PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -7 vs. VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INDIA PVT. LTD.

285 days [ITA 187/2023] and 286 days [ITA 188/2023]. ITA 186-188/2023 1/3 This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 13:11:26 3. Mr Rajeev Mishra

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -7 vs. VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INDIA PVT. LTD.

285 days [ITA 187/2023] and 286 days [ITA 188/2023]. ITA 186-188/2023 1/3 This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 14:02:17 3. Mr Rajeev Mishra

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -7 vs. VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INDIA PVT. LTD.

285 days [ITA 187/2023] and 286 days [ITA 188/2023]. ITA 186-188/2023 1/3 This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 13:11:29 3. Mr Rajeev Mishra

MR. NIKHIL SAWHNEY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishimr. Nikhil Sawhney Acit, 17 – Sunder Nagar, Central Circle, Vs. New Delhi – 110 003. Noida. Pan: Aaups0222Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

condone the delay admitting the appeal of the assessee and proceed to decide the issue on merits. 08. Facts of case in a narrow compass shows that assessee filed his return of income on 31 August 2012 declaring total income of Rs. 167,09,146 which was subsequently revised on 25th of March 2014 declaring same

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD vs. MAHALAXMI LIGHT HOUSE , HAPUR

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Mahalakshmi Light House, Income Tax 285, Avas Vikas Vihar, Room No. 201, First Floor, Hapur, Uttar Pradesh Cgo Complex, Hapurchungi, Pan: Aatfm3627N Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh Appellant Respondent

285, Avas VikasVihar, Hapur, Income Tax Ghaziabad,Uttar Pradesh, Room No. 201, First Floor, 201002 CGO Complex, PAN: AATFM3627N HapurChungi, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Rajiv Saxena, Adv, Ms.Sumangla Saxena, Adv& Sh. Shyam Sunder, Adv Revenue by Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT (DR) Date of Hearing 09/10/2025 Date of Pronouncement 05/12/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR

PICO DEEPALI OVERLAYS CONSORTIUM,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, NEW DELHI

In the result, ITA No. 4929/Del/2018 is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishipico Deepali Overlays Consortium, Vs. Acit, (By Deepali Designs Exhibits P. Ltd As Central Circle-8, Alleged Member), New Delhi Plot No. 17, 2Nd & 3Rd Floor, Central Market, Punjabi Bagh West, New Delhi Pan: Aabap1880F (Appellant) (Respondent) Deepali Designs & Exhibits Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, As Alleged Member Of M/S. Pico Central Circle-8, Deepali Overlays Consortium, New Delhi Plot No. 17, 2Nd & 3Rd Floor, Central Market, Punjabi Bagh West, New Delhi Pan: Aabap1880F (Appellant) (Respondent)

condone the delay in filing of the appeal. PICO Deepali Overlays consortium Vs. ACIT ITA No. 1561/Del/2017 &4929/Del/2018 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) 14. On the merits of the issue, we note that the appeal has been filed in the name of M/s. PICO Deepali Overlays Consortium, signed by the authorized signatory of M/s. Deepali Design and Exhibits

DEEPALI DESIGNS & EXHIBITS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, ITA No. 4929/Del/2018 is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishipico Deepali Overlays Consortium, Vs. Acit, (By Deepali Designs Exhibits P. Ltd As Central Circle-8, Alleged Member), New Delhi Plot No. 17, 2Nd & 3Rd Floor, Central Market, Punjabi Bagh West, New Delhi Pan: Aabap1880F (Appellant) (Respondent) Deepali Designs & Exhibits Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, As Alleged Member Of M/S. Pico Central Circle-8, Deepali Overlays Consortium, New Delhi Plot No. 17, 2Nd & 3Rd Floor, Central Market, Punjabi Bagh West, New Delhi Pan: Aabap1880F (Appellant) (Respondent)

condone the delay in filing of the appeal. PICO Deepali Overlays consortium Vs. ACIT ITA No. 1561/Del/2017 &4929/Del/2018 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) 14. On the merits of the issue, we note that the appeal has been filed in the name of M/s. PICO Deepali Overlays Consortium, signed by the authorized signatory of M/s. Deepali Design and Exhibits

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI 4 vs. IL AND FS ENERGY DEVELOPMENT CO LTD

285 days. 2. For the reasons given in the applications, the delay is condoned. 3. The applications are disposed of in the aforesaid terms. ITA 316/2023 & ITA 317/2023 1/3 This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI 4 vs. IL AND FS ENERGY DEVELOPMENT CO. LTD .

285 days. 2. For the reasons given in the applications, the delay is condoned. 3. The applications are disposed of in the aforesaid terms. ITA 316/2023 & ITA 317/2023 1/3 This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. HLS ASIA LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

285 despite findings that the appellant was not engaged in manufacture and production of articles or things. (ii) Allowing depreciation in respect of plant and machinery @ 25% as against the applicable rate of 15%. 3. That the CIT erred on facts and in law in exercising reversionary powers under section 263 of the Act in respect of the issue

HLS ASIA LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. CIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

285 despite findings that the appellant was not engaged in manufacture and production of articles or things. (ii) Allowing depreciation in respect of plant and machinery @ 25% as against the applicable rate of 15%. 3. That the CIT erred on facts and in law in exercising reversionary powers under section 263 of the Act in respect of the issue

HLS ASIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

285 despite findings that the appellant was not engaged in manufacture and production of articles or things. (ii) Allowing depreciation in respect of plant and machinery @ 25% as against the applicable rate of 15%. 3. That the CIT erred on facts and in law in exercising reversionary powers under section 263 of the Act in respect of the issue

HLS ASIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. CIT- IV, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

285 despite findings that the appellant was not engaged in manufacture and production of articles or things. (ii) Allowing depreciation in respect of plant and machinery @ 25% as against the applicable rate of 15%. 3. That the CIT erred on facts and in law in exercising reversionary powers under section 263 of the Act in respect of the issue

M/S. HLS ASIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

285 despite findings that the appellant was not engaged in manufacture and production of articles or things. (ii) Allowing depreciation in respect of plant and machinery @ 25% as against the applicable rate of 15%. 3. That the CIT erred on facts and in law in exercising reversionary powers under section 263 of the Act in respect of the issue

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. HLS ASIA LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

285 despite findings that the appellant was not engaged in manufacture and production of articles or things. (ii) Allowing depreciation in respect of plant and machinery @ 25% as against the applicable rate of 15%. 3. That the CIT erred on facts and in law in exercising reversionary powers under section 263 of the Act in respect of the issue

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. HLS ASIA LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

285 despite findings that the appellant was not engaged in manufacture and production of articles or things. (ii) Allowing depreciation in respect of plant and machinery @ 25% as against the applicable rate of 15%. 3. That the CIT erred on facts and in law in exercising reversionary powers under section 263 of the Act in respect of the issue

CIT vs. JAIPUR GOLDEN TRANSPORT

Appeal is allowed

delay in refiling the appeal is condoned. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. 2010:DHC:4432-DB ITA 1387/2010 1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,1961 (hereinafter referred to as “Act”) challenging the order dated 27th November, 2003 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (in short “Tribunal

CIT vs. JAIPUR GOLDEN TRANSPORT

Appeal is allowed

Bench: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN

delay in refiling the appeal is condoned. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. ITA 1387/2010 Page 2 of 4 ITA 1387/2010 1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,1961 (hereinafter referred to as “Act”) challenging the order dated 27th November, 2003 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (in short “Tribunal