DEEPAK KATHARI,KANPUR vs. ACIT, CC-5, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

vii) of section 56(2). DCIT Vs Veena Goyal (ITAT Jaipur) Appeal Number: ITA No. 751JPI2020 the same has been reiterated Without prejudice to what has been stated above, the Ld. A.O, in complete haste, has made several errors while drawing the assessment order in as much that the number of bonus shares received by the appellant have not been

INDIA TODAY ONLINE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 12(2), NEW DELHI

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuita Nos. 6453 & 6454/Del/2018 Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15

disallowance under section 56(2)(viib) at the rate of Rs. 3.06 per share, in its computation of income, that means, fair market value of its shares was worked out at Rs. 40.23 and the said working was accepted by AO in order of assessment passed under section 143(3) of the Act. e. Further, M/s Mail Today Newspaper

INDIA TODAY ONLINE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 12(2), NEW DELHI

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuita Nos. 6453 & 6454/Del/2018 Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15

disallowance under section 56(2)(viib) at the rate of Rs. 3.06 per share, in its computation of income, that means, fair market value of its shares was worked out at Rs. 40.23 and the said working was accepted by AO in order of assessment passed under section 143(3) of the Act. e. Further, M/s Mail Today Newspaper

ARUN DWIVEDI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-9(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 56(2)(vii)(b) the value of stamp duty of\nproperty which exceeds the consideration i.e. Rs.86,66,666/\nwas correctly disallowed

M/S. RATNA COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated above

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2010-11 Ratna Commercial Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Vs Addl. Cit, 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, Range-15, 10, House Avenue, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaacr0354B Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit, Vs. Ratna Commercial Enterprises Circle 21(1), Pvt. Ltd., 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, New Delhi. 10, House Avenue, New Delhi. Pan: Aaacr0354B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.P. Rastogi, Advocate Revenue By : Shri J.K. Mishra, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.09.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.11.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: These Are Cross Appeals. The First One Is Filed By The Assessee & The Second One By The Revenue & Are Directed Against The Order Dated 22Nd April, 2015 Of The Cit(A)-11, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2010-11. Ita No.3796/Del/2015 2. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue Read As Under:-

disallowed the appellant’s claim for bad debts on the ground that the appellant company is not in the business of money lending and as such is not covered u/s 36(l)(vii) read with section 36(2) of the Act. From perusal of the details of interest income and past assessment orders u/s 143(3), I find that

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. RATNA COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated above

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2010-11 Ratna Commercial Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Vs Addl. Cit, 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, Range-15, 10, House Avenue, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaacr0354B Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit, Vs. Ratna Commercial Enterprises Circle 21(1), Pvt. Ltd., 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, New Delhi. 10, House Avenue, New Delhi. Pan: Aaacr0354B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.P. Rastogi, Advocate Revenue By : Shri J.K. Mishra, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.09.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.11.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: These Are Cross Appeals. The First One Is Filed By The Assessee & The Second One By The Revenue & Are Directed Against The Order Dated 22Nd April, 2015 Of The Cit(A)-11, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2010-11. Ita No.3796/Del/2015 2. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue Read As Under:-

disallowed the appellant’s claim for bad debts on the ground that the appellant company is not in the business of money lending and as such is not covered u/s 36(l)(vii) read with section 36(2) of the Act. From perusal of the details of interest income and past assessment orders u/s 143(3), I find that

MAHAVIR TRANSMISSIN LTD ,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25 , NEW DELHI

In the result, the all appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

vii. Cross examination not being possible due to non-appearance of Mr. Manoj Dudeja and Mr. Gopal in response to summon issued. 12. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed appeal before ld. CIT(A) who determined the profit @ 5.47% on the total purchases. 13. Before the ld. CIT(A), the contention of the assessee

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI vs. MAHAVEER TRANSMISSION LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the all appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

vii. Cross examination not being possible due to non-appearance of Mr. Manoj Dudeja and Mr. Gopal in response to summon issued. 12. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed appeal before ld. CIT(A) who determined the profit @ 5.47% on the total purchases. 13. Before the ld. CIT(A), the contention of the assessee

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI vs. MAHAVEER TRANSMISSION LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the all appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

vii. Cross examination not being possible due to non-appearance of Mr. Manoj Dudeja and Mr. Gopal in response to summon issued. 12. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed appeal before ld. CIT(A) who determined the profit @ 5.47% on the total purchases. 13. Before the ld. CIT(A), the contention of the assessee

MAHAVIR TRANSMISSION LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the all appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

vii. Cross examination not being possible due to non-appearance of Mr. Manoj Dudeja and Mr. Gopal in response to summon issued. 12. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed appeal before ld. CIT(A) who determined the profit @ 5.47% on the total purchases. 13. Before the ld. CIT(A), the contention of the assessee

MAHAVIR TRANSMISSION LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the all appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

vii. Cross examination not being possible due to non-appearance of Mr. Manoj Dudeja and Mr. Gopal in response to summon issued. 12. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed appeal before ld. CIT(A) who determined the profit @ 5.47% on the total purchases. 13. Before the ld. CIT(A), the contention of the assessee

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI vs. MAHAVEER TRANSMISSION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the all appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

vii. Cross examination not being possible due to non-appearance of Mr. Manoj Dudeja and Mr. Gopal in response to summon issued. 12. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed appeal before ld. CIT(A) who determined the profit @ 5.47% on the total purchases. 13. Before the ld. CIT(A), the contention of the assessee

MAHAVIR TRANSMISSION LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CORCLE-25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the all appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

vii. Cross examination not being possible due to non-appearance of Mr. Manoj Dudeja and Mr. Gopal in response to summon issued. 12. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed appeal before ld. CIT(A) who determined the profit @ 5.47% on the total purchases. 13. Before the ld. CIT(A), the contention of the assessee

ENN VEE HOLDINGS PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 31, NEW DELHI

In the result, the addition made u/s 68 and u/s 56(2)(viib) in the case of M/s Realtime Marketing Pvt

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Yogesh Kumar Us

disallowances have also been made. The company has been proved to be in existence, assessments were completed, additions made and the source of funds to this company are not disputed but the share capital Realtime Marketing & ENN VEE Holdings Pvt. Ltd. contributed by this company to the assessee company has been disputed by the Revenue. Such flip-flop

DCIT, CC-31, NEW DELHI vs. REALTIME MARKETING PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, the addition made u/s 68 and u/s 56(2)(viib) in the case of M/s Realtime Marketing Pvt

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Yogesh Kumar Us

disallowances have also been made. The company has been proved to be in existence, assessments were completed, additions made and the source of funds to this company are not disputed but the share capital Realtime Marketing & ENN VEE Holdings Pvt. Ltd. contributed by this company to the assessee company has been disputed by the Revenue. Such flip-flop

SAHARA INDIA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and CO of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.1977/धिल्ली/2013(नि.व. 2009-10) Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd., Sahara India Sadan, 2A, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata 700071 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aadcs-6118-F बिाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-6, R. No. 334, E-2, Ara, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Centre Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi आअसं.4728, 2795, 4729, 4730 और 4731/धिल्ली/2017(नि.व. 2010-11 से 2014-15)

vii) of the Act. In so far as the remaining parties i.e. at serial no. 2, 5 to 9, 11, 12, 17 and 21 to 24, the CIT(A) held that the loans advanced were for business purposes, hence, deleted the disallowance. Accordingly, the CIT(A) sustained the disallowance to the extent of Rs.3,61,45,836/- and deleted

SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORP. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC- 1, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and CO of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.1977/धिल्ली/2013(नि.व. 2009-10) Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd., Sahara India Sadan, 2A, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata 700071 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aadcs-6118-F बिाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-6, R. No. 334, E-2, Ara, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Centre Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi आअसं.4728, 2795, 4729, 4730 और 4731/धिल्ली/2017(नि.व. 2010-11 से 2014-15)

vii) of the Act. In so far as the remaining parties i.e. at serial no. 2, 5 to 9, 11, 12, 17 and 21 to 24, the CIT(A) held that the loans advanced were for business purposes, hence, deleted the disallowance. Accordingly, the CIT(A) sustained the disallowance to the extent of Rs.3,61,45,836/- and deleted

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and CO of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.1977/धिल्ली/2013(नि.व. 2009-10) Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd., Sahara India Sadan, 2A, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata 700071 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aadcs-6118-F बिाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-6, R. No. 334, E-2, Ara, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Centre Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi आअसं.4728, 2795, 4729, 4730 और 4731/धिल्ली/2017(नि.व. 2010-11 से 2014-15)

vii) of the Act. In so far as the remaining parties i.e. at serial no. 2, 5 to 9, 11, 12, 17 and 21 to 24, the CIT(A) held that the loans advanced were for business purposes, hence, deleted the disallowance. Accordingly, the CIT(A) sustained the disallowance to the extent of Rs.3,61,45,836/- and deleted