granted since the INC did not place on record the factual basis for such a claim. 124. The legal position is that no deduction can be allowed with respect to the expenditure incurred by the political party for any purpose whatsoever if it fails to comply with the basic requirements

WAPMERR CONSULTANCY & FINANCIAL SERVICES P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-27(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Chella Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

delay is condoned. 6. Ground Nos. 1 and 3 have not been pressed. The same are dismissed as not pressed. 7. Ground No. 2 pertains to the confirmation of disallowance of 50% of the expenses of Business Promotion. 8. Brief facts relating to this issue are that the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee company had claimed business promotion expenses

MADHAVA HOME DECOR PVT LTD,FARIDABAD vs. ITO WARD - 1(5), FARIDABAD

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

delay of 19 days of filing the present appeal is condoned. 2. The assessee has raised the following Concise grounds of appeal:- “1. That the Id. CIT (A) has erred in law as well as on facts in confirming addition of Rs. 96,00,000 us 68 of the IT Act, 1961 on account of alleged unexplained share premium

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-7, NEW DELHI vs. RITES LTD., GURGAON

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conference)

delay of 49 days in filing the present cross objection is hereby condoned. 5. Briefly stated the facts necessary for adjudication of the controversy at hand are : Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed an 4 ITA No.6447/Del./2017 ITA No.6448/Del./2017 CO No.78/Del.2019 amount of Rs.1,15,21,250/- & Rs.13,21,75,000/- by invoking the provisions contained

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-7, NEW DELHI vs. RITES LTD., GURGAON

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conference)

delay of 49 days in filing the present cross objection is hereby condoned. 5. Briefly stated the facts necessary for adjudication of the controversy at hand are : Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed an 4 ITA No.6447/Del./2017 ITA No.6448/Del./2017 CO No.78/Del.2019 amount of Rs.1,15,21,250/- & Rs.13,21,75,000/- by invoking the provisions contained

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MS BELIEVE DEVELOPERS AND PROMOTERS P LTD

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

135 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned. The application shall stand disposed of. CM APPL. 196/2024 (103 days delay in refilling) in ITA 3/2024 This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 2 vs. GOPAL KUMAR GOYAL

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

135 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned. The application shall stand disposed of. CM APPL. 196/2024 (103 days delay in refilling) in ITA 3/2024 This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from