BRAHAM SINGH,DELHI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Vimal Kumarita No. 4757/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Ita No.4756/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Braham Singh, Vs Assessment Unit, House N0.57, Dhansa . Income Tax Department Raota, South West Delhi Delhi Pin: 1100 73 Delhi. Pan: Fhmps9910M (Appellant) (Respondent)

194A of the Act amounting to Rs.1,35,616/- and also a payment received in respect to transfer of immoveable property (TDS form 26QB, section 194IA) amounting to Rs.4,98,66,600/- which was not disclosed in ITR as ITR for the assessment year 2014-15 was not filed. The case was reopened vide order under Section 148A sub-section

BRAHAM SINGH,DELHI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT , DELHI

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Vimal Kumarita No. 4757/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Ita No.4756/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Braham Singh, Vs Assessment Unit, House N0.57, Dhansa . Income Tax Department Raota, South West Delhi Delhi Pin: 1100 73 Delhi. Pan: Fhmps9910M (Appellant) (Respondent)

194A of the Act amounting to Rs.1,35,616/- and also a payment received in respect to transfer of immoveable property (TDS form 26QB, section 194IA) amounting to Rs.4,98,66,600/- which was not disclosed in ITR as ITR for the assessment year 2014-15 was not filed. The case was reopened vide order under Section 148A sub-section

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. ARJUN ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.5 & 6 raised by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanacit , Vs. Arjun Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi 711, Filix Commercial Complex, Opp Asian Paints L.Bs Marg Bhandup W Mumbai 400078 Maharashtra (Pan: Aahca 1448 A)

condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Brief facts of the case are, assessee filed its return of income declaring an income of Rs.1,25,37,270/- on 30.10.2018 which was processed on 17.05.2019 by the CPC. Subsequently, the case was selected for complete scrutiny through CASS to verify ‘assessee has made substantial purchases from suppliers

M/S MODIPON LTD.,,MODINAGAR vs. ITO (TDS & SURVEY), GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

condonation of delay in filing of appeal. However, the id. CIT(A) in his above referred order held that the appellant should have filed rectification application under section 154 before the A.O. subject to the genuineness and correctness of its claims and time limit involved. 4) The assessee after the order of CIT(A) filed a reminder before

M/S MODIPON LTD.,,MODINAGAR vs. ITO (TDS & SURVEY), GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

condonation of delay in filing of appeal. However, the id. CIT(A) in his above referred order held that the appellant should have filed rectification application under section 154 before the A.O. subject to the genuineness and correctness of its claims and time limit involved. 4) The assessee after the order of CIT(A) filed a reminder before

M/S MODIPON LTD.,,MODINAGAR vs. ITO (TDS & SURVEY), GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

condonation of delay in filing of appeal. However, the id. CIT(A) in his above referred order held that the appellant should have filed rectification application under section 154 before the A.O. subject to the genuineness and correctness of its claims and time limit involved. 4) The assessee after the order of CIT(A) filed a reminder before

ACIT (TDS), GURGAON vs. ARTEMIS MEDICARE SERVICE LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaacit (Tds), Vs. Artemis Medicares Services Ltd, 414/1, 4Th Floor, Dda Gurgaon Commercial Complex, District Centre, Janakpuri, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aafca0130M

condone the delay and admit the Cross Objection of the assessee. 3. Identical issues are involved in all these appeals and hence they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience. 4. The revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. Relying upon the decision of Hon'ble ITAT, New Delhi

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI, DELHI vs. BIJWASAN REALTY ONE PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed being devoid of any merit

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं.7131/धिल्ली/2025 (नि.व. 2018-19) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-25, R.No 317, 3Rd Floor, Ara Centre, ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Jhandewalan Extn. Delhi 110055 बिाम Vs. Bijwasan Realty One P. Ltd., 85A, Rishy Amook, Panchkuian Road, New Delhi 110001 ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Pan: Aafcr-3144-L अपीलार्थी द्वारा/Appellant By : Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr प्रधििािीद्वारा/Respondent By : Shri Abhishek Jain, Chartered Accountant & Ms. Sunidhi Sharma, Advocate सुिवाई की निथर्थ/ Date Of Hearing : 15/12/2025 घोषणा की निथर्थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 02/01/2026 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-29, New Delhi [In Short ‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 16.07.2025, For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Appeal Is Time Barred By 7 Days. The Revenue Has Filed An Application Citing Reasons For Delay In Filing Of Appeal. After Perusal Of The Same, I Am Satisfied That Delay In Filing Of Appeal Is Not Intentional, The Delay Has Been Caused For The Reasons Stated In Application Which Appears To Be Bonafide. Considering The 2 Explanation Furnished By The Department, Delay Of 7 Days In Filing Of Appeal Is Condoned & Appeal Is Taken Up For Adjudication On Merits.

delay of 7 days in filing of appeal is condoned and appeal is taken up for adjudication on merits. 3. Shri Abhishek Jain, appearing on behalf of the assessee submits that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of construction, development and sale of land. The assessee filed its return of income

GULSHAN HOMES AND INFRASTRUCTURE (P) LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DR. MANOJ KUMAR, DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-31, NEW DELHI

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

194A\n| AYAP: 75020 Ashley Jam\n| Salaried Perso\n| 5\n240000.00\n24000.00 2019-20\nD5-1944\n| ADPSC354A Divya Parashar\n| Salaried Perso\n| 5\n240000.00\n1400000 2019-20\nDS 1944\n| AVCP58/58C Ashok lain\n| Salaried Perso\n| 30\n240000.00\n24000.00 2019-20\n105-1944\n| AAAP551629 Sachin V Shah\n| Proprwtor\n| 3\n131250.00

DCM SHRIIRAM LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. NEAC, NEW DELHI

section 80 IA of the Act, the\nassessee has also made application for submission of following additional\nevidences under Rule 29 of ITAT:\n\na) Detailed working of enhanced deduction u/s 80-IA of the Act.\nb) Chartered engineer's certificate computing the equivalent value of\nsteam.\nc) Supplementary Form 10CCBs along with power accounts of all the\neligible plants