SRD MANAGEMENT COMPANY,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-22(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr. B.R.R.Kumar[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Srd Management Company, Vs Dcit, 304, 3Rd Floor, 44 Deenar Circle-22(2), Bhawan, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi-110019. Pan-Aamcs3799K Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Bawa Kanwarjit Singh, Ca Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 01.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 07.08.2023

Disallowance 10% of exp of Rs.1,57,06,795.00/ Addition Rs.15,70,679 without going into the merits of the case. 3. That the Ld. C.I.T. (Appeals) has erred in making ex parte order without considering condonation of delay

MS. KENZO INTERNATIONAL,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 43(1), DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical

Bench: Before Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No. 3274/Del/2024, (A.Y.2015-16)

condoning the delay thereon. It is not in dispute that there was a delay in filing of appeal by the assessee by 1081 days. But we find that assessee has duly explained the circumstances under which a decision was taken for not preferring any appeal. We also find that the Chartered Accountant who advised the assessee has also filed

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

disallowed while processing return of income as it a mistake made while filing of Form 3CD was bad in both law and facts of the case.” 16 ITA Nos- 3654 & 3656/Del/2025 Naresh Kumar 13.1 The Ld. AR submitted that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) in limine by not condoning the delay

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

disallowed while processing return of income as it a mistake made while filing of Form 3CD was bad in both law and facts of the case.” 16 ITA Nos- 3654 & 3656/Del/2025 Naresh Kumar 13.1 The Ld. AR submitted that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) in limine by not condoning the delay

PME POWER SOLUTIONS INDIA LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

condone the delay in filing of appeals before us and admit the appeals for adjudication. 5. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal in ITA No. 242/Del/2024 :- ―1. That the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (herein after referred to as "the CIT(A)") dated 03.04.2017 dismissing the appeal of the assessee company

PME POWER SOLUTIONS INDIA LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

condone the delay in filing of appeals before us and admit the appeals for adjudication. 5. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal in ITA No. 242/Del/2024 :- ―1. That the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (herein after referred to as "the CIT(A)") dated 03.04.2017 dismissing the appeal of the assessee company

INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND (ICID PF TRUST),NEW DELHI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

disallowed the claim of exemption under section 10 of the Act on the reasoning that the assessee was not eligible for said exemption under specified sub-sections of section 10 of the Act duly mentioned in ITRs. Later, the assessee filed applications under section 154 of the Act for rectification of the processing under section

INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND (ICID PF TRUST),NEW DELHI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

disallowed the claim of exemption under section 10 of the Act on the reasoning that the assessee was not eligible for said exemption under specified sub-sections of section 10 of the Act duly mentioned in ITRs. Later, the assessee filed applications under section 154 of the Act for rectification of the processing under section

SHAFA HOME,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, (EXEMPTION) WARD 2(1), NEW DELHI

Appeal stands allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

disallowed on account of non-submission of Form 10 along with ITR. Aggrieved against this the assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(Appeals), who dismissed the appeal by sustaining the addition made by the AO. Aggrieved against this now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 3. Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the addition has been

IMPERIAL AUTO INUDSTRIES LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, DELHI

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Ms. Madhumita Royi.T.A. No. 3927/Del/2023 (Assessment Year : 2020-21) M/S. Imperial Auto Vs. Asst. Director Of Income Tax Industries Ltd., Centralized Processing Plot No.202, Kushal Cell, Bengaluru Bazar, 32-33, Nehru Place, New Delhi-110019 Pan: Aaaci 0645 J (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

disallowance. 3. The appellant was under bonafide belief that since the assessment proceeding has already been started, all claims and contentions would be examined during the course of assessment proceeding for the impugned year and thus did not pursue the remedy against the impugned intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act dated 23.12.2021 to avoid multiplicity of proceedings. Subsequently

NTPC BHEL POWER PROJECTS PVT. LTD. ,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-18(2), DELHI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

condone the delay of 852 days in filing the appeal and admitted for adjudication. 6.The brief facts of the case are that assessee is EPC Contractor engaged to have certain preliminary site enabling assets for 6 facilitating project construction of 500MW unit Power Plant at site. The assessee has filed its return of income on 30-09-2015 declaring loss

INDIAN INSTITUTE OF FOREIGN TRADE,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE- EXEMPT 1(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh, Ita No:- 4944/Del/2025 (Assessment Year- 2023-24) Indian Institute Of Foreign Deputy Commissioner Of Trade, Income Tax, B-21, Iift Bhawan, Qutab Vs Circle Exempt 1(1), Institutional Area, Shaheed Delhi, Jeet Singh Marg, Civic Centre, New Delhi- New Delhi-110016. 110002. Pan- Aaati0438E Assessee Revenue

disallowed its claim for exemption u/s 11 of the Act on the ground that the assessee had filed the Auditor’s report in Form 10-B 01.11.2023 for which the due date was 31.10.2023. The Ld. AR further submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground that it constituted violation of the provisions

SHAHEED BISHAN SINGH MEMORIAL SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL,MANSAROVER GARDEN, NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD EXEMPTION 2(1), NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2021-22] Shaheed Bishan Singh Memorial Vs Ito, Senior Secondary School, Ward(Exemption)-2(1), F-213, Mansarover Garden, New Delhi. New Delhi-110015. Pan-Aacts8314D Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Kurshid Ahmed, Adv. Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 29.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 29.05.2024 Order Per Kul Bharat, Jm : The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld.Cit(A)/Addl/Jcit(A), Madurai Dated 30.12.2023 For The Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

disallowance of Rs.37,04,505/- related to set-apart U/s 11(2) of Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The appellant is a regular claimer of such deduction from the last sufficient years by having the registration U/s 12A of Income Tax Act, 1961, thus is quite eligible for such deduction. 4. That since the appellant is neither intentional or willful

GOODVIEW TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,LAXMI NAGAR DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE NOIDA, NOIDA

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

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

disallowed a sum of Rs. ITA No.- 3327/Del/2024 Goodview Technologies Pvt. Ltd. 1,54,300/-, being 20% of the expenses claimed by the assessee, in the absence of books of accounts and vouchers. 2.1 Aggrieved with the said order the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), which was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A). 2.2 Aggrieved with

HILLVIEW TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,LAXMI NAGAR DELHI vs. DCIT, NOIDA UTTAR PRADESH

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

Bench: Yogesh Kumar Us & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2011-12]

disallowed a sum of Rs. ITA No.- 3326/Del/2024 Hillview Technologies Pvt. Ltd. 1,57,404/-, being 20% of the expenses claimed by the assessee, in the absence of books of accounts and vouchers. 2.1 Aggrieved with the said order the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), which was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A). 2.2 Aggrieved with

SEHKARI GANNA VIKAS SAMITI LIMITED SUAR,RAMPUR vs. ITO , RAMPUR

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं.924/िद"ी/2024 (िन.व. 2020-21) Sekhari Ganna Vikas Samiti Ltd., Village Dhanori, Suar, Rampur, Up 244924 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aafts-7805-L

disallowed assessee’s claim of deduction of interest income Rs. 12,18,305/- u/s. 80P of the Act and also made addition of rental income Rs.24,000/- . Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 06.09.2022 passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The appeal filed by the assessee before

GUPTA SUBHASH & SONS HUF,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD 34(3), DELHI, CIVIC CENTRE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Brief facts of the case are, assessee filed its return of income on 05.10.2017 declaring total income of Rs.3,49,095/- which was processed under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’). The case was selected for scrutiny through CASS. Notices

PILOT INDUSTRIES LTD.,DELHI vs. CENTRAL CIRCLE -19 DELHI , DELHI

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

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Asstt. Year: 2018-19

condoning the delay in filing of appeal without appreciating the fact that there was sufficient cause for not being able to present the appeal in time. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without appreciating that the appellant was not aware of any intimation having been passed