DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. GEE ISPAT PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

delay in filing the appeals is condoned and the appeals are admitted. & ITA Nos. 4256 to 4259/Del/2014 Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd. 8. At the first instance, we take up the cross appeals for the assessment year 2005-06. The grounds raised by the assessee in its appeal read as under: “1. The order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-XXXI

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

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

delay in filing the appeals is condoned and the appeals are admitted. & ITA Nos. 4256 to 4259/Del/2014 Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd. 8. At the first instance, we take up the cross appeals for the assessment year 2005-06. The grounds raised by the assessee in its appeal read as under: “1. The order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-XXXI

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. GEE ISPAT PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

delay in filing the appeals is condoned and the appeals are admitted. & ITA Nos. 4256 to 4259/Del/2014 Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd. 8. At the first instance, we take up the cross appeals for the assessment year 2005-06. The grounds raised by the assessee in its appeal read as under: “1. The order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-XXXI

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. GEE ISPAT PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

delay in filing the appeals is condoned and the appeals are admitted. & ITA Nos. 4256 to 4259/Del/2014 Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd. 8. At the first instance, we take up the cross appeals for the assessment year 2005-06. The grounds raised by the assessee in its appeal read as under: “1. The order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-XXXI

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

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

delay in filing the appeals is condoned and the appeals are admitted. & ITA Nos. 4256 to 4259/Del/2014 Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd. 8. At the first instance, we take up the cross appeals for the assessment year 2005-06. The grounds raised by the assessee in its appeal read as under: “1. The order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-XXXI

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

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

delay in filing the appeals is condoned and the appeals are admitted. & ITA Nos. 4256 to 4259/Del/2014 Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd. 8. At the first instance, we take up the cross appeals for the assessment year 2005-06. The grounds raised by the assessee in its appeal read as under: “1. The order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-XXXI

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. GEE ISPAT PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

delay in filing the appeals is condoned and the appeals are admitted. & ITA Nos. 4256 to 4259/Del/2014 Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd. 8. At the first instance, we take up the cross appeals for the assessment year 2005-06. The grounds raised by the assessee in its appeal read as under: “1. The order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-XXXI

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

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

delay in filing the appeals is condoned and the appeals are admitted. & ITA Nos. 4256 to 4259/Del/2014 Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd. 8. At the first instance, we take up the cross appeals for the assessment year 2005-06. The grounds raised by the assessee in its appeal read as under: “1. The order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-XXXI

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -CENTRAL -1 vs. VATIKA LIMITED.

delay is condoned. 3. The application is, accordingly, disposed of. ITA 560/2022 4. Mr Shlok Chandra, who appears on behalf of the appellant/revenue, informs us that in the assessee’s appeal, i.e., ITA No.33/2020, the issue which arises for consideration also obtains in the instant appeal. ITA 560/2022 page 1 of 2 This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 18(1) vs. M/S URBAN MASS TRANSIT LTD.

delay is condoned. Application stands allowed. ITA 84/2014 1. The Revenue claims to be aggrieved by an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) made in two appeals preferred by the assessee - M/s Urban Mass Transit Ltd., for the assessment year 2007-08. 2. The assessee, a public limited company, was a joint venture enterprise of the Central Government

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 18(1) vs. M/S URBAN MASS TRANSIT LTD

delay is condoned. Application stands allowed. ITA 84/2014 1. The Revenue claims to be aggrieved by an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) made in two appeals preferred by the assessee - M/s Urban Mass Transit Ltd., for the assessment year 2007-08. 2. The assessee, a public limited company, was a joint venture enterprise of the Central Government