M/S. GREEN LINE (PUNJAB),NEW DELHI vs. ITO (TDS), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in Green Line Earth Ltd

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2002-03 Green Line (Punjab), Vs Ito (Tds), I-25, Lajpat Nagar-Iii, Ward-50(5), New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aadfg5282H Assessment Year: 2002-03 Green Line (Delhi), Vs. Ito (Tds), I-25, Lajpat Nagar-Iii, Ward-50(5), New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaaps6803P Assessment Year: 2003-04 Green Line Earth Ltd., Vs. Ito (Tds), I-25, Lajpat Nagar-Iii, Ward-50(5), New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaacg6500C (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K.R. Manjani, Advocate & Shri Tarun Aswani, Advocate Revenue By : Shri J.S. Minhas, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.05.2023

condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and restored the appeal to the file of this Tribunal to hear the matter on merits qua the grounds raised by the assessee. Hence, the appeals of the assessee are admitted for adjudication. ITAs No.1102, 1103 & 1104//Del/2016 4. The only identical issue to be decided in these appeals

M/S. GREEN LINE EARTH LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO (TDS), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in Green Line Earth Ltd

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2002-03 Green Line (Punjab), Vs Ito (Tds), I-25, Lajpat Nagar-Iii, Ward-50(5), New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aadfg5282H Assessment Year: 2002-03 Green Line (Delhi), Vs. Ito (Tds), I-25, Lajpat Nagar-Iii, Ward-50(5), New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaaps6803P Assessment Year: 2003-04 Green Line Earth Ltd., Vs. Ito (Tds), I-25, Lajpat Nagar-Iii, Ward-50(5), New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaacg6500C (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K.R. Manjani, Advocate & Shri Tarun Aswani, Advocate Revenue By : Shri J.S. Minhas, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.05.2023

condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and restored the appeal to the file of this Tribunal to hear the matter on merits qua the grounds raised by the assessee. Hence, the appeals of the assessee are admitted for adjudication. ITAs No.1102, 1103 & 1104//Del/2016 4. The only identical issue to be decided in these appeals

M/S. GREEN LINE (DELHI),NEW DELHI vs. ITO (TDS), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in Green Line Earth Ltd

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2002-03 Green Line (Punjab), Vs Ito (Tds), I-25, Lajpat Nagar-Iii, Ward-50(5), New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aadfg5282H Assessment Year: 2002-03 Green Line (Delhi), Vs. Ito (Tds), I-25, Lajpat Nagar-Iii, Ward-50(5), New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaaps6803P Assessment Year: 2003-04 Green Line Earth Ltd., Vs. Ito (Tds), I-25, Lajpat Nagar-Iii, Ward-50(5), New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaacg6500C (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K.R. Manjani, Advocate & Shri Tarun Aswani, Advocate Revenue By : Shri J.S. Minhas, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.05.2023

condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and restored the appeal to the file of this Tribunal to hear the matter on merits qua the grounds raised by the assessee. Hence, the appeals of the assessee are admitted for adjudication. ITAs No.1102, 1103 & 1104//Del/2016 4. The only identical issue to be decided in these appeals

MEDSAVE HEALTH INSURANCE TPA LIMITED ,DELHI vs. ACIT,CPC TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri N.K. Choudhry

201(1A) of the Act in the light of CBDT Circular No.8/2009 dated 24.11.2009 and the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court, where the Assessee itself was one of the petitioners in Writ Petition(Civil) No. 121 of 2010, wherein it has been held that section 194J applies to the payments made by the petitioners to juristic or corporate

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

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

M/S. CJ INTERNATIONAL HOTELS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, 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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CR BUILDING vs. PC JEWELLER LIMITED, DELHI

In the result appeals preferred by the revenue are dismissed and the\ncross objections preferred by the assessee are allowed\nOrder pronounced in open court on 06

delay condone by the ld. CIT(A) is\nfound to be just and proper so as not to warrant interference. Thus this\nground of appeal preferred by the revenue is found to be devoid of any merit\nand hence dismissed.\n15. The Revenue has further raised grounds in regard to the decision\nmade by the Ld. First Appellate Authority

DCIT, CIRCLE - 19(1), DELHI vs. PC JEWELLER LIMITED, DELHI

In the result appeals preferred by the revenue are dismissed and the\ncross objections preferred by the assessee are allowed\nOrder pronounced in open court on 06

delay condone by the ld. CIT(A) is\nfound to be just and proper so as not to warrant interference. Thus this\nground of appeal preferred by the revenue is found to be devoid of any merit\nand hence dismissed.\n15. The Revenue has further raised grounds in regard to the decision\nmade by the Ld. First Appellate Authority

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)

201(1) r.w. Rule 31ACB of IT Rules, no disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act can be made. However this opportunity was denied at the threshold by the authorities below. iv. The 2nd Proviso to Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act has been inserted in the statute by the Finance Act, 2012 w.e.f

CIT vs. NHK JAPAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA

Delay condoned. Leave granted. The following substantial question of law arises for consideration in this batch of civil appeals:- "Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct In law in holding that the orders passed under Sections 201

CIT vs. NHK JAPAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION

Delay condoned. Leave granted. The following substantial question of law arises for consideration in this batch of civil appeals:- “Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the orders passed under Sections 201

CIT vs. NHK JAPAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION

Delay condoned. Leave granted. The following substantial question of law arises for consideration in this batch of civil appeals:- "Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct In law in holding that the orders passed under Sections 201

GREEN LINE EARTH LTD vs. ITO (TDS) WARD 50(5)/74(3)

Appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

Section 201(1) were issued to the Assessees on 7th February, 2001, i.e., before the end of Financial Year (‘FY’) 2010-11. 5. Being aggrieved by the orders of the CIT(A), the Assessees’ filed appeals before the ITAT along with applications for condonation of delay

GREEN LINE PUNJAB vs. ITO(TDS) WARD 50(5)/74(3)

Appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

Section 201(1) were issued to the Assessees on 7th February, 2001, i.e., before the end of Financial Year (‘FY’) 2010-11. 5. Being aggrieved by the orders of the CIT(A), the Assessees’ filed appeals before the ITAT along with applications for condonation of delay

CIT vs. NHK JAPAN BROADCASTING

Delay condoned. . Leave granted. The following substantial question of law arises for consideration in this batch of civil appeals:- "Whether the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the orders passed under Sections 2OL(1) and 201

CIT vs. NHK JAPAN BROADCASTING

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA

Delay condoned. . Leave granted. The following substantial question of law arises for consideration in this batch of civil appeals:- "Whether the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the orders passed under Sections 2OL(1) and 201

CIT vs. NHK JAPAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION

Delay condoned. Leave granted. -J The following substantial questioni.of law arises for consideration in this batch of civil ;irppeals:- i "Whether the lnconre Ta;i' Appellate Tribunal was correct in lau,' in holding that the orders ;cassed unc',er Sections 201