DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. VISHWA JAGRITI MISSION

condoning the delay. 24. On the question of perversity of the decision of the Tribunal we may also refer to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sree Meenakshi Mills Ltd. v. CIT, (1957) 31 ITR 28. In that judgment, it was noted that only a question of law can be referred for decision of the Court and the decision

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

Section 35D\nof the Act appeal was filed.\n2.3 Consequently, the appellant appealed before Ld. CIT-(A) on 07-\n11-2020 and hence, the delay of 4 years and 3 months (1537 days).\nThe period of delay is tabulated as under:-\nSl. No.\nParticulars\nDate\nPeriod of delay\n1\nDate of receipt of Intimation | 24-07-2016\nissued

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. CONTAINER CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result ITA No. 1364/Del/2012 for AY 2007-08 filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

condoning the delay of 585 and 502 days delay in both these appeals. ACIT, Vs. Container Cooperation of India Ltd ITA No. 1555/Del/2012, 1363/Del/2012, 3960/Del/2010 and 1364/Del/2012 Assessment Year: 2006-07 and 2007-08 9. Now coming on the merits of the case we first take up the appeal of the revenue in ITA NO. 1363/Del/2012 for Assessment Year

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 6, NEW DELHI vs. NEC TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed\nas time barred

24", "summary": { "facts": "The Revenue has appealed an order of the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) which deleted an addition made under Section 40(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act. The appeal was filed with significant delay, and the primary issue before the tribunal was whether the delay should be condoned

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

condoning the delay of 1537 days without any reasonable\ncause?\nThe facts of the cases are that the assessee is a public limited company\nengaged in the business of manufacturing and trading of jewellery. It has\nfiled his return of income for Assessment Year 2015-16 on 30.11.2015\ndeclaring total income at ₹4,22,28,69,410/-under the normal

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DEWAN SUGAR LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2008-09 Dcit, Vs. M/S. Dewan Sugar Ltd., Circle-10(1), New Delhi Surya Plaza, 1St Floor, K- 185, Sarai Jullena, New Friends Colony, New Delhi Pan :Aaacd3465H (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 36(1)(va), if the actual payment towards the PF/CSI contributions is made before the return is filed. The relevant finding of the Hon’ble High Court is reproduced as under: 17 “11. Before we delve into this discussion, we may take note of some more provisions of the Act. Sec. 2(24) of the Act enumerates different components

UDAY KUMAR VAISH,NEW DELHI vs. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Lalit Kumar, Jm Ita No. 5700/Del/2014 : Asstt. Years : 2009-10 Uday Kumar Vaish, Vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, 52/79, Ramjas Road, Karol Bagh, Central-Ii, New Delhi-110005 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaipv1716G Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta & Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Kartar Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.11.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2016 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 06.03.2014 Of Ld. Cit, Central-Ii, New Delhi U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Act).

24, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has laid down that the assessee has explained the delay made day by day. It is also stated that he has to show that he was not guilty of “want of bonafides in action for negligence”. This was a case where the appellant failed to explain the delay on either of the two grounds

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S GEE GEE BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed and appeal of the Department dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

24 ITA.No.2277/Del./2016 etc., batch M/s. Alankar Saphire Developers, New Delhi. Copy of the relevant pages of the appraisal report and statement on oath recorded during search under section 132(4) are placed on record. Without prejudice to the above, it was submitted with regard to plea of the assessee that no assessment under section 153A can be completed

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. KING BUILDCON PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed and appeal of the Department dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

24 ITA.No.2277/Del./2016 etc., batch M/s. Alankar Saphire Developers, New Delhi. Copy of the relevant pages of the appraisal report and statement on oath recorded during search under section 132(4) are placed on record. Without prejudice to the above, it was submitted with regard to plea of the assessee that no assessment under section 153A can be completed

M/S LKG BUILDERS (P) LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed and appeal of the Department dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

24 ITA.No.2277/Del./2016 etc., batch M/s. Alankar Saphire Developers, New Delhi. Copy of the relevant pages of the appraisal report and statement on oath recorded during search under section 132(4) are placed on record. Without prejudice to the above, it was submitted with regard to plea of the assessee that no assessment under section 153A can be completed

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. LKG BUILDERS P. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed and appeal of the Department dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

24 ITA.No.2277/Del./2016 etc., batch M/s. Alankar Saphire Developers, New Delhi. Copy of the relevant pages of the appraisal report and statement on oath recorded during search under section 132(4) are placed on record. Without prejudice to the above, it was submitted with regard to plea of the assessee that no assessment under section 153A can be completed

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S VINMAN ESTATES PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed and appeal of the Department dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

24 ITA.No.2277/Del./2016 etc., batch M/s. Alankar Saphire Developers, New Delhi. Copy of the relevant pages of the appraisal report and statement on oath recorded during search under section 132(4) are placed on record. Without prejudice to the above, it was submitted with regard to plea of the assessee that no assessment under section 153A can be completed

M/S ASHUTOSH DEVELOPERS (P) LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed and appeal of the Department dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

24 ITA.No.2277/Del./2016 etc., batch M/s. Alankar Saphire Developers, New Delhi. Copy of the relevant pages of the appraisal report and statement on oath recorded during search under section 132(4) are placed on record. Without prejudice to the above, it was submitted with regard to plea of the assessee that no assessment under section 153A can be completed

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S LAKSHYA CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD.,, GURGAON

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed and appeal of the Department dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

24 ITA.No.2277/Del./2016 etc., batch M/s. Alankar Saphire Developers, New Delhi. Copy of the relevant pages of the appraisal report and statement on oath recorded during search under section 132(4) are placed on record. Without prejudice to the above, it was submitted with regard to plea of the assessee that no assessment under section 153A can be completed

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S NAGESHWAR REALTORS PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed and appeal of the Department dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

24 ITA.No.2277/Del./2016 etc., batch M/s. Alankar Saphire Developers, New Delhi. Copy of the relevant pages of the appraisal report and statement on oath recorded during search under section 132(4) are placed on record. Without prejudice to the above, it was submitted with regard to plea of the assessee that no assessment under section 153A can be completed

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S LAKSHYA CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD.,, GURGAON

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed and appeal of the Department dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

24 ITA.No.2277/Del./2016 etc., batch M/s. Alankar Saphire Developers, New Delhi. Copy of the relevant pages of the appraisal report and statement on oath recorded during search under section 132(4) are placed on record. Without prejudice to the above, it was submitted with regard to plea of the assessee that no assessment under section 153A can be completed

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S WORLDWIDE REALTORS PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed and appeal of the Department dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

24 ITA.No.2277/Del./2016 etc., batch M/s. Alankar Saphire Developers, New Delhi. Copy of the relevant pages of the appraisal report and statement on oath recorded during search under section 132(4) are placed on record. Without prejudice to the above, it was submitted with regard to plea of the assessee that no assessment under section 153A can be completed

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SHINE STAR BUILDCON PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed and appeal of the Department dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

24 ITA.No.2277/Del./2016 etc., batch M/s. Alankar Saphire Developers, New Delhi. Copy of the relevant pages of the appraisal report and statement on oath recorded during search under section 132(4) are placed on record. Without prejudice to the above, it was submitted with regard to plea of the assessee that no assessment under section 153A can be completed