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

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

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

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S YKK INDIA PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

delay itself. In view of these discussions, in our considered view, the condonation petition does not deserve to be accepted. We reject the same. The appeal is dismissed as time barred. Having held so, we may also add that even on merits grievance of the Assessing Officer is that “On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

YKK INDIA (P) LTD vs. ACIT CICLE-18 (1),

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

delay itself. In view of these discussions, in our considered view, the condonation petition does not deserve to be accepted. We reject the same. The appeal is dismissed as time barred. Having held so, we may also add that even on merits grievance of the Assessing Officer is that “On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

NARESH KUMAR,SHANTI NAGAR, MODEL TOWN, PANIPAT, HARYANA, INDIA vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, WARD NO. ONE, PANIPAT HARYANA, INDIA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

condoned along with the delay of 33 days in filing both the appeals before us and we admit both the appeals for adjudication. 6. First, we take up ITA No.- 3654/Del/2025. (Assessment Year- 2021-22) 6.1 In this case as per the intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act, dated 17.12.2022, following two adjustments were made ITA Nos- 3654 & 3656/Del/2025

NARESH KUMAR,SHANTI NAGAR, MODEL TOWN, PANIPAT, HARYANA, INDIA vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, WARD ONE, PANIPAT, HARYANA, INDIA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

condoned along with the delay of 33 days in filing both the appeals before us and we admit both the appeals for adjudication. 6. First, we take up ITA No.- 3654/Del/2025. (Assessment Year- 2021-22) 6.1 In this case as per the intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act, dated 17.12.2022, following two adjustments were made ITA Nos- 3654 & 3656/Del/2025

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

delay shall have to be condoned and there is no violation of Rule 46A and in deciding the issue of assumption of jurisdiction under section 153A in favour of the assessee, in the absence of any incriminating material during the course of search, when original assessments were already completed on the date of search. The issues on merit decided

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

delay shall have to be condoned and there is no violation of Rule 46A and in deciding the issue of assumption of jurisdiction under section 153A in favour of the assessee, in the absence of any incriminating material during the course of search, when original assessments were already completed on the date of search. The issues on merit decided

M/S. ALANKAR SAPHIRE DEVELOPERS,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

delay shall have to be condoned and there is no violation of Rule 46A and in deciding the issue of assumption of jurisdiction under section 153A in favour of the assessee, in the absence of any incriminating material during the course of search, when original assessments were already completed on the date of search. The issues on merit decided

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

delay shall have to be condoned and there is no violation of Rule 46A and in deciding the issue of assumption of jurisdiction under section 153A in favour of the assessee, in the absence of any incriminating material during the course of search, when original assessments were already completed on the date of search. The issues on merit decided

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S ASHUTOSH DEVELOPERS 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

delay shall have to be condoned and there is no violation of Rule 46A and in deciding the issue of assumption of jurisdiction under section 153A in favour of the assessee, in the absence of any incriminating material during the course of search, when original assessments were already completed on the date of search. The issues on merit decided

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

delay shall have to be condoned and there is no violation of Rule 46A and in deciding the issue of assumption of jurisdiction under section 153A in favour of the assessee, in the absence of any incriminating material during the course of search, when original assessments were already completed on the date of search. The issues on merit decided

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

delay shall have to be condoned and there is no violation of Rule 46A and in deciding the issue of assumption of jurisdiction under section 153A in favour of the assessee, in the absence of any incriminating material during the course of search, when original assessments were already completed on the date of search. The issues on merit decided

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. M.M. 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

delay shall have to be condoned and there is no violation of Rule 46A and in deciding the issue of assumption of jurisdiction under section 153A in favour of the assessee, in the absence of any incriminating material during the course of search, when original assessments were already completed on the date of search. The issues on merit decided

M/S. ALANKAR SAPHIRE DEVELOPERS,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

delay shall have to be condoned and there is no violation of Rule 46A and in deciding the issue of assumption of jurisdiction under section 153A in favour of the assessee, in the absence of any incriminating material during the course of search, when original assessments were already completed on the date of search. The issues on merit decided

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

delay shall have to be condoned and there is no violation of Rule 46A and in deciding the issue of assumption of jurisdiction under section 153A in favour of the assessee, in the absence of any incriminating material during the course of search, when original assessments were already completed on the date of search. The issues on merit decided

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. BELIEVE DEVELOPERS & PROMOTERS 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

delay shall have to be condoned and there is no violation of Rule 46A and in deciding the issue of assumption of jurisdiction under section 153A in favour of the assessee, in the absence of any incriminating material during the course of search, when original assessments were already completed on the date of search. The issues on merit decided

M/S VINMAN ESTATES (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

delay shall have to be condoned and there is no violation of Rule 46A and in deciding the issue of assumption of jurisdiction under section 153A in favour of the assessee, in the absence of any incriminating material during the course of search, when original assessments were already completed on the date of search. The issues on merit decided

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S WITNESS 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

delay shall have to be condoned and there is no violation of Rule 46A and in deciding the issue of assumption of jurisdiction under section 153A in favour of the assessee, in the absence of any incriminating material during the course of search, when original assessments were already completed on the date of search. The issues on merit decided