JCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DAAWAT FOODS LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannua N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

disallowance made by the assessing officer and held that the assessee was engaged in the integrated business of transporting, handling and storage of foodgrains and condition stipulated in section 80IB(11A

RANBIR SINGH SOROUT,FARIDABAD vs. ITO,WARD-2(2), FARIDABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

11A, Vs. Ward-2(2), Faridabad. Faridabad, Haryana. PAN No.AZHPS3384D अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by Shri A.K. Pandey, Adv. & Shri Arvind Saini, CA Revenue by Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date of hearing: 04.08.2025 20.08.2025 उ"ोषणाक"तारीख/Pronouncement on आदेश /O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD, J.M. These appeals are filed

RANBIR SINGH SOROUT,FARIDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), FARIDABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

11A, Vs. Ward-2(2), Faridabad. Faridabad, Haryana. PAN No.AZHPS3384D अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by Shri A.K. Pandey, Adv. & Shri Arvind Saini, CA Revenue by Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date of hearing: 04.08.2025 20.08.2025 उ"ोषणाक"तारीख/Pronouncement on आदेश /O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD, J.M. These appeals are filed

ADIDAS INDIA MARKETING PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. NATIONAL E- ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Us & Stay Application No.73/Del/2021 (Assessment Year : 2016-17)

11A, Vishnu DIGAMBAR MARG, New Delhi, Delhi – 110002. PAN : AAACA 5313 P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by Shri Rishabh Malhotra, A.R. Shri Ravi Sharma, Adv. Revenue by Shri Surender Pal, CIT (D.R.) Shri Mrinal Kumar Das, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing: 24.03.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 05.04.2022 ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI vs. AL AMMAR FROZEN FOODS EXPORTS PVT. LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and cross\nobjection filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

11A) in its original return and filed revised returns. Software errors led to incorrect adjustments of brought forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation. The CPC issued an intimation under Section 143(1) proposing disallowance

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JHANDEWALAN EXTN. vs. OM PRAKASH ARORA, CONNAUGHT PLACE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue vide ITA No

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2015-16] Assistant Commissioner Of Om Prakash Arora, Income Tax, Central Circle-01, M-3, Flat No.103, Avg Bhawan E-2, Jhandewalan Extn. Vs The Variety Books Depot. New Delhi-110055 Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001 Pan-Accpa9774F Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.42/Del/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No.5031/Del/2024) [Assessment Year: 2015-16] Om Prakash Arora, Assistant Commissioner Of Income M-3, Flat No.103, Avg Tax, Central Circle-01, Bhawan The Variety Books Vs E-2, Jhandewalan Extn. Depot. Connaught Place, New Delhi-110055 New Delhi-110001 Pan-Accpa9774F Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2016-17] Assistant Commissioner Of Om Prakash Arora, Income Tax, Central Circle-01, M-3, Flat No.103, Avg Bhawan E-2, Jhandewalan Extn. Vs The Variety Books Depot. New Delhi-110055 Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001 Pan-Accpa9774F Assessee Revenue

section 68 has been found to be correct. We have also noted that the observation of ld. CIT(A) regarding failure of the ld. AO to bring on record any evidence to support cash expenditure on repair and maintenance of building by the assessee, is also correct. Thus, we have noted that the order

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JHANDEWALAN EXTN. vs. OM PRAKASH ARORA, CONNAUGHT PLACE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue vide ITA No

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2015-16] Assistant Commissioner Of Om Prakash Arora, Income Tax, Central Circle-01, M-3, Flat No.103, Avg Bhawan E-2, Jhandewalan Extn. Vs The Variety Books Depot. New Delhi-110055 Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001 Pan-Accpa9774F Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.42/Del/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No.5031/Del/2024) [Assessment Year: 2015-16] Om Prakash Arora, Assistant Commissioner Of Income M-3, Flat No.103, Avg Tax, Central Circle-01, Bhawan The Variety Books Vs E-2, Jhandewalan Extn. Depot. Connaught Place, New Delhi-110055 New Delhi-110001 Pan-Accpa9774F Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2016-17] Assistant Commissioner Of Om Prakash Arora, Income Tax, Central Circle-01, M-3, Flat No.103, Avg Bhawan E-2, Jhandewalan Extn. Vs The Variety Books Depot. New Delhi-110055 Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001 Pan-Accpa9774F Assessee Revenue

section 68 has been found to be correct. We have also noted that the observation of ld. CIT(A) regarding failure of the ld. AO to bring on record any evidence to support cash expenditure on repair and maintenance of building by the assessee, is also correct. Thus, we have noted that the order

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

JCIT SPL. RANGE-12, NEW DELHI vs. ARIHANTA INDUSTRIES, DELHI

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

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

disallowance made u/s 68 of the Act by the AO on account of sales to the tune of Rs.10,73,87,706/- and holding that the assessee is eligible for deduction u/s 801C of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) has not appreciated the fact that in the concerned year, the assessee had consumed raw materials only

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE , GHAZIABAD vs. A1-DUA FOOD PROCESSING PRIVATE LIMITED, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareekacit, Central Circle, Vs. Al-Dua Food Processing Pvt. Ltd., Ghaziabad. 16, Fire Brigade Lane, Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001. (Pan : Aagca0396J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Deepak Singh, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Javed Akhtar, Citdr Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 Date Of Order : 06.12.2024 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-4, Kanpur [Hereinafter Referred To ‘Ld. Cit (A)’] Dated 25.01.2023 For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of Rs.8,76,98,220/- On 30.11.2017. The Return Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’). The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass & Statutory Notices

section, the appellant is eligible for 100% deduction on the profit from the eligible business. In the assessment order it has been found that Ld. AO has computed NP by rejecting books of accounts at Rs. 41,12,46,052/- and Since the appellant has shown NP of Rs. 17,64,57,430/-, net addition

ACIT, CIRCLE- 19(1), DELHI vs. PNC RAJASTHAN HIGHWAYS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, relevant grounds of the Revenue are dismissed

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

section of NH-11A extension in the state of Rajasthan under NHDP Phase IV on Hybrid Annuity Mode. The company filed the return of income for the AY 2020-21 on 29/12/2020 declaring total loss at Rs. 24,33,09,074/-, the income was assessed u/s 143(3) at assessed income of Rs. 2,20,34,35,833/- after making

Commissioner of Income Tax – I

disallowed the claim for deduction/exemption of Rs.12,17,41,860/- under Section 10B, as made in the return. He also made additions in alternative. Total 2015:DHC:1179-DB ITA 551/2013 & 553/2013 Page 4 of 30 income of the assessee on the basis of aforesaid addition and other additions was computed at Rs.10,86,14,708/-. 6. The assessee succeeded

ITO,, NEW DELHI vs. M/S NORTH WEST SALES AND MARKETING P. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

11a[Joint Commissioner] (Appeals)] 12[or, as the case may be, the Commissioner (Appeals)] records in writing the reasons for its admission. 13(3) The 14[14a[Joint Commissioner] (Appeals)] 15[or, as the case may be, the Commissioner (Appeals)] shall not take into account any evidence produced under sub-rule (1) unless the 16[Assessing Officer] has been allowed