ITO, WARD- 27(4), NEW DLEHI vs. ZEXUS AIR SERVICES PVT. LTD., GURGAON

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2014-15 Ito, Vs Zexus Air Services Pvt. Ltd., Ward-27(4), 148-149, Centrum Plaza, New Delhi. Sector-53, Dlf Phase-V, Gurgaon. Pan: Aaacz6541L Co No.121/Del/2018 (Ita No.2608/Del/2018) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Zexus Air Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito, 148-149, Centrum Plaza, Ward-27(4), Sector-53, Dlf Phase-V, New Delhi. Gurgaon. Pan: Aaacz6541L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gaurav Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Smt. Sushma Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 31.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.04.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 12Th January, 2018 Of The Cit(A)-9, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. Co No.121/Del/2018 The Assessee Has Filed The Co Against The Appeal Filed By The Revenue. For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order.

Section 68 have to come into play necessarily. Without prejudice to above, the amount before being credited to share capital account, is credited to the share applicant, details such as Name, address, PAN, ITR are available on records. 5.9 In the present case the “sum” has been identified by the Ld. AO as per the value of the goodwill claimed

JUDGEMENTopens in new window

Section 68 of the Act from Rs.150.53 crores to Rs.73.13 crores. The figure of Rs.73.13 crores was arrived at by adjusting from Rs.150.53 crores, Rs.13.99 crores and Rs.63.41 crores [i.e., (180.53 crores – 30 crores) i.e., 150.53 crores-13.99 crores- 63.41 crores]. 16.5. It is in this background that the Tribunal examined the merits of the case put up by both

JUDGEMENTopens in new window

Section 68 of the Act from Rs.150.53 crores to Rs.73.13 crores. The figure of Rs.73.13 crores was arrived at by adjusting from Rs.150.53 crores, Rs.13.99 crores and Rs.63.41 crores [i.e., (180.53 crores – 30 crores) i.e., 150.53 crores-13.99 crores- 63.41 crores]. 16.5. It is in this background that the Tribunal examined the merits of the case put up by both

JUDGEMENTopens in new window

Section 68 of the Act from Rs.150.53 crores to Rs.73.13 crores. The figure of Rs.73.13 crores was arrived at by adjusting from Rs.150.53 crores, Rs.13.99 crores and Rs.63.41 crores [i.e., (180.53 crores – 30 crores) i.e., 150.53 crores-13.99 crores- 63.41 crores]. 16.5. It is in this background that the Tribunal examined the merits of the case put up by both

JUDGEMENTopens in new window

Section 68 of the Act from Rs.150.53 crores to Rs.73.13 crores. The figure of Rs.73.13 crores was arrived at by adjusting from Rs.150.53 crores, Rs.13.99 crores and Rs.63.41 crores [i.e., (180.53 crores – 30 crores) i.e., 150.53 crores-13.99 crores- 63.41 crores]. 16.5. It is in this background that the Tribunal examined the merits of the case put up by both

STRYTON EXIM INDIA P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-24(2), NEW DELHI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishisa No. 665/Del/2018 (In Ita No. 5982/Del/2018) (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Stryton Exim India Pvt Ltd, Vs. Ito, C/O. R Khare & Associates, Ward-24(2), 7/6, Sarvapriya Vihar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaics0797B (Appellant) (Respondent) Stryton Exim India Pvt Ltd, Vs. Ito, C/O. R Khare & Associates, Ward-24(2), 7/6, Sarvapriya Vihar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaics0797B (Appellant) (Respondent)

68 of the Act. Submit detail in as per below: fatal Name and Face No. of Value Amount address of (he value Premium on PAN shares w Receive share holder of each each share allotted allotte d I share d 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Also furnish (i) Bank statement of the company which shares capital and premium

ACIT, HARIDWAR vs. M/S SANT STEEL & ALLOYS (P) LTD., KOTDWAR

In the result, appeals filed by Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kant

68 of the Act by the CIT(A) has not been challenged by the assessee even before the Tribunal. AYs: 2003-04 & 2008-09 19. The issue has also been decided by the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Kim Parma private limited versus CIT 258 CTR for 454 and held that deemed income under

ACIT, HARIDWAR vs. M/S SANT STEEL & ALLOYS (P) LTD., KOTDWAR

In the result, appeals filed by Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kant

68 of the Act by the CIT(A) has not been challenged by the assessee even before the Tribunal. AYs: 2003-04 & 2008-09 19. The issue has also been decided by the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Kim Parma private limited versus CIT 258 CTR for 454 and held that deemed income under

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. CHARANJIV CHARITABLE TRUST

In the result both aspects of the first substantial question of law

Bench: It, Two By The Assessee Relating To The Assessment Years 2006-07 & 2007-08 & One By The Revenue Relating To The Assessment Year 2006-07. In Other Words, In Respect Of The Assessment Year 2006-07, There Were Cross- 2014:Dhc:1467-Db

Section 68. The assessing officer also disallowed depreciation on certain assets on the ground that the cost of those assets

ACIT, CENTRAL CRCLE-18, NEW DELHI vs. SHIMMER DEVELOPERS P.LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

depreciation allowance or any other allowance under this Act has been computed. Explanation 3 For the purpose of assessment or reassessment under this section, the Axsessing Officer may assess or reassess the income in respect of any issue, which has escaped assessment, and such issue comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, notwithstanding

RIVET ELECTRICAL PVT LTD,FARIDABAD vs. PR. CIT, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia[Assessment Year : 2014-15] Rivet Electrical Pvt.Ltd., Vs Pr.Cit, Ff-9, Vishnu Place, Faridabad, Near Neelam Flyover, Sec-20B, Haryana. Faridabad, Haryana-121002. Pan-Aafcr8803C Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Rajeev Saxena, Adv., Ms. Sumangl Saxena, Adv. & Shri Sahyamsunder, Adv. Respondent By Shri Anuj Garg, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 12.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 15.11.2022

68 in the hands of the assessee. However, rejecting the entire submissions of the assessee, the Ld.PCIT did not agree with the genuineness of transactions, identity and creditworthiness of the investors. 7. The main points raised by the Ld.PCIT challenging the assessment order dated 5.4.2016 are: a) That the genuineness and creditworthiness of the investors were not verified

POTENT FOODS PRIVATE LIMTED,FARIDABAD vs. ITO WARD-2(1), FARIDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda

68 can be made out of opening balances for A.Y. 2015-16. The Revenue is not in appeal against the above finding of the CIT(A), therefore, I am not concerned about the same. However, the ld.CIT(A) held that the assessee has no business worth and there is no tangible business activity being carried out by the assessee since

VEDANTA LTD (SUCCESSOR TO CAIRN INDIA LTD),GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-26(1), NEW DELHI

Bench: Hon’Ble, Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

depreciation on producing facilities @ 5.28% on straight line method, thereby making adjustment of Rs.180,40,27,029 to the book profit under section 115JB of the Act. 6. That on the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. AO/TPO/DRP erred in not appreciating that the transactions of reimbursement of Rs.2,00,40,842, Manpower, general and administrative

ITO WARD 17 (4) vs. VITAL COMMUNICATION LTD,

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2003-04

section 68 of the IT Act. On this ground also, the said addition cannot be sustained. Though the said addition made u/s 68 cannot be sustained on the legal grounds itself as discussed above 8.4 We further note that during the appellate proceedings, the Assessee’s AR has filed the copies of ledger accounts of eleven trade creditors to whom

M/S. RELIGARE CAPITAL MARKETS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

section 68 of the Act, in relation to the aforesaid amount received by the appellant. 3.2 That the assessing officer/ DRP erred on facts and in law in not appreciating that the voluminous document(s)/evidence(s) placed on record by the appellant conclusively established the identity, genuineness of the transaction and creditworthiness of CIL. 3.3 That the assessing officer

MR. INDER PAL SINGH WADHAWAN,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiinder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Jcit, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, East Patel Vs. Circle-33, Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Circle-33(1), Room No.1505, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, Vs. 15Th Floor, Dr. Shyama Prasad East Patel Nagar, New Delhi Mukherjee Civil Centre, New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Acit, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, East Patel Circle-33, Vs. Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Circle-33(1), Room No.1505, 15Th E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, Vs. Floor, Dr. Shyama Prasad East Patel Nagar, New Delhi Mukherjee Civil Centre, Pan: Aarps6904L New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 68 of the IT Act, 1961, Inderpal Singh Wadhawan V JCIT & JCIT V Inderpal singh Wadhawan ITA No 1155 & 1589 / Del/2013 & 1489 & 952 /Del/2013 A Y 2007-08 & 2008-09 Page 32 of 59 empowers the Assessing Officer to make enquiry regarding the credit. If he is satisfied that the entries are not genuine, the Assessing Officer has every

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. INDERPAL SINGH WADHAWAN, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiinder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Jcit, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, East Patel Vs. Circle-33, Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Circle-33(1), Room No.1505, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, Vs. 15Th Floor, Dr. Shyama Prasad East Patel Nagar, New Delhi Mukherjee Civil Centre, New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Acit, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, East Patel Circle-33, Vs. Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Circle-33(1), Room No.1505, 15Th E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, Vs. Floor, Dr. Shyama Prasad East Patel Nagar, New Delhi Mukherjee Civil Centre, Pan: Aarps6904L New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 68 of the IT Act, 1961, Inderpal Singh Wadhawan V JCIT & JCIT V Inderpal singh Wadhawan ITA No 1155 & 1589 / Del/2013 & 1489 & 952 /Del/2013 A Y 2007-08 & 2008-09 Page 32 of 59 empowers the Assessing Officer to make enquiry regarding the credit. If he is satisfied that the entries are not genuine, the Assessing Officer has every

MR. INDER PAL SINGH WADHAWAN,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiinder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Jcit, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, East Patel Vs. Circle-33, Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Circle-33(1), Room No.1505, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, Vs. 15Th Floor, Dr. Shyama Prasad East Patel Nagar, New Delhi Mukherjee Civil Centre, New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Acit, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, East Patel Circle-33, Vs. Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Circle-33(1), Room No.1505, 15Th E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, Vs. Floor, Dr. Shyama Prasad East Patel Nagar, New Delhi Mukherjee Civil Centre, Pan: Aarps6904L New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 68 of the IT Act, 1961, Inderpal Singh Wadhawan V JCIT & JCIT V Inderpal singh Wadhawan ITA No 1155 & 1589 / Del/2013 & 1489 & 952 /Del/2013 A Y 2007-08 & 2008-09 Page 32 of 59 empowers the Assessing Officer to make enquiry regarding the credit. If he is satisfied that the entries are not genuine, the Assessing Officer has every