M/S. SAAN GLOBAL,NOIDA vs. ITO (TDS), NOIDA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4487/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 4488/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 4489/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 4490/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 4491/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 4492/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 M/S Saan Global, Vs Income Tax Officer(Tds), C-56/18, Institutional Area, Noida Sector-62, G.B. Nagar, Noida-201301 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aahfs7473A Assessee By : Sh. S. Krishnan, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.08.2019 Order Per Bench: The Appeals Are Time Barred By A Period Of 11 Days. It Was Submitted That The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dated 31.05.2016 Has Been Received On 13.06.2016 & Appeals Have Been Filed On 23.08.2016. The Assessee Has Filed Rectification Application U/S 154 Before The Ito For Correction Of The Amount Of Tax Demanded. It Was Submitted That The Assessee Was Under Bonafide Belief That The Appeal To Tribunal Does Not Lie At The Stage & Hence The Delay. We Find That The Delay Is Due To Bonafide Reasons & The Assessee Has Not Derived Or Sought To Ita Nos. 4487 To 4492/Del/2016 2 Saan Global

delay is hereby condoned. 2. The common grounds are raised in all these appeals are as under: “That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A) erred in- (i) confirming the order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 read with

M/S. SAAN GLOBAL,NOIDA vs. ITO (TDS), NOIDA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4487/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 4488/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 4489/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 4490/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 4491/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 4492/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 M/S Saan Global, Vs Income Tax Officer(Tds), C-56/18, Institutional Area, Noida Sector-62, G.B. Nagar, Noida-201301 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aahfs7473A Assessee By : Sh. S. Krishnan, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.08.2019 Order Per Bench: The Appeals Are Time Barred By A Period Of 11 Days. It Was Submitted That The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dated 31.05.2016 Has Been Received On 13.06.2016 & Appeals Have Been Filed On 23.08.2016. The Assessee Has Filed Rectification Application U/S 154 Before The Ito For Correction Of The Amount Of Tax Demanded. It Was Submitted That The Assessee Was Under Bonafide Belief That The Appeal To Tribunal Does Not Lie At The Stage & Hence The Delay. We Find That The Delay Is Due To Bonafide Reasons & The Assessee Has Not Derived Or Sought To Ita Nos. 4487 To 4492/Del/2016 2 Saan Global

delay is hereby condoned. 2. The common grounds are raised in all these appeals are as under: “That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A) erred in- (i) confirming the order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 read with

M/S. SAAN GLOBAL,NOIDA vs. ITO (TDS), NOIDA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4487/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 4488/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 4489/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 4490/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 4491/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 4492/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 M/S Saan Global, Vs Income Tax Officer(Tds), C-56/18, Institutional Area, Noida Sector-62, G.B. Nagar, Noida-201301 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aahfs7473A Assessee By : Sh. S. Krishnan, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.08.2019 Order Per Bench: The Appeals Are Time Barred By A Period Of 11 Days. It Was Submitted That The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dated 31.05.2016 Has Been Received On 13.06.2016 & Appeals Have Been Filed On 23.08.2016. The Assessee Has Filed Rectification Application U/S 154 Before The Ito For Correction Of The Amount Of Tax Demanded. It Was Submitted That The Assessee Was Under Bonafide Belief That The Appeal To Tribunal Does Not Lie At The Stage & Hence The Delay. We Find That The Delay Is Due To Bonafide Reasons & The Assessee Has Not Derived Or Sought To Ita Nos. 4487 To 4492/Del/2016 2 Saan Global

delay is hereby condoned. 2. The common grounds are raised in all these appeals are as under: “That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A) erred in- (i) confirming the order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 read with

M/S. SAAN GLOBAL,NOIDA vs. ITO (TDS), NOIDA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4487/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 4488/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 4489/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 4490/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 4491/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 4492/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 M/S Saan Global, Vs Income Tax Officer(Tds), C-56/18, Institutional Area, Noida Sector-62, G.B. Nagar, Noida-201301 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aahfs7473A Assessee By : Sh. S. Krishnan, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.08.2019 Order Per Bench: The Appeals Are Time Barred By A Period Of 11 Days. It Was Submitted That The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dated 31.05.2016 Has Been Received On 13.06.2016 & Appeals Have Been Filed On 23.08.2016. The Assessee Has Filed Rectification Application U/S 154 Before The Ito For Correction Of The Amount Of Tax Demanded. It Was Submitted That The Assessee Was Under Bonafide Belief That The Appeal To Tribunal Does Not Lie At The Stage & Hence The Delay. We Find That The Delay Is Due To Bonafide Reasons & The Assessee Has Not Derived Or Sought To Ita Nos. 4487 To 4492/Del/2016 2 Saan Global

delay is hereby condoned. 2. The common grounds are raised in all these appeals are as under: “That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A) erred in- (i) confirming the order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 read with

M/S. SAAN GLOBAL,NOIDA vs. ITO (TDS), NOIDA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4487/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 4488/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 4489/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 4490/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 4491/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 4492/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 M/S Saan Global, Vs Income Tax Officer(Tds), C-56/18, Institutional Area, Noida Sector-62, G.B. Nagar, Noida-201301 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aahfs7473A Assessee By : Sh. S. Krishnan, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.08.2019 Order Per Bench: The Appeals Are Time Barred By A Period Of 11 Days. It Was Submitted That The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dated 31.05.2016 Has Been Received On 13.06.2016 & Appeals Have Been Filed On 23.08.2016. The Assessee Has Filed Rectification Application U/S 154 Before The Ito For Correction Of The Amount Of Tax Demanded. It Was Submitted That The Assessee Was Under Bonafide Belief That The Appeal To Tribunal Does Not Lie At The Stage & Hence The Delay. We Find That The Delay Is Due To Bonafide Reasons & The Assessee Has Not Derived Or Sought To Ita Nos. 4487 To 4492/Del/2016 2 Saan Global

delay is hereby condoned. 2. The common grounds are raised in all these appeals are as under: “That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A) erred in- (i) confirming the order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 read with

SH. JAGDEEP SINGH,PANIPAT vs. ITO, PANIPAT

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

Bench: Shri N.S. Sainiassessment Year: 2009-10

condone the delay of 275 days in filing the appeal and admit the same for hearing. 6. The sole issue involved in this appeal is that the CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition of Rs.18,00,100/-for non deduction of TDS u/s 194 C of the Act by invoking the provisions of section

WELGROW HOTELS CONCEPTS (P) LTD,DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-78(4), DELHI

In the result, Appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: SHRI G.S.PANNU (President), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

delay of 115 days in filing the above captioned appeals are condoned. Page 2 of 6 ITA Nos.1869 & 1870/Del/2023 Welgrow Hotels Concepts (P) Ltd. vs. ITO 4. Brief facts of the case are that, the Assessing Officer passed orders u/s 201(1)/201(1A) computing the total income of the assessee at Rs. 38,35,746/- on 26/03/2021 for Assessment

WELGROW HOTELS CONCEPTS (P) LTD,DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-78(4), DELHI

In the result, Appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: SHRI G.S.PANNU (President), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

delay of 115 days in filing the above captioned appeals are condoned. Page 2 of 6 ITA Nos.1869 & 1870/Del/2023 Welgrow Hotels Concepts (P) Ltd. vs. ITO 4. Brief facts of the case are that, the Assessing Officer passed orders u/s 201(1)/201(1A) computing the total income of the assessee at Rs. 38,35,746/- on 26/03/2021 for Assessment

SH. SUDESH SABHARWAL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri 0.P. Kantassessment Year: 2007-08 Shri Sudesh Sabharwal, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 57A, Central Avenue, Sainik Ward-22(1), New Delhi Farm, New Delhi Pan :Aatps3269A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri A.K. Srivastava, Ca Respondent By Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr.Dr

delay of 365 days in filling the appeal is condoned. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee was engaged in the business of fabrication and trading of the garments in the name and style of proprietor concern of M/s. B.B. International. The assessee filed its return electronically on 30.10.2007, declaring total income Rs.52,607/-. The case

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS)-2 vs. M/S SS GROUP

The appeal is dismissed in favour of the respondent and against the

delay of 400 days in re- filing the appeal is condoned. The same is allowed. 2. The application stands disposed of. ITA 308/2025 3. This appeal has been filed by the Revenue challenging the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (‘ITAT’, hereinafter) dated 14.02.2024. 4. The assessee who is the respondent herein is engaged in the business of real

M/S HCL TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,,NOIDA vs. ACIT (TDS), NOIDA

In the result appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishihcl Technologies Ltd, Acit(Tds), Plot No. 3A, Tower 6, 14Th Floor, Vs. Noida Sector-126, Noida Pan: Aaach1645P (Appellant) (Respondent)

194C, 194H, 194I and 194J of the Act holding that the assessee is an „ assessee in default‟ for non deduction of tax at source amounting to Rs. 23871484/- u/s 201(1) and consequential interest u/s 201(1A) of Rs. 19817482/- was determined, was confirmed. 2. The assessee raised the following grounds of appeal:- “1. That the Commissioner of Income

CIT vs. HARDARSHAN SINGH

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: The Tribunal, The Assessee, Who Was Aggrieved By The Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer As Well As The

delay in re-filing is condoned. This application stands disposed of. ITA 604/2012 1. The revenue is aggrieved by the order dated 26.08.2011 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA 1447/Del/2011 pertaining to the assessment year 2007-08. Before the Tribunal, the assessee, who was aggrieved by the orders passed by the Assessing Officer as well

ALEXIS GLOBAL PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(2), DELHI, DELHI

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

Delay condoned. 2. We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court" Hon'ble Bombay High Court CIT-1 v. B.G. Shirke Construction Technology (P.) Ltd. [2018] 96 taxmann.com 608 (Bombay) "4.... Under the circumstances, the CIT(A) inter-alia record in its order as under: "The primary requirement for application of section

GALLERIA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION,GURGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), GURGAON, GURGAON

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment

Bench: Shri Amit Shuklaas S.M.C. (Through Video Conferencing)

delay in filing the appeals in all the three years is condoned. 5. The facts and issue raised in all the three appeals are arising out of identical set of facts, therefore, common order is passed in all the three appeals. Page 4 of 10 6. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. Accordingly, the appeals are decided ex-parte

GALLERIA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION,GURGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(5), GURGAON, GURUGRAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment

Bench: Shri Amit Shuklaas S.M.C. (Through Video Conferencing)

delay in filing the appeals in all the three years is condoned. 5. The facts and issue raised in all the three appeals are arising out of identical set of facts, therefore, common order is passed in all the three appeals. Page 4 of 10 6. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. Accordingly, the appeals are decided ex-parte

GALLERIA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION,GURGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), GURGAON, GURGAON

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment

Bench: Shri Amit Shuklaas S.M.C. (Through Video Conferencing)

delay in filing the appeals in all the three years is condoned. 5. The facts and issue raised in all the three appeals are arising out of identical set of facts, therefore, common order is passed in all the three appeals. Page 4 of 10 6. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. Accordingly, the appeals are decided ex-parte

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI vs. ODIA SAMAJ, NEW DELHI

In the result Cross objections raised by assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

delay of 27 days in filing the instant cross objections by assessee is condoned. 3 The Revenue has filed the appeal with the following grounds: “1) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) for the AY 2020-21 has erred in allowing and directing the AO to re- compute

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. C.J. INTERNATIONAL HOTELS LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm

condonation of delay. That is how, there are three appeals by the Department for each of the years, namely, one original consolidated appeal by the Revenue under both the ITA Nos.21,22, 25&26/Del/2015 sub-sections of section 201 and then separate appeals for quantum and interest. 4.2. The ld. AR argued that separate appeals filed by the Revenue

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. C.J. INTERNATIONAL HOTELS LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm

condonation of delay. That is how, there are three appeals by the Department for each of the years, namely, one original consolidated appeal by the Revenue under both the ITA Nos.21,22, 25&26/Del/2015 sub-sections of section 201 and then separate appeals for quantum and interest. 4.2. The ld. AR argued that separate appeals filed by the Revenue