EBRO INDIA PVT.LTD. ,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-7(1), DELHI

In the result, the ground no 4 raised by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Accountant Member)

disallowances have been made by the assessing officer without considering the relevant submissions and detailed documentary evidences placed on record by the appellant, despite the specific directions of the DRP. Further, the documentary evidences have not been controverted by the assessing officer before making the additions. 41. In fact, the appellant had, during the course of assessment proceedings even offered

DILEEP K GUPTA,DELHI vs. DCIT CC-31, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

119 of the Act and reproduced Para 9 of Chapter 3 of Volume-II(Technical) of the Manual, which reads as under:- “9. Approval for assessment – An assessment order under Chapter XIV-B can be passed only with the previous approval of the range JCIT/Addl.CIT (for the period from 30- 6-1995 to 31-12-1996 the approving authority

DILEEP K GUPTA,DELHI vs. DCIT CC-31, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

119 of the Act and reproduced Para 9 of Chapter 3 of Volume-II(Technical) of the Manual, which reads as under:- “9. Approval for assessment – An assessment order under Chapter XIV-B can be passed only with the previous approval of the range JCIT/Addl.CIT (for the period from 30- 6-1995 to 31-12-1996 the approving authority

DILEEP K GUPTA,DELHI vs. DCIT, CC-31 , DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

119 of the Act and reproduced Para 9 of Chapter 3 of Volume-II(Technical) of the Manual, which reads as under:- “9. Approval for assessment – An assessment order under Chapter XIV-B can be passed only with the previous approval of the range JCIT/Addl.CIT (for the period from 30- 6-1995 to 31-12-1996 the approving authority

DILEEP K GUPTA,DELHI vs. DCIT CC-31 , DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

119 of the Act and reproduced Para 9 of Chapter 3 of Volume-II(Technical) of the Manual, which reads as under:- “9. Approval for assessment – An assessment order under Chapter XIV-B can be passed only with the previous approval of the range JCIT/Addl.CIT (for the period from 30- 6-1995 to 31-12-1996 the approving authority

DILEEP K GUPTA,DELHI vs. DCIT, CC-31, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

119 of the Act and reproduced Para 9 of Chapter 3 of Volume-II(Technical) of the Manual, which reads as under:- “9. Approval for assessment – An assessment order under Chapter XIV-B can be passed only with the previous approval of the range JCIT/Addl.CIT (for the period from 30- 6-1995 to 31-12-1996 the approving authority

DILEEP K GUPTA,DELHI vs. DCIT CC-31, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

119 of the Act and reproduced Para 9 of Chapter 3 of Volume-II(Technical) of the Manual, which reads as under:- “9. Approval for assessment – An assessment order under Chapter XIV-B can be passed only with the previous approval of the range JCIT/Addl.CIT (for the period from 30- 6-1995 to 31-12-1996 the approving authority

NITIGYA READY MIX PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT CPC, BENGALORE , KARNATAKA BENGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2018-19] Nitigya Ready Mix Pvt.Ltd., Vs Dcit, 510-511, 5Th Floor, Ild Trade Centre, Cpc, Sohna Road, Sector-47, Gurgaon, Bengalore. Haryana-122001. Pan-Aafcn7423G Appellant Respondent Appellant By Ms. Monika Agarwal, Ca Respondent By Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 22.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 22.02.2022

119 (Kerala) is as under: "Section 36(1)(va), read with sections 2(24)(x) and 43B, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Employee's contributions (Section 36(1)(va) v. section 43B) - Assessment year 2010- 11 - Whether section 36(1)(va) and section 43B(b) operate in different fields i.e. former takes care of employee's contribution and latter

DCIT, HISAR vs. M/S SYNERGY WASTE MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD.,, HISAR

In the result, all the five captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

disallowed the deduction u/s 80IA to the tune of Rs. 4,12,98,980/- treating the return as late. 2 ITA Nos.5701-5704/Del/2016 Your Honour the assessee company complied with all the requirements for filing the return well on time, which would prove that there was no error on part of the assessee company to delay the return. Mentioned below

DCIT, HISAR vs. M/S SYNERGY WASTE MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD.,, HISAR

In the result, all the five captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

disallowed the deduction u/s 80IA to the tune of Rs. 4,12,98,980/- treating the return as late. 2 ITA Nos.5701-5704/Del/2016 Your Honour the assessee company complied with all the requirements for filing the return well on time, which would prove that there was no error on part of the assessee company to delay the return. Mentioned below

DCIT, HISAR vs. M/S SYNERGY WASTE MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD.,, HISAR

In the result, all the five captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

disallowed the deduction u/s 80IA to the tune of Rs. 4,12,98,980/- treating the return as late. 2 ITA Nos.5701-5704/Del/2016 Your Honour the assessee company complied with all the requirements for filing the return well on time, which would prove that there was no error on part of the assessee company to delay the return. Mentioned below

DCIT, HISAR vs. M/S SYNERGY WASTE MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD.,, HISAR

In the result, all the five captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

disallowed the deduction u/s 80IA to the tune of Rs. 4,12,98,980/- treating the return as late. 2 ITA Nos.5701-5704/Del/2016 Your Honour the assessee company complied with all the requirements for filing the return well on time, which would prove that there was no error on part of the assessee company to delay the return. Mentioned below

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

SECTION 45, READ WITH SECTION 28(i), OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 - CAPITAL GAINS, CHARGEABLE AS - ISSUE OF TAXABILITY OF SURPLUS ON SALE OF SHARES AND SECURITIES - CAPITAL GAINS OR BUSINESS INCOME - INSTRUCTIONS IN ORDER TO REDUCE LITIGATION CIRCULAR NO.6/2016 [F.NO.225/12/2016-ITA-II], DATED 29-2-2016 1. Sub-section (14) of section 2 of the Income

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

SECTION 45, READ WITH SECTION 28(i), OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 - CAPITAL GAINS, CHARGEABLE AS - ISSUE OF TAXABILITY OF SURPLUS ON SALE OF SHARES AND SECURITIES - CAPITAL GAINS OR BUSINESS INCOME - INSTRUCTIONS IN ORDER TO REDUCE LITIGATION CIRCULAR NO.6/2016 [F.NO.225/12/2016-ITA-II], DATED 29-2-2016 1. Sub-section (14) of section 2 of the Income

LENIENT CONSULTANTS PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed\nas indicated above

119 of\nthe Act and reproduced Para 9 of Chapter 3 of Volume-II (Technical)\nof the Manual, which reads as under:-\n“9. Approval for assessment An assessment order under\nChapter XIV-B can be passed only with the previous approval of\nthe range JCIT/Addl.CIT (for the period from 30-6-1995 to 31-\n12-1996 the approving authority

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

2. At the outset, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee was 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

KAUR KOOKIES (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. PR,CIT, DELHI-4, NEW DELHI

Appeal are allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2017-18

119-125 of JPB). Nothing bars/prohibits the CIT from collecting and relying upon new/additional material/evidence to show and state that the order of the Assessing Officer is erroneous.' 5. In the present case, inquiries were certainly conducted by the Assessing Officer. It is not a case of no inquiry. The order under Section 263 itself records that the Director felt

DILEEP KUMAR GUPTA,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-31, DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

B’, NEW DELHI\nBEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER\n&\nSHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nITA No. 3592 & 3593/DEL/2023\n[Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15]\nDILEEP KUMAR GUPTA\nVs\nDCIT\n311, Sanjay Enclave,\nAdarsh Nagar,\nNorthwest Delhi.\nPAN No. AADPG 4888K\n(APPELLANT)\nCentral Cirle-31\nNew Delhi\n(RESPONDENT)\nAppellant by\nRespondent by\nShri Pranav Yadav