MADHU APARTMENT PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 16(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

disallowances u/s 14A read with rule 8D also applicable in the case. The statement given by Shri Himanshu Verma also establishes the link with the self-confessed "accommodation entry providers", 53 ITA.Nos.3869 & 3870/Del./2018 M/s. Madhu Apartment Private Limited, Delhi. whose business is to help assessees bring back their unaccounted money into their books of account. Thus, there

MADHU APARTMENT PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 16(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

disallowances u/s 14A read with rule 8D also applicable in the case. The statement given by Shri Himanshu Verma also establishes the link with the self-confessed "accommodation entry providers", 53 ITA.Nos.3869 & 3870/Del./2018 M/s. Madhu Apartment Private Limited, Delhi. whose business is to help assessees bring back their unaccounted money into their books of account. Thus, there

MAHESHWARI ROLLER FLOUR MILLS PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 16(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

disallowances u/s 14A read with rule 8D also applicable in the case. The statement given by Shri Himanshu Verma also establishes the link with the self-confessed "accommodation entry providers", 73 ITA.No.4257/Del./2019 Maheshwari Roller Flour Mills Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi.. whose business is to help assessees bring back their unaccounted money into their books of account. Thus

VRC TOWNSHIP P LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

disallowances u/s 14A read with rule 8D also applicable in the case. The statement given by Shri Himanshu Verma also establishes the link with the self-confessed "accommodation entry providers", 55 ITA.No.1503/Del./2017 VRC Township P. Ltd., Delhi. whose business is to help assessees bring back their unaccounted money into their books of account. Thus, there is a direct

BEHAT HOLDINGS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD-4(3), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya

disallowances u/s 14A read with rule 8D also applicable in the case. The statement given by Shri Himanshu Verma also establishes the link with the self-confessed "accommodation entry providers", whose business is to help assessees bring back their unaccounted money into their books of account. Thus, there is a direct link between the information/available with the department

GANESH GANGA INVESTMENTS PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 10(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

disallowances u/s 14A read with rule 8D also applicable in the case. The statement given by Shri Himanshu Verma also establishes the link with the self-confessed "accommodation entry providers", whose business is to help assessees bring back their unaccounted money into their books of account. Thus, there is a direct link between the information/available with the department

GARG ACRYLICS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 4, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

disallowances out of bogus purchases to 16.26% having regard to the average gross profit ratio earned in the past. The additions on account of bogus purchase was thus eventually sustained at Rs.2,66,13,417/-. 6. Aggrieved by the impugned order of the CIT(A), the assessee has preferred appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has challenged (i) the usurption

GARG ACRYLICS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 4, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

disallowances out of bogus purchases to 16.26% having regard to the average gross profit ratio earned in the past. The additions on account of bogus purchase was thus eventually sustained at Rs.2,66,13,417/-. 6. Aggrieved by the impugned order of the CIT(A), the assessee has preferred appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has challenged (i) the usurption

GARG ACRYLICS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 4, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

disallowances out of bogus purchases to 16.26% having regard to the average gross profit ratio earned in the past. The additions on account of bogus purchase was thus eventually sustained at Rs.2,66,13,417/-. 6. Aggrieved by the impugned order of the CIT(A), the assessee has preferred appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has challenged (i) the usurption

CHAMPION BUILDER PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO,WARD-1(3), GURGAON

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.462 & 463/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17

disallowed. It was also noted that the TDS on the interest has been deducted in respect of the interest payment on such loan and therefore the Income Tax Department was not justified on making addition on such loans. The Tribunal further held that the loans were repaid and therefore the genuineness of the transaction has been established and the assessee

NISHA GOEL,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 52(3), WARD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadिनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13

bogus/accommodation entries provided by certain individuals/ companies. The name of the assessee figures as one of the beneficiaries of these alleged bogus transactions given by the Directorate after making the necessary enquiries. In the said information, it has been inter-alia reported as under: "Entries are broadly taken for two purposes: 1. To plough back unaccounted black money

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 15, NEW DELHI vs. DEEPTI AGRAWAL, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S Rifuar Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmadcit Vs. Deepti Agrawal R. No. 245, 2Nd Floor, E-2 1-A, Maharaja Lal Lane Block, Ara Centre, Civil Lines Jhandewalan Extension New Delhi – 110054 New Delhi – 110055 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aampa0573C Appellant .. Respondent

disallowance of bogus long term capital gain claimed as exempt u/s 10(38) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on sale of shares of M/s Capital Tradelink Pvt. Ltd. & M/s Alankit Ltd. P a g e | 3 Deepti Agrawal (AY: 2017-18) and Rs. 7,46,370/- as unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on account

VERTEX BUILDWELL PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 26(2), C R BUILDING, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

bogus/accommodation entry based on non-service of Summons u/s 131 on the directors of the alleged investor companies after long period of approx. 6 years that too without bringing any tangible or substantive material on record in support of allegation made by both the lower authorities. 10. That the grounds of appeal are independent and without prejudice to each other

DCIT, JHANDEWALAN EXTENTION vs. JAY ENN INFOTECH PVT. LTD., DELHI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S Rifuar Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmadcit Vs. Deepti Agrawal R. No. 245, 2Nd Floor, E-2 1-A, Maharaja Lal Lane Block, Ara Centre, Civil Lines Jhandewalan Extension New Delhi – 110054 New Delhi – 110055 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aampa0573C Appellant .. Respondent

disallowance of bogus long term capital gain claimed as exempt u/s 10(38) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on sale of shares of M/s Capital Tradelink Pvt. Ltd. & M/s Alankit Ltd. P a g e | 3 Deepti Agrawal (AY: 2017-18) and Rs. 7,46,370/- as unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on account

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15, NEW DELHI vs. DEEPTI AGRAWAL, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Dey & Sh. M. Balaganeshdcit Vs. Deepti Agrawal Central Circle – 15 1-A, Maharaja Lal Lane, New Delhi Civil Lines, New Delhi-110 054 Pan No. Aampa 0573 C (Appellant) (Respondent) & Co No. 48/Del/2024 (In Ita No.224/Del/2024) (Assessment Year : 2016-17) Deepti Agrawal Vs. Dcit 1-A, Maharaja Lal Lane, Central Circle – 15 Civil Lines, New Delhi New Delhi-110 054 Pan No. Aampa 0573 C (Appellant) (Respondent)

bogus/accommodation entry by the ld. AO. Also, the operations and modus operandi of this regulated market does not in any way provide for any mechanism by which assessee can bring forth the identity of the buyers of its shares and their creditworthiness. Further, sale proceeds are received through the stock market processing into the pre-identified bank account

SANJEEV AGRAWAL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CC-15, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee areallowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice-& Shri Girish Agrawal

bogus/accommodation entry by the ld. AO. Also, the operations and modus operandi of this regulated market does not in any way provide for any mechanism by which assessee can bring forth the identity of the buyers of its shares and their creditworthiness. Further, sale proceeds are received through the stock market processing into the pre-identified bank account

SANJEEV AGRAWAL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CC-15, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee areallowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice-& Shri Girish Agrawal

bogus/accommodation entry by the ld. AO. Also, the operations and modus operandi of this regulated market does not in any way provide for any mechanism by which assessee can bring forth the identity of the buyers of its shares and their creditworthiness. Further, sale proceeds are received through the stock market processing into the pre-identified bank account

CIT vs. DALMIA BROS PVT LTD

The appeal is dismissed

disallowances were made by the Assessing Officer, but were deleted in the appellate proceedings. One such order has been upheld by the High Court in ITA No. 1340/2009. In the said appeal the same question was raised but the appeal of the Revenue was dismissed vide order dated 16.12.2011. . 3. The second issue raised by the Revenue relates to bogus