TAPI JWIL JV,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-62(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6722/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 4873/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Tapi Jwil Jv, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/O C. S. Anand, Adv., Ward-62(4), 104, Pankaj Tower, 10, L.S.C. New Delhi Savita Vihar, Delhi-110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadat3744J Assessee By : Sh. C. S. Anand, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Amitabh K. Sinha, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2023 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:

disallow the expenditure, moreover with the structuring of the JV provisions of Section 40A(2)(b) are not attracted in the given facts and circumstances of the instant case. 9. Reliance is being placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Oriental Structural Engineers & Ors.(374 ITR 35) wherein it was held – “dismissing

W SERVE TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Anubhav Sharma

Disallowance of business expenditure on account of non- deduction of tax on payment to resident payee …………………………………. (Not reproduced as not relevant) III. Fee and penalty for delay in furnishing of TDS/TCS Statement and penalty for incorrect information in TDS/TCS Statement As per the existing provisions of the Income-tax Act, a deductor is required to furnish a periodical TDS statement

W SERVE TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Anubhav Sharma

Disallowance of business expenditure on account of non- deduction of tax on payment to resident payee …………………………………. (Not reproduced as not relevant) III. Fee and penalty for delay in furnishing of TDS/TCS Statement and penalty for incorrect information in TDS/TCS Statement As per the existing provisions of the Income-tax Act, a deductor is required to furnish a periodical TDS statement

VINAY CHAUDHARY,PITAMPURA vs. ACIT INT TAX 1(2)(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed

Bench: “Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

D E R PER RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN , J.M.: This appeal is filed by the appellant/assessee against the final assessment order dated 18.10.2023 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), in pursuant to the direction of Ld. 1 Vinay Chaudhary Dispute Resolution Panel-2, New Delhi (Ld. DRP) u/s 144C

TALHA KHAN,MOHALLA AFGANAN PO AMROHA vs. ADDL.JT.DY.ACIT.NFAC, NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC) DELHI

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Vimal Kumara.Yr. : 2017-18 Talha Khan, Vs. National Faceless Mohalla Afganan Po Amroha, Appeal Centre (Nfac), Amroha-244221 Delhi Uttar Pradesh (Pan: Ejspk7379K) (Appellant) (Respondent)

disallowance has been confirmed rejecting the explanation given by the assessee in this regard. 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in iaw and being admitted fact on record, the AO has wrongly presumed cash deposits of Rs. 1,14,57,570 as deemed concealed or unexplained income under section 69A/115BBE through net taking

REENA JAIN,MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. ITO,WARD 3(2)(4), MUZAFFARNAGAR

In the result the appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

272A(1)(d) of the Act. 7. Appeal of the assessee is allowed. ITA No. 2577/Del/2022: 8. This appeal preferred by the assessee is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 26.08.2022, pertaining to the assessment year 2018-19. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1

REENA JAIN ,MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. ITO, WARD 3(2)(4) , MUZAFFARNAGAR

In the result the appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

272A(1)(d) of the Act. 7. Appeal of the assessee is allowed. ITA No. 2577/Del/2022: 8. This appeal preferred by the assessee is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 26.08.2022, pertaining to the assessment year 2018-19. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1

GM INTERNATIONAL ,DELHI vs. AO WARD-36(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

disallowance of interest expenses amounting to Rs. 12,38,800/-. 6. Assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). 7. In the meantime, pending adjudication of the appeal by the ld. CIT(A), the PCIT assumed jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act and issued a show cause notice to the assessee which reads as under

ASHOK WASAN ,NEW DELHI vs. CIRCLE-61(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

272A(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for non-compliance of notices issued under section 142(1)/143(2) was issued to assessee. 6. Further, records in the form of Income Tax Return, 26AS as retrieved from system and bank statements given by assessee on 20.11.2019 have been perused. On further examination of the facts, a sharp increase

M/S ABAXIAL ARCHITECTS P. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : The Appellant, M/s. Abaxial Architects P. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘assessee’) by filing the present appeal sought to set aside the impugned order dated 06.01.2016 passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-I, New Delhi, qua the assessment year 2012-13 on the grounds inter alia that :- “1. That

ER AUTO PVT LTD,ROHTAK vs. ITO WARD - (TDS) , ROHTAK

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

272A(2)(j) of the Income Tax Act on account of delay in furnishing of Form 27C.” 4. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by CIT(A) confirming the additions made by AO u/s 201(1) & 201(1A) of the Act by holding that the assessee in default for not deducting tax on freight

ER AUTO PVT LTD,ROHTAK vs. ITO WARD - (TDS) , ROHTAK

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

272A(2)(j) of the Income Tax Act on account of delay in furnishing of Form 27C.” 4. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by CIT(A) confirming the additions made by AO u/s 201(1) & 201(1A) of the Act by holding that the assessee in default for not deducting tax on freight

ER AUTO PVT LTD,ROHTAK vs. ITO WARD - (TDS) , ROHTAK

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

272A(2)(j) of the Income Tax Act on account of delay in furnishing of Form 27C.” 4. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by CIT(A) confirming the additions made by AO u/s 201(1) & 201(1A) of the Act by holding that the assessee in default for not deducting tax on freight

M/S. PERFECT SPRAY PAC PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed and consequently penalty order stands quashed

Bench: Shri J.S. Reddy & Shri Kuldip Singh

D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : Appellant, M/s. Perfect Spray Pac Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ‘the assessee’), by filing the present appeal sought to set aside the impugned order dated 21.01.2014 passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-XVII, New Delhi, affirming the penalty order dated 26.11.2012 passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income

YOUNG INDIAN,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT(E), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conference)

DISALLOWANCE OF RS.50,00,000/- PAID FOR ASSIGNMENT OF LOAN FROM AJL AS AN EXPENSE INCURRED TOWARDS THE OBJECTS 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of the AO of not granting deduction of Rs.50,00,000/- paid by the Appellant for assignment

MARKETHILL CORPORATE ADVISORY SERVICES PVT LTD,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-16(2), DELHI

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON'BLE (Vice President)

section 143(3) hence the order is liable to be quashed full arguments shall be advanced at the time of the hearing. 4. The CIT(A) has erred on facts and law by making the additions of Rs. 48,13,200/- under “Income From Business & Profession” i.e. treating the entire transactions as “unexplained expenditure” without taking the genuineness

DCIT, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD vs. UNITED EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY C/O NIMT COLLEGE, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

272A(2)(e) & not denying exemption u/s 11 of the Act. VII. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and law in confirming the action of AO in taking Rs. 6,61,58,482/- as returned income of the Assessee. VIII. On the facts and circumstances of the case

DCIT, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD vs. UNITED EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY C/O NIMT COLLEGE, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

272A(2)(e) & not denying exemption u/s 11 of the Act. VII. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and law in confirming the action of AO in taking Rs. 6,61,58,482/- as returned income of the Assessee. VIII. On the facts and circumstances of the case

UNITED EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY C/O NIMT COLLEGE,GHAZIABAD vs. JCIT, RANGE- 2 , GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

272A(2)(e) & not denying exemption u/s 11 of the Act. VII. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and law in confirming the action of AO in taking Rs. 6,61,58,482/- as returned income of the Assessee. VIII. On the facts and circumstances of the case