PERNOD RICARD INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the recalled matter of the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

section 292C of the Act and accordingly, made disallowance of Rs. 10.80 lakhs. 50. Objection of the assessee did not result

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT vs. PMK IMPEX PRIVATE LIMITED , ATMA RAM HOUSE

292C. [(1)] Where any books of account, other documents, money,\nbullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing are or is found in the\npossession or control of any person in the course of a search under\nKhemka Group\n26\nsection 132 [or survey under section 133A], it may, in any proceeding\nunder this Act, be presumed-\n(i) that

PARAM DAIRY LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 14, NEW DELHI

In the result, for both the years, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

disallowed, specifically when Assessing Officer has neither found any defects in the books of account or has disturbed the trading result. Apart from that, the said Annexure itself contains the details of transaction for purchase of packing material which specifies, the name, purchases amount, TDS, cheque, cash, etc. Only the amounts mentioned in column ‘cash’ has been treated as unexplained

PARAM DAIRY LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 14, NEW DELHI

In the result, for both the years, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

disallowed, specifically when Assessing Officer has neither found any defects in the books of account or has disturbed the trading result. Apart from that, the said Annexure itself contains the details of transaction for purchase of packing material which specifies, the name, purchases amount, TDS, cheque, cash, etc. Only the amounts mentioned in column ‘cash’ has been treated as unexplained

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MAJESTIC PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA 3115/Del/2014 for AY 2010-11 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 292C of the Act had been duly shifted by the assessee to the income tax department right from the time of search, which fact also stood corroborated by an affidavit. Further, the ld CIT(A) had noted in his findings that the some of the names mentioned in the slip pad like Mohitji, Shri Ram Hari

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MAJESTIC PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA 3115/Del/2014 for AY 2010-11 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 292C of the Act had been duly shifted by the assessee to the income tax department right from the time of search, which fact also stood corroborated by an affidavit. Further, the ld CIT(A) had noted in his findings that the some of the names mentioned in the slip pad like Mohitji, Shri Ram Hari

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. RAJAT GUPTA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA 3115/Del/2014 for AY 2010-11 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 292C of the Act had been duly shifted by the assessee to the income tax department right from the time of search, which fact also stood corroborated by an affidavit. Further, the ld CIT(A) had noted in his findings that the some of the names mentioned in the slip pad like Mohitji, Shri Ram Hari

M/S MAJESTIC PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA 3115/Del/2014 for AY 2010-11 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 292C of the Act had been duly shifted by the assessee to the income tax department right from the time of search, which fact also stood corroborated by an affidavit. Further, the ld CIT(A) had noted in his findings that the some of the names mentioned in the slip pad like Mohitji, Shri Ram Hari

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MAJESTIC PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA 3115/Del/2014 for AY 2010-11 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 292C of the Act had been duly shifted by the assessee to the income tax department right from the time of search, which fact also stood corroborated by an affidavit. Further, the ld CIT(A) had noted in his findings that the some of the names mentioned in the slip pad like Mohitji, Shri Ram Hari

M/S. MAJESTIC PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA 3115/Del/2014 for AY 2010-11 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 292C of the Act had been duly shifted by the assessee to the income tax department right from the time of search, which fact also stood corroborated by an affidavit. Further, the ld CIT(A) had noted in his findings that the some of the names mentioned in the slip pad like Mohitji, Shri Ram Hari

GD FOODS MANUFACTURING (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 26, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. N. Chary

disallowable. Naturally, he submitted that such vouchers and bills as available in case of expenses recorded in the books of accounts are not expected. iii. He submitted that there is no denial that provision of section 132 (4A) and section 292C

GD FOODS MANUFACTURING (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 26, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. N. Chary

disallowable. Naturally, he submitted that such vouchers and bills as available in case of expenses recorded in the books of accounts are not expected. iii. He submitted that there is no denial that provision of section 132 (4A) and section 292C

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 26, NEW DELHI vs. GD FOODS MANUFACTURING (INDIA) PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. N. Chary

disallowable. Naturally, he submitted that such vouchers and bills as available in case of expenses recorded in the books of accounts are not expected. iii. He submitted that there is no denial that provision of section 132 (4A) and section 292C

GD FOODS MANUFACTURING (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 26, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. N. Chary

disallowable. Naturally, he submitted that such vouchers and bills as available in case of expenses recorded in the books of accounts are not expected. iii. He submitted that there is no denial that provision of section 132 (4A) and section 292C

GD FOODS MANUFACTURING (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 26, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. N. Chary

disallowable. Naturally, he submitted that such vouchers and bills as available in case of expenses recorded in the books of accounts are not expected. iii. He submitted that there is no denial that provision of section 132 (4A) and section 292C

GD FOODS MANUFACTURING (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 26, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. N. Chary

disallowable. Naturally, he submitted that such vouchers and bills as available in case of expenses recorded in the books of accounts are not expected. iii. He submitted that there is no denial that provision of section 132 (4A) and section 292C

GD FOODS MANUFACTURING (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 26, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. N. Chary

disallowable. Naturally, he submitted that such vouchers and bills as available in case of expenses recorded in the books of accounts are not expected. iii. He submitted that there is no denial that provision of section 132 (4A) and section 292C

GD FOODS MANUFACTURING (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 26, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. N. Chary

disallowable. Naturally, he submitted that such vouchers and bills as available in case of expenses recorded in the books of accounts are not expected. iii. He submitted that there is no denial that provision of section 132 (4A) and section 292C