INNOVATIVE WELFARE AND EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,GR. NOIDA vs. ADIT (E), TRUST CIRCLE, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri N. K. Choudhryito(Exemption), Vs. Innovative Welfare & Ward-1(2), Educational Society, New Delhi Regd. Office: B-19, Defence Colony, New Delhi Pan: Aaati4207R (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 2(15). The assessee has concealed facts from the AO during the first assessment proceedings and furnished incorrect information as well. In view of clear violation of Sec-13(l)(d) r.w.s 13(30 r.w.s 11(5) of Act, 1961, exemption u/s 11 and 12 are denied to the assessee. 6. Hence, the income of the assessee in taxed

INNOVATIVE WELFARE AND EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,GR. NOIDA vs. ADIT (E), TRUST CIRCLE, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri N. K. Choudhryito(Exemption), Vs. Innovative Welfare & Ward-1(2), Educational Society, New Delhi Regd. Office: B-19, Defence Colony, New Delhi Pan: Aaati4207R (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 2(15). The assessee has concealed facts from the AO during the first assessment proceedings and furnished incorrect information as well. In view of clear violation of Sec-13(l)(d) r.w.s 13(30 r.w.s 11(5) of Act, 1961, exemption u/s 11 and 12 are denied to the assessee. 6. Hence, the income of the assessee in taxed

SH. SANJAY DALMIA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result all the appeal filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

depreciation can be carried forward - Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, ss. 10(2)(vi), Prov. Cl. (b); 24(2), Prov. (b). Interpretation of statutes - Taxing statutes - Doubt - Assessee entitled to interpretation favourable to him. iv) CIT vs. Poddar Cement (P.) Ltd. [19971 226 ITR 625 (SC) Where there are two possible interpretations of a particular section which is akin

CAIRN UK HOLDING LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 5 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

143 (2) was issued. Also, Notice under section 142 (1) on 07/05/2014 and summons under section 131, dated 20/01/2014 and 22/01/2014 were issued along with the questionnaire. Against all these notices and summons, assessee sought time. The Ld. assessing officer gave a further opportunity vide letter dated 08/10/2014 to the assessee requesting to furnish the details against which the assessee

CIT vs. VISHAL GUPTA

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

143(2) of the Act, within 12 months from the end of the month in which the return was filed. The reasoning given by the tribunal reads:- “5. We have considered the rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. Section 147 of the Act provides that if the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable

CIT vs. VISHAL GUPTA

143(2) of the Act, within 12 months from the end of the month in which the return was filed. The reasoning given by the tribunal reads:- “5. We have considered the rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. Section 147 of the Act provides that if the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable

CIT vs. VISHAL GUPTA

143(2) of the Act, within 12 months from the end of the month in which the return was filed. The reasoning given by the tribunal reads:- “5. We have considered the rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. Section 147 of the Act provides that if the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SURYA BUILDWELL (P) LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result cross objection filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 14 A of Rs. 3 086234/-, except sum of Rs. 1142945/– . In the result ground No. 3 of the cross objection of the assessee is partly allowed. 64. Coming to the other disallowance of Rs 102 0912/– on account of lease agreement charges. The brief facts relating to this issue is that the appellant and developed and promoted

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. SURYA BUILDWELL PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result cross objection filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 14 A of Rs. 3 086234/-, except sum of Rs. 1142945/– . In the result ground No. 3 of the cross objection of the assessee is partly allowed. 64. Coming to the other disallowance of Rs 102 0912/– on account of lease agreement charges. The brief facts relating to this issue is that the appellant and developed and promoted

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. SURYA BUILDWELL PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result cross objection filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 14 A of Rs. 3 086234/-, except sum of Rs. 1142945/– . In the result ground No. 3 of the cross objection of the assessee is partly allowed. 64. Coming to the other disallowance of Rs 102 0912/– on account of lease agreement charges. The brief facts relating to this issue is that the appellant and developed and promoted

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL LTD., DELHI

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

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

143(2) was not served. 6. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the disallowance of Rs.3,895/- out of total disallowance of Rs.20,54,172/- allegedly being prior period expenses, more so when such disallowance could not have been made in the proceedings

M/S. DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

143(2) was not served. 6. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the disallowance of Rs.3,895/- out of total disallowance of Rs.20,54,172/- allegedly being prior period expenses, more so when such disallowance could not have been made in the proceedings

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. FUTURZ NEXT SERVICES (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi

2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). d. Disallowed excess claim of depreciation of Rs.29,63,061/-. Total income of assessee was assessed at Rs. 4,01,01,260/- vide order dated 23.03.2016 passed under Section 143

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2005-06 Ay: 2009-10

Section, First Floor, New Delhi Bharat Sanchar Bhawan, Janpath, New Delhi-110001 (PAN: AABCB5576G) AY: 2009-10 AY: 2005-06 ACIT, vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Circle 2(1), New Delhi-110001 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Tarandeep Singh, Adv. Respondent by: Shri Ravi Jain, CIT DR Date of hearing: 15.02.2016 Date of pronouncement: 13.05.2016 ORDER PER SUDHANSHU

BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2005-06 Ay: 2009-10

Section, First Floor, New Delhi Bharat Sanchar Bhawan, Janpath, New Delhi-110001 (PAN: AABCB5576G) AY: 2009-10 AY: 2005-06 ACIT, vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Circle 2(1), New Delhi-110001 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Tarandeep Singh, Adv. Respondent by: Shri Ravi Jain, CIT DR Date of hearing: 15.02.2016 Date of pronouncement: 13.05.2016 ORDER PER SUDHANSHU

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2005-06 Ay: 2009-10

Section, First Floor, New Delhi Bharat Sanchar Bhawan, Janpath, New Delhi-110001 (PAN: AABCB5576G) AY: 2009-10 AY: 2005-06 ACIT, vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Circle 2(1), New Delhi-110001 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Tarandeep Singh, Adv. Respondent by: Shri Ravi Jain, CIT DR Date of hearing: 15.02.2016 Date of pronouncement: 13.05.2016 ORDER PER SUDHANSHU

BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2005-06 Ay: 2009-10

Section, First Floor, New Delhi Bharat Sanchar Bhawan, Janpath, New Delhi-110001 (PAN: AABCB5576G) AY: 2009-10 AY: 2005-06 ACIT, vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Circle 2(1), New Delhi-110001 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Tarandeep Singh, Adv. Respondent by: Shri Ravi Jain, CIT DR Date of hearing: 15.02.2016 Date of pronouncement: 13.05.2016 ORDER PER SUDHANSHU

PATANJALI YOGPEETH (NYAS),DELHI vs. ADIT(EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L. P. Sahu

section 142(2A) while confirming the order of the Assessing Officer in denying exemption under sections 11/12 of the Act. 8.2 The ld. AR on queries raised by the Bench responded that assessee trust is not running shops or distribution of products and for those shoppings and distribution and selling of products, as on commercial basis different entity is there

M/s JAY BHARAT MARUTI LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result the appeal is allowed and

143(3) cannot be permitted to verify all the statements under the guise of assessing escaped income. Petitioner submits that Exts.P7 and P8 requiring him to produce books of accounts and furnishing information on various points are not warranted in a proceeding under Section 147 of the Act. Section 148 deals with issue of notice where income has escaped assessment