ACIT CIRCLE 54(1), NEW DELHI vs. SWADESH KUMAR MISHRA, GURGAON

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee i

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

145(2) of the Act according to which the stock can be valued at cost or at net realizable value, whichever is lower. The AO ignored the fact that accounting has been done, as per the regular accounting system followed by the assessee and there was no question of adopting average purchase price for valuation of the closing stock

M/S. BHARTI PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

delay in the appeals is condoned. 4. Ld. AR inviting attention to the assessment order under consideration submitted that the assessee who is found mentioned at Sl. No.-17 in the list of companies where Konichiva Builders Ltd. is found mentioned in Sl. No.-1. It was submitted that the Tribunal in Konichiva Builders Ltd. restored the issue of allowance

M/S. BHARTI PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

delay in the appeals is condoned. 4. Ld. AR inviting attention to the assessment order under consideration submitted that the assessee who is found mentioned at Sl. No.-17 in the list of companies where Konichiva Builders Ltd. is found mentioned in Sl. No.-1. It was submitted that the Tribunal in Konichiva Builders Ltd. restored the issue of allowance

MOHD GULZAR,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD 63(5), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. 3. Brief facts of the case are, the assessee is an individual having income from business and filed his return of income for AY 2011-12 declaring total income of Rs.8,04,680/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO rejected books of account of the assessee and estimated

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

145 of 2011 is concerned the following questions of law were framed for consideration: 1. Whether in the circumstances of the instant case and on the ITA Nos. 145/2001 & 180/2001 Page 27 of 71 basis of the material available on record, the total income adopted at Rs.25,12,68,08 was valid and in accordance with the provisions of Section

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

145 of 2011 is concerned the following questions of law were framed for consideration: 1. Whether in the circumstances of the instant case and on the 2016:DHC:2463-DB ITA Nos. 145/2001 & 180/2001 Page 27 of 71 basis of the material available on record, the total income adopted at Rs.25,12,68,08 was valid and in accordance with

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

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

145 of 2011 is concerned the following questions of law were framed for consideration: 1. Whether in the circumstances of the instant case and on the ITA Nos. 145/2001 & 180/2001 Page 27 of 71 basis of the material available on record, the total income adopted at Rs.25,12,68,08 was valid and in accordance with the provisions of Section

DEWSOFT OVERSEAS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT SPL RANGE-3, NEW DELHI

The appeal is partly allowed

145 of the income Tax Act,1961 which is basic condition for disallowances on estimated basis.. 8. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of appeal.” (A.1) In this case, assessment order dated 29/12/2016 was passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of Income Tax Act, wherein the assessee’s income

VIDVATA INTERVIEW MAKERS PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, GURGAON

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

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2015-16 Vidvata Interview Makers Vs. Acit Pvt. Ltd, 902, Shyam Kunj, Gurgaon Plot No.26, J.B. Nagar, Andheri East, Mumbai- 400059 Pan No.Aaccv2915J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Manish Rastogi, Advocate Sh. Uma Shankar, Advocate Respondent By Sh. Dheeraj Kumar Jain, Sr. Dr

condoning the delay in filing the appeal, vide order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, ('the Act'), dated 26-12-2024. 2. For that the NFAC erred in failing to appreciate that the assessee was prevented from reasonable cause in filing the appeal within the time prescribed in section 249(2) of the Act, which

M/S. BANSI LAL AND SONS,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N.S. Saini & Smt. Beena A Pillaiay: 2009-10

section 145 (3) of the Act and rejecting the books of accounts maintained in the normal course of business and duly audited u/s 44AB of the Act; 2. in making addition of Rs.64,26,409/-on account of alleged discrepancies in the creditors account even though books of accounts had been rejected; ITA No. 01/Del/2015 AY-2009-10 Bansi

SINGLA APPARELS PVT LTD ,GANDHI NAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2017-18] Singla Apparels Pvt.Ltd. Vs Ito House No.17, Street No.2, Ward Shankar Nagar, Gandhi Nagar, C.R. Building, Ito Krishan Nagar, Delhi-110051. I.P.Estate Pan-Aajcs3628L New Delhi-110002 Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2017-18] Singla Apparels Pvt.Ltd. Vs Ito 7244, Mahavir Gali Ward Gandhi Nagar, Delhi-1100531. C.R. Building, Ito Pan-Aajcs3628L I.P.Estate New Delhi-110002 Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Salil Kapoor, Adv. & Shri Utkarsa Gupta, Adv. Respondent By Shri Manish Gupta, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 17.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17.11.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Captioned Appeals Are Filed By Assessee Against The Separate Orders Dt.11.06.2024 & 12.08.2024 By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“Nfac”), Delhi [“Ld.Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Cit(A), Delhi-8/10554/2019-20 & In Appeal No. Nfac/2016-17/10058210 Respectively, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising Out Of Assessment Order Dated 31.12.2019 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act & Penalty

condone the delay in filing the appeal and admitted the same for hearing. 6. Both appeals have common and identical issues therefore, both appeals are adjudicated by a common order for the sake of convenience. 7. First we take up appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 3445/Del/2024 [Assessment Year 2017-18]. ITA No.3445/Del/2024 [Assessment Year 2017-18] 8. Brief

SINGLA APPARELS PRIVATE LIMITED,GANDHI NAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2017-18] Singla Apparels Pvt.Ltd. Vs Ito House No.17, Street No.2, Ward Shankar Nagar, Gandhi Nagar, C.R. Building, Ito Krishan Nagar, Delhi-110051. I.P.Estate Pan-Aajcs3628L New Delhi-110002 Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2017-18] Singla Apparels Pvt.Ltd. Vs Ito 7244, Mahavir Gali Ward Gandhi Nagar, Delhi-1100531. C.R. Building, Ito Pan-Aajcs3628L I.P.Estate New Delhi-110002 Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Salil Kapoor, Adv. & Shri Utkarsa Gupta, Adv. Respondent By Shri Manish Gupta, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 17.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17.11.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Captioned Appeals Are Filed By Assessee Against The Separate Orders Dt.11.06.2024 & 12.08.2024 By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“Nfac”), Delhi [“Ld.Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Cit(A), Delhi-8/10554/2019-20 & In Appeal No. Nfac/2016-17/10058210 Respectively, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising Out Of Assessment Order Dated 31.12.2019 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act & Penalty

condone the delay in filing the appeal and admitted the same for hearing. 6. Both appeals have common and identical issues therefore, both appeals are adjudicated by a common order for the sake of convenience. 7. First we take up appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 3445/Del/2024 [Assessment Year 2017-18]. ITA No.3445/Del/2024 [Assessment Year 2017-18] 8. Brief

M/S KBC ESTATES PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2012-13

delay in dispute is condoned. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of building and contractor. The assessee filed its e-return declaring income of Rs.3,20,070/- on 28.09.2012. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny through CASS and statutory notices were served. In response

BELLFLOWER INFRABUILD PVT LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-13, DELHI

In the result, Appeal in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

145 days in filing the above appeals. The Assessee filed an application for condontion of delay contending that the order of the CIT(A) has been served on the Assessee vide order dated 25/08/2022 and the Assessee has filed Appeal electronically on 05/12/2022,further filed the physical copies of documents on 01/05/2023, the delay in filing the present Appeals

BELLFLOWER INFRABUILD PVT LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-13, NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

145 days in filing the above appeals. The Assessee filed an application for condontion of delay contending that the order of the CIT(A) has been served on the Assessee vide order dated 25/08/2022 and the Assessee has filed Appeal electronically on 05/12/2022,further filed the physical copies of documents on 01/05/2023, the delay in filing the present Appeals

BELLFLOWER INFRABUILD PVT LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-13, DELHI

In the result, Appeal in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

145 days in filing the above appeals. The Assessee filed an application for condontion of delay contending that the order of the CIT(A) has been served on the Assessee vide order dated 25/08/2022 and the Assessee has filed Appeal electronically on 05/12/2022,further filed the physical copies of documents on 01/05/2023, the delay in filing the present Appeals

BELLFLOWER INFRABUILD PVT LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-13, DELHI

In the result, Appeal in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

145 days in filing the above appeals. The Assessee filed an application for condontion of delay contending that the order of the CIT(A) has been served on the Assessee vide order dated 25/08/2022 and the Assessee has filed Appeal electronically on 05/12/2022,further filed the physical copies of documents on 01/05/2023, the delay in filing the present Appeals

BELLFLOWER INFRABUILD PVT LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-13, DELHI

In the result, Appeal in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

145 days in filing the above appeals. The Assessee filed an application for condontion of delay contending that the order of the CIT(A) has been served on the Assessee vide order dated 25/08/2022 and the Assessee has filed Appeal electronically on 05/12/2022,further filed the physical copies of documents on 01/05/2023, the delay in filing the present Appeals