HERO MOTOCORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 11(1), NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

disallowing this claim. Therefore, Ground No. 18 to 18.2 are allowed in favour of the assessee.” From the records it can be seen that the provision for the material is worked out in respect of price amendments which were already issued on 31.03.2009 which was made on the basis of actual supplied made upto the end of the year

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

M/S. PEARL POLYMERS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed partly for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2009-10 Vs. Deputy M/S. Pearl Polymers Ltd., 204, Commissioner Of Rohit House, 3, Tolstoy Marg, Income Tax, Circle-14(1), New New Delhi Delhi Pan : Aaacp0182F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. R.K. Kapoor, Ca Respondent By Sh. F.R. Meena, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 24.08.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 18.11.2016 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against Order Dated 23/09/2013 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xvii, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi For Assessment Year 2009-10 Raising Following Grounds: “1.0 That The Learned Cit(A) Has Grossly Erred In Law & On Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Appellant’S Case In Confirming The Disallowance Of Rs.4.45.076/- U/S.40A(3Ijof The Income-Tax Act, On Wholly Untenable Grounds. 1.1 That The Learned Cit(A) Has Failed To Appreciate The Circumstances Under Which The Cash Payment Exceeding The Prescribed Limit U/S.40A(3) Had To Be Made By The Assessee, Although The Payees Were Fully Identified & Even Tds Has Been Made. 1.2 That The Disallowance Made U/S.40A(3) Is Bad In Law.

disallowance ultimately directed works out to nearly 110% of that sum, i.e., Rs.52,56,197/-. By no stretch of imagination can Section

MUFG BANK LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) CIRCLE-2(2)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Mufg Bank Ltd, Vs. Acit (International Taxation), 5Th Floor, Worldmark 2, Asset 8, Circle-2(2)(1), Aerocity, Nh-8, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aabct3880D (Appellant) (Respondent)

197,40,048/–. He further disallowed 0.5% of the average value of investment as administrative expenditure. Thus the total disallowance was computed at ₹ 22,521,366/–. The assessee has raised the first issue that it is treated the passthrough certificates as its stock in trade in case of a bank, provisions of Section

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

disallowance.”\n30. Respectfully following the decision of the coordinate Bench (supra), we allow ground\nnos.8 to 8.2.\n\n23\n31. With regard to Ground Nos.9 to 9.4 regarding income from trading in mutual\nfunds/shares treated as business income and not as long term/short term capital gain,\nld. AR of the assessee submitted as under :-\n“The appellant, as a consistent

M/S. HERO MOTOCORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2005-06

disallowance is to be made for nexus with exempt income, then only proportionate expenditure in the ratio of dividend income to capital gains should be made. 14.0 The Ld. DR defended the findings in the assessment order. It was argued that when the assessee is claiming income from investments under the head capital gains and not business income, then such

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. HERO HONDA MOTORS LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2005-06

disallowance is to be made for nexus with exempt income, then only proportionate expenditure in the ratio of dividend income to capital gains should be made. 14.0 The Ld. DR defended the findings in the assessment order. It was argued that when the assessee is claiming income from investments under the head capital gains and not business income, then such

DCIT, CIRCLE- 27(1), NEW DELHI vs. UFO MOVIEZ INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of

Bench: Shrichalla Nagendra Prasad & Dr. Brr Kumarआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.5635/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम Ufo Moviez India Ltd., Dcit Valuable Techno Park, Plot No.53/1, Vs. Circle-27(2), Road No.7, Marol Midc, Andheri (East) C.R. Building, Mumbai, Maharashtra. New Delhi. Pan No.Aabcv8900E अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.5825/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम Dcit Ufo Moviez India Ltd., Circle-27(1), Vs. Valuable Techno Park, Plot No.53/1, C.R. Building, Road No.7, Marol Midc, Andheri (East) New Delhi. Mumbai, Maharashtra. Pan No.Aabcv8900E अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 14A for the purpose of disallowance - AO on the basis of his own understanding of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules disallowed the sum of Rs.52,56,197

UFO MOVIEZ INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 27(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of

Bench: Shrichalla Nagendra Prasad & Dr. Brr Kumarआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.5635/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम Ufo Moviez India Ltd., Dcit Valuable Techno Park, Plot No.53/1, Vs. Circle-27(2), Road No.7, Marol Midc, Andheri (East) C.R. Building, Mumbai, Maharashtra. New Delhi. Pan No.Aabcv8900E अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.5825/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम Dcit Ufo Moviez India Ltd., Circle-27(1), Vs. Valuable Techno Park, Plot No.53/1, C.R. Building, Road No.7, Marol Midc, Andheri (East) New Delhi. Mumbai, Maharashtra. Pan No.Aabcv8900E अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 14A for the purpose of disallowance - AO on the basis of his own understanding of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules disallowed the sum of Rs.52,56,197

DCIT CIRCLE-10(1), C.R. BUILDING vs. INFO EDGE (INDIA) LTD., NEHRU PLACE, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sudhir Pareeksl. Ita/Co No(S) Asst. Appeal(S) By No Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 2014-15 M/S. Info Edge (India) Acit Ltd. Circle – 10(1) Gf-12A, 94, Meghdoot Delhi Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi – 110019 2. 2015-16 -Do- -Do- 3. 2017-18 -Do- -Do- 4. 2018-19 -Do- -Do- 5. 2020-21 -Do- -Do- 6. 2014-15 Dy. Cit, Circle – 10(1) M/S. Info Edge (India) New Delhi Ltd. Gf-12A, 94, Meghdoot Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi – 110019 7. 2015-16 -Do- -Do 8. 2017-18 -Do- -Do- 9. 2018-19 -Do- -Do- 10. Ita No.2648/Del/2023 2020-21 -Do- -Do- 11. Ita No.2649/Del/2023 2021-22 -Do- -Do- Assessee By Shri S. K. Aggarwal, C.A. & Ms. Jyoti Yadav, C.A. Revenue By Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit(D.R.) Date Of Hearing: 19.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.11.2024 Order Per Pradip Kumar Kedia, Am : The Captioned Eleven Appeals Arise From The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) - Delhi In Respective Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Tabulated Hereunder:

section 14A and Rule 8D. Consequently, we hold that the objection of the assessee on this score is unfounded. 4.5 Thus, in the totality of the facts and circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the CIT(A) has rightly upheld the action of the AO with some modification towards exclusion of investments not yielding exempt income which

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 10(1), NEW DELHI, C.R. BUILDING vs. INFO EDGE (INDIA) LTD., NEHRU PLACE, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sudhir Pareeksl. Ita/Co No(S) Asst. Appeal(S) By No Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 2014-15 M/S. Info Edge (India) Acit Ltd. Circle – 10(1) Gf-12A, 94, Meghdoot Delhi Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi – 110019 2. 2015-16 -Do- -Do- 3. 2017-18 -Do- -Do- 4. 2018-19 -Do- -Do- 5. 2020-21 -Do- -Do- 6. 2014-15 Dy. Cit, Circle – 10(1) M/S. Info Edge (India) New Delhi Ltd. Gf-12A, 94, Meghdoot Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi – 110019 7. 2015-16 -Do- -Do 8. 2017-18 -Do- -Do- 9. 2018-19 -Do- -Do- 10. Ita No.2648/Del/2023 2020-21 -Do- -Do- 11. Ita No.2649/Del/2023 2021-22 -Do- -Do- Assessee By Shri S. K. Aggarwal, C.A. & Ms. Jyoti Yadav, C.A. Revenue By Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit(D.R.) Date Of Hearing: 19.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.11.2024 Order Per Pradip Kumar Kedia, Am : The Captioned Eleven Appeals Arise From The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) - Delhi In Respective Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Tabulated Hereunder:

section 14A and Rule 8D. Consequently, we hold that the objection of the assessee on this score is unfounded. 4.5 Thus, in the totality of the facts and circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the CIT(A) has rightly upheld the action of the AO with some modification towards exclusion of investments not yielding exempt income which

INFO EDGE (INDIA) LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 10(1), DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sudhir Pareeksl. Ita/Co No(S) Asst. Appeal(S) By No Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 2014-15 M/S. Info Edge (India) Acit Ltd. Circle – 10(1) Gf-12A, 94, Meghdoot Delhi Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi – 110019 2. 2015-16 -Do- -Do- 3. 2017-18 -Do- -Do- 4. 2018-19 -Do- -Do- 5. 2020-21 -Do- -Do- 6. 2014-15 Dy. Cit, Circle – 10(1) M/S. Info Edge (India) New Delhi Ltd. Gf-12A, 94, Meghdoot Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi – 110019 7. 2015-16 -Do- -Do 8. 2017-18 -Do- -Do- 9. 2018-19 -Do- -Do- 10. Ita No.2648/Del/2023 2020-21 -Do- -Do- 11. Ita No.2649/Del/2023 2021-22 -Do- -Do- Assessee By Shri S. K. Aggarwal, C.A. & Ms. Jyoti Yadav, C.A. Revenue By Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit(D.R.) Date Of Hearing: 19.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.11.2024 Order Per Pradip Kumar Kedia, Am : The Captioned Eleven Appeals Arise From The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) - Delhi In Respective Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Tabulated Hereunder:

section 14A and Rule 8D. Consequently, we hold that the objection of the assessee on this score is unfounded. 4.5 Thus, in the totality of the facts and circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the CIT(A) has rightly upheld the action of the AO with some modification towards exclusion of investments not yielding exempt income which

INFO EDGE (INDIA) LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 10(1), DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sudhir Pareeksl. Ita/Co No(S) Asst. Appeal(S) By No Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 2014-15 M/S. Info Edge (India) Acit Ltd. Circle – 10(1) Gf-12A, 94, Meghdoot Delhi Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi – 110019 2. 2015-16 -Do- -Do- 3. 2017-18 -Do- -Do- 4. 2018-19 -Do- -Do- 5. 2020-21 -Do- -Do- 6. 2014-15 Dy. Cit, Circle – 10(1) M/S. Info Edge (India) New Delhi Ltd. Gf-12A, 94, Meghdoot Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi – 110019 7. 2015-16 -Do- -Do 8. 2017-18 -Do- -Do- 9. 2018-19 -Do- -Do- 10. Ita No.2648/Del/2023 2020-21 -Do- -Do- 11. Ita No.2649/Del/2023 2021-22 -Do- -Do- Assessee By Shri S. K. Aggarwal, C.A. & Ms. Jyoti Yadav, C.A. Revenue By Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit(D.R.) Date Of Hearing: 19.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.11.2024 Order Per Pradip Kumar Kedia, Am : The Captioned Eleven Appeals Arise From The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) - Delhi In Respective Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Tabulated Hereunder:

section 14A and Rule 8D. Consequently, we hold that the objection of the assessee on this score is unfounded. 4.5 Thus, in the totality of the facts and circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the CIT(A) has rightly upheld the action of the AO with some modification towards exclusion of investments not yielding exempt income which

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 10(1), NEW DELHI, C.R. BUILDING vs. INFO EDGE (INDIA) LTD., NEHRU PLACE, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sudhir Pareeksl. Ita/Co No(S) Asst. Appeal(S) By No Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 2014-15 M/S. Info Edge (India) Acit Ltd. Circle – 10(1) Gf-12A, 94, Meghdoot Delhi Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi – 110019 2. 2015-16 -Do- -Do- 3. 2017-18 -Do- -Do- 4. 2018-19 -Do- -Do- 5. 2020-21 -Do- -Do- 6. 2014-15 Dy. Cit, Circle – 10(1) M/S. Info Edge (India) New Delhi Ltd. Gf-12A, 94, Meghdoot Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi – 110019 7. 2015-16 -Do- -Do 8. 2017-18 -Do- -Do- 9. 2018-19 -Do- -Do- 10. Ita No.2648/Del/2023 2020-21 -Do- -Do- 11. Ita No.2649/Del/2023 2021-22 -Do- -Do- Assessee By Shri S. K. Aggarwal, C.A. & Ms. Jyoti Yadav, C.A. Revenue By Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit(D.R.) Date Of Hearing: 19.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.11.2024 Order Per Pradip Kumar Kedia, Am : The Captioned Eleven Appeals Arise From The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) - Delhi In Respective Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Tabulated Hereunder:

section 14A and Rule 8D. Consequently, we hold that the objection of the assessee on this score is unfounded. 4.5 Thus, in the totality of the facts and circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the CIT(A) has rightly upheld the action of the AO with some modification towards exclusion of investments not yielding exempt income which

PRABODH SHARMA, DY. CIT10(1), NEW DELHI, C. R. BUILDING vs. INFO EDGE (INDIA) LTD., NEHRU PLACE, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sudhir Pareeksl. Ita/Co No(S) Asst. Appeal(S) By No Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 2014-15 M/S. Info Edge (India) Acit Ltd. Circle – 10(1) Gf-12A, 94, Meghdoot Delhi Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi – 110019 2. 2015-16 -Do- -Do- 3. 2017-18 -Do- -Do- 4. 2018-19 -Do- -Do- 5. 2020-21 -Do- -Do- 6. 2014-15 Dy. Cit, Circle – 10(1) M/S. Info Edge (India) New Delhi Ltd. Gf-12A, 94, Meghdoot Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi – 110019 7. 2015-16 -Do- -Do 8. 2017-18 -Do- -Do- 9. 2018-19 -Do- -Do- 10. Ita No.2648/Del/2023 2020-21 -Do- -Do- 11. Ita No.2649/Del/2023 2021-22 -Do- -Do- Assessee By Shri S. K. Aggarwal, C.A. & Ms. Jyoti Yadav, C.A. Revenue By Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit(D.R.) Date Of Hearing: 19.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.11.2024 Order Per Pradip Kumar Kedia, Am : The Captioned Eleven Appeals Arise From The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) - Delhi In Respective Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Tabulated Hereunder:

section 14A and Rule 8D. Consequently, we hold that the objection of the assessee on this score is unfounded. 4.5 Thus, in the totality of the facts and circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the CIT(A) has rightly upheld the action of the AO with some modification towards exclusion of investments not yielding exempt income which

INFO EDGE (INDIA) LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 10(1), DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sudhir Pareeksl. Ita/Co No(S) Asst. Appeal(S) By No Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 2014-15 M/S. Info Edge (India) Acit Ltd. Circle – 10(1) Gf-12A, 94, Meghdoot Delhi Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi – 110019 2. 2015-16 -Do- -Do- 3. 2017-18 -Do- -Do- 4. 2018-19 -Do- -Do- 5. 2020-21 -Do- -Do- 6. 2014-15 Dy. Cit, Circle – 10(1) M/S. Info Edge (India) New Delhi Ltd. Gf-12A, 94, Meghdoot Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi – 110019 7. 2015-16 -Do- -Do 8. 2017-18 -Do- -Do- 9. 2018-19 -Do- -Do- 10. Ita No.2648/Del/2023 2020-21 -Do- -Do- 11. Ita No.2649/Del/2023 2021-22 -Do- -Do- Assessee By Shri S. K. Aggarwal, C.A. & Ms. Jyoti Yadav, C.A. Revenue By Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit(D.R.) Date Of Hearing: 19.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.11.2024 Order Per Pradip Kumar Kedia, Am : The Captioned Eleven Appeals Arise From The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) - Delhi In Respective Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Tabulated Hereunder:

section 14A and Rule 8D. Consequently, we hold that the objection of the assessee on this score is unfounded. 4.5 Thus, in the totality of the facts and circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the CIT(A) has rightly upheld the action of the AO with some modification towards exclusion of investments not yielding exempt income which

DCIT, CIRCLE 10(1), NEW DELHI, C. R. BUILDING vs. INFO EDGE (INDIA) LTD., NEHRU PLACE, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sudhir Pareeksl. Ita/Co No(S) Asst. Appeal(S) By No Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 2014-15 M/S. Info Edge (India) Acit Ltd. Circle – 10(1) Gf-12A, 94, Meghdoot Delhi Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi – 110019 2. 2015-16 -Do- -Do- 3. 2017-18 -Do- -Do- 4. 2018-19 -Do- -Do- 5. 2020-21 -Do- -Do- 6. 2014-15 Dy. Cit, Circle – 10(1) M/S. Info Edge (India) New Delhi Ltd. Gf-12A, 94, Meghdoot Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi – 110019 7. 2015-16 -Do- -Do 8. 2017-18 -Do- -Do- 9. 2018-19 -Do- -Do- 10. Ita No.2648/Del/2023 2020-21 -Do- -Do- 11. Ita No.2649/Del/2023 2021-22 -Do- -Do- Assessee By Shri S. K. Aggarwal, C.A. & Ms. Jyoti Yadav, C.A. Revenue By Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit(D.R.) Date Of Hearing: 19.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.11.2024 Order Per Pradip Kumar Kedia, Am : The Captioned Eleven Appeals Arise From The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) - Delhi In Respective Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Tabulated Hereunder:

section 14A and Rule 8D. Consequently, we hold that the objection of the assessee on this score is unfounded. 4.5 Thus, in the totality of the facts and circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the CIT(A) has rightly upheld the action of the AO with some modification towards exclusion of investments not yielding exempt income which

INFO EDGE (INDIA) LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 10(1), DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sudhir Pareeksl. Ita/Co No(S) Asst. Appeal(S) By No Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 2014-15 M/S. Info Edge (India) Acit Ltd. Circle – 10(1) Gf-12A, 94, Meghdoot Delhi Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi – 110019 2. 2015-16 -Do- -Do- 3. 2017-18 -Do- -Do- 4. 2018-19 -Do- -Do- 5. 2020-21 -Do- -Do- 6. 2014-15 Dy. Cit, Circle – 10(1) M/S. Info Edge (India) New Delhi Ltd. Gf-12A, 94, Meghdoot Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi – 110019 7. 2015-16 -Do- -Do 8. 2017-18 -Do- -Do- 9. 2018-19 -Do- -Do- 10. Ita No.2648/Del/2023 2020-21 -Do- -Do- 11. Ita No.2649/Del/2023 2021-22 -Do- -Do- Assessee By Shri S. K. Aggarwal, C.A. & Ms. Jyoti Yadav, C.A. Revenue By Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit(D.R.) Date Of Hearing: 19.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.11.2024 Order Per Pradip Kumar Kedia, Am : The Captioned Eleven Appeals Arise From The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) - Delhi In Respective Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Tabulated Hereunder:

section 14A and Rule 8D. Consequently, we hold that the objection of the assessee on this score is unfounded. 4.5 Thus, in the totality of the facts and circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the CIT(A) has rightly upheld the action of the AO with some modification towards exclusion of investments not yielding exempt income which