ACIT, CIRCLE-26(2), NEW DELHI vs. VIKRAM ELECTRIC EQUIPMENT P.LTD, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as\ninfructuous

delay is condoned.\n\n4. The Revenue in its appeal challenged the order of the\nLd.CIT(Appeals) in deleting the addition made u/s 68 of the Act and\nthe assessee in its cross objection challenged the validity of\n2\n\nI.T.A. No. 4651/Del/2018 & CO No.74/Del/2023\nreopening of assessment on the ground that notice u/s 148 of the\nAct

DIGITE INC., USA,PUNE vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, ground of appeal No.4 is dismissed

Bench: Sh. R. K. Pandaand. Sh. Kuldip Singh

condone the delay in filing of the appeal for assessee’s A. Y. 2007-08 and 2009-10 and these appeals are admitted for adjudication. 11. Now, we take up the ITA No. 4918/Del/2010 for A.Y. 2007- 08 as the lead case. 11.1 Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee filed its return of income

M/S DIGITE INC. USA,USA vs. ADIT, INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, ground of appeal No.4 is dismissed

Bench: Sh. R. K. Pandaand. Sh. Kuldip Singh

condone the delay in filing of the appeal for assessee’s A. Y. 2007-08 and 2009-10 and these appeals are admitted for adjudication. 11. Now, we take up the ITA No. 4918/Del/2010 for A.Y. 2007- 08 as the lead case. 11.1 Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee filed its return of income

DIGITE INC.,CALIFORINA vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, ground of appeal No.4 is dismissed

Bench: Sh. R. K. Pandaand. Sh. Kuldip Singh

condone the delay in filing of the appeal for assessee’s A. Y. 2007-08 and 2009-10 and these appeals are admitted for adjudication. 11. Now, we take up the ITA No. 4918/Del/2010 for A.Y. 2007- 08 as the lead case. 11.1 Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee filed its return of income

DIGITE INC. USA,PUNE vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NEW DELHI

Accordingly, ground of appeal No.4 is dismissed

Bench: Sh. R. K. Pandaand. Sh. Kuldip Singh

condone the delay in filing of the appeal for assessee’s A. Y. 2007-08 and 2009-10 and these appeals are admitted for adjudication. 11. Now, we take up the ITA No. 4918/Del/2010 for A.Y. 2007- 08 as the lead case. 11.1 Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee filed its return of income

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

UMAR DARAJ,MEERUT vs. ITO WARD-1(2)(4), MEERUT

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

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Umar Daraj, Vs. Ito, Ward 1(2)(4), 153/1, Hapur Road, Meerut. Umar Nagar, Meerut – 250 001 (Uttar Pradesh). (Pan : Ainpd8766H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sumit Lal Chandani, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Citdr Date Of Hearing : 17.09.2025 Date Of Order : 10.12.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman:

condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Brief facts of the case are, the assessee filed its original return of income on 20.09.2015 declaring total income of Rs.7,66,440/-. The case of the assessee was reopened by issue of notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) dated

SANJAY,HARYANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, HARYANA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaasstt. Year : 2012-13 Sanjay, Vs. Ito, Ward-2, H.No. 166, V&Po Bir Zila Parishad Bldg., Barkatabad, Rohtak, Haryana-124001 Bahadurgarh, Haryana-124507 (Pan: Darps0546B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : None Respondent By : Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. Dr. Date Of Hearing 10.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10.03.2025 Order

166, V&PO BIR ZILA PARISHAD BLDG., BARKATABAD, ROHTAK, HARYANA-124001 BAHADURGARH, HARYANA-124507 (PAN: DARPS0546B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : None Respondent by : Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR. Date of Hearing 10.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement 10.03.2025 ORDER This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order dated 14.05.2024 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi relating

DALMIA CEMENT (BHARAT) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 26, NEW DELHI

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2013-14] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.63/Chny/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.3157/Chny2017) [Assessment Year: 2013-14] M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. The Assistant Commissioner Of Dalmiapuram, Income Tax, Circle-1, Tamilnadu-621651 Vs Williams Road, Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan- Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2014-15] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue

condone the delay in the appeals of the Revenue and proceed to adjudicate the same. 3. Both the contesting parties have informed that the appeals and the Cross objections in relevant years being AY 2013-14 and 2014-15, hover around common issues and hence for the purposes of convenience were heard and are being adjudicated by this common order

DALMIA CEMENT (BHARAT) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 26, NEW DELHI

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2013-14] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.63/Chny/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.3157/Chny2017) [Assessment Year: 2013-14] M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. The Assistant Commissioner Of Dalmiapuram, Income Tax, Circle-1, Tamilnadu-621651 Vs Williams Road, Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan- Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2014-15] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue

condone the delay in the appeals of the Revenue and proceed to adjudicate the same. 3. Both the contesting parties have informed that the appeals and the Cross objections in relevant years being AY 2013-14 and 2014-15, hover around common issues and hence for the purposes of convenience were heard and are being adjudicated by this common order

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 4(2), DELHI, I.P.ESTATE vs. BUREAU VERITAS CONSUMER PRODUCTS SERVICES(INDIA) PVT. LTD., LAJPAT NAGAR

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2013-14] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.63/Chny/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.3157/Chny2017) [Assessment Year: 2013-14] M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. The Assistant Commissioner Of Dalmiapuram, Income Tax, Circle-1, Tamilnadu-621651 Vs Williams Road, Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan- Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2014-15] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue

condone the delay in the appeals of the Revenue and proceed to adjudicate the same. 3. Both the contesting parties have informed that the appeals and the Cross objections in relevant years being AY 2013-14 and 2014-15, hover around common issues and hence for the purposes of convenience were heard and are being adjudicated by this common order

SHRI SURYA KANT JAIPURIA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. Kuldip Singhita No. 2586/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2007-08 Sh. Surya Kant Jaipuria, Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income S-25, Green Park Main Market, Tax, Central Circle-7, New Delhi-110016 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaipj6008K Assessee By : Sh. P. C. Yadav, Adv. Revenue By : Smt. Pramita M. Biswas, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing :01.04.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.07.2019 Order Per R. K. Panda:

delay should be condoned and justice should be done. For the above, proposition he relied on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Improvement Trust Vs Ujagar Singh (2010) 6 SSC 786. 12. After hearing the arguments of the ld. Departmental Representative and considering the facts narrated in the petition for raising the additional ground

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-1 vs. M/S BURDA DRUCK INDIA PVT. LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

delay is condoned. 3. Accordingly, the application is disposed of. Digitally Signed By:ATUL JAIN Signing Date:11.12.2023 11:50:53 Signature Not Verified ITA No.660/2023 Page 2 of 6 ITA 660/2023 4. This appeal concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15. 5. Via the instant appeal, the appellant/revenue seeks to assail the order dated 05.12.2022 [stamped on 04.01.2023] passed

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-1 vs. M/S BURDA DRUCK INDIA PVT. LTD.

delay is condoned. 3. Accordingly, the application is disposed of. Digitally Signed By:ATUL JAIN Signing Date:11.12.2023 11:50:53 Signature Not Verified ITA No.660/2023 Page 2 of 6 ITA 660/2023 4. This appeal concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15. 5. Via the instant appeal, the appellant/revenue seeks to assail the order dated 05.12.2022 [stamped on 04.01.2023] passed

VOITH HYDRO P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-25(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

delay of 207 days in filing of appeal is condoned and appeal is admitted for\ndecision on merits.\n3.\nThe Id. Counsel for the assessee placing reliance on the decision rendered in\nthe case of CIT vs. Roca Bathroom Products P Ltd. reported as 140 taxmann.com 304\n(Mad.), submits that the assessment orders in the impugned assessment years

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

RADHA REDDY,DELHI vs. CIT, WARD 68-1, NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2020-21 Radha Reddy Vs. Cit Ward 68-1 B-5, Type-5 Quarters, 17Th Floor, E 2 Block Hudco Place Extension Civic Centre New Delhi- 49 Minto Road New Delhi- 110002 Pan: Aexpr7957Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Vikas Hasnani, Ar & (Ms. Radha Reddy, Assessee In Person) Department By Sh. Ravi Kant Chaudhary, Sr. Dr

section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. It transpires at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A) has refused to condone the assessee’s alleged delay of 1523 days in institution of her lower appeal instituted on 20.05.2025 against