BHIM SINGH,GURGAON vs. ITO WARD 1(3) , GURGAON

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

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

disallowance of deduction of Rs 51,110/- claimed U/s 80C &Rs 18,172/- claimed U/s 80Dof the Act. The action of the ld.AO is totally unlawful, unjustified and unreasonable. The deduction claimed deserves to be allowed. 2. On the basis of Facts &circumstances of the case there is no legal warrant or valid justification on the part of learned

PTC INDIA FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 19(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2013-14 & Asstt. Year 2014-15

56,97,665/- for non- deduction of TDS; disallowance of Rs. 1,16,97,590/- under section 14A; disallowance of Rs. 1,76,16,528/- under section 36(1)(viii) and disallowance of Rs. 9,69,602/- under section 37 aggregating in all to Rs. 24,71,35,045/-. 5. The Ld. AO completed the assessment

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PTC INDIA FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2013-14 & Asstt. Year 2014-15

56,97,665/- for non- deduction of TDS; disallowance of Rs. 1,16,97,590/- under section 14A; disallowance of Rs. 1,76,16,528/- under section 36(1)(viii) and disallowance of Rs. 9,69,602/- under section 37 aggregating in all to Rs. 24,71,35,045/-. 5. The Ld. AO completed the assessment

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 7, NEW DELHI vs. PTC INDIA FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2013-14 & Asstt. Year 2014-15

56,97,665/- for non- deduction of TDS; disallowance of Rs. 1,16,97,590/- under section 14A; disallowance of Rs. 1,76,16,528/- under section 36(1)(viii) and disallowance of Rs. 9,69,602/- under section 37 aggregating in all to Rs. 24,71,35,045/-. 5. The Ld. AO completed the assessment

M/S. PTC INDIA FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2013-14 & Asstt. Year 2014-15

56,97,665/- for non- deduction of TDS; disallowance of Rs. 1,16,97,590/- under section 14A; disallowance of Rs. 1,76,16,528/- under section 36(1)(viii) and disallowance of Rs. 9,69,602/- under section 37 aggregating in all to Rs. 24,71,35,045/-. 5. The Ld. AO completed the assessment

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S JAY METAL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

VIII, New Delhi dated 27.07.2012 passed in Appeal No. 402/2011-12 for AY 2009-10. 2. Ground No. 1 and 3 of the revenue are general in nature which need no adjudication. Remaining grounds of the Revenue containing sole issue/controversy read as under:- “2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting

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

viii. M/s. Shri Ganpati - 3,06,15,810 - - Traders ix. M/s. Ambika - 14,89,52,322 - - International x. M/s. Radiant - 18,59,83,259 - - Overseas xi. M/s. Royal Traders - 5,46,17,922 - - xii. M/s. Dev Infocom - 36,20,77,917 81,21,89,115 - ITA Nos. 2844 to 2846/Del/2022 Mahavir Transmission Ltd. (P) Ltd. xiii. M/s. At Your Door

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

viii. M/s. Shri Ganpati - 3,06,15,810 - - Traders ix. M/s. Ambika - 14,89,52,322 - - International x. M/s. Radiant - 18,59,83,259 - - Overseas xi. M/s. Royal Traders - 5,46,17,922 - - xii. M/s. Dev Infocom - 36,20,77,917 81,21,89,115 - ITA Nos. 2844 to 2846/Del/2022 Mahavir Transmission Ltd. (P) Ltd. xiii. M/s. At Your Door

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

viii. M/s. Shri Ganpati - 3,06,15,810 - - Traders ix. M/s. Ambika - 14,89,52,322 - - International x. M/s. Radiant - 18,59,83,259 - - Overseas xi. M/s. Royal Traders - 5,46,17,922 - - xii. M/s. Dev Infocom - 36,20,77,917 81,21,89,115 - ITA Nos. 2844 to 2846/Del/2022 Mahavir Transmission Ltd. (P) Ltd. xiii. M/s. At Your Door

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

viii. M/s. Shri Ganpati - 3,06,15,810 - - Traders ix. M/s. Ambika - 14,89,52,322 - - International x. M/s. Radiant - 18,59,83,259 - - Overseas xi. M/s. Royal Traders - 5,46,17,922 - - xii. M/s. Dev Infocom - 36,20,77,917 81,21,89,115 - ITA Nos. 2844 to 2846/Del/2022 Mahavir Transmission Ltd. (P) Ltd. xiii. M/s. At Your Door

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

viii. M/s. Shri Ganpati - 3,06,15,810 - - Traders ix. M/s. Ambika - 14,89,52,322 - - International x. M/s. Radiant - 18,59,83,259 - - Overseas xi. M/s. Royal Traders - 5,46,17,922 - - xii. M/s. Dev Infocom - 36,20,77,917 81,21,89,115 - ITA Nos. 2844 to 2846/Del/2022 Mahavir Transmission Ltd. (P) Ltd. xiii. M/s. At Your Door

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

viii. M/s. Shri Ganpati - 3,06,15,810 - - Traders ix. M/s. Ambika - 14,89,52,322 - - International x. M/s. Radiant - 18,59,83,259 - - Overseas xi. M/s. Royal Traders - 5,46,17,922 - - xii. M/s. Dev Infocom - 36,20,77,917 81,21,89,115 - ITA Nos. 2844 to 2846/Del/2022 Mahavir Transmission Ltd. (P) Ltd. xiii. M/s. At Your Door

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

viii. M/s. Shri Ganpati - 3,06,15,810 - - Traders ix. M/s. Ambika - 14,89,52,322 - - International x. M/s. Radiant - 18,59,83,259 - - Overseas xi. M/s. Royal Traders - 5,46,17,922 - - xii. M/s. Dev Infocom - 36,20,77,917 81,21,89,115 - ITA Nos. 2844 to 2846/Del/2022 Mahavir Transmission Ltd. (P) Ltd. xiii. M/s. At Your Door

TSI YATRA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE-25, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

disallowance of face vaule amounting to Rs.10591530/- is concerned, it is noted that the provision of S. 56(2)(viib) clearly stipulates that consideration received over and above, the FMV is deemed to be income as there is no exception for face value is mentioned therein. In the case of appellant FMV being computed

HERO MOTO CORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. NEAC, DELHI

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

56,90,94,045/- on account of trade incentives, The Revenue, on the other hand, on the basis of the aforesaid facts, contends that incentives/discounts were not given by way of reduction in the sales invoice at the time of delivery of the vehicle, the same consequentially fall within the meaning of word „commission‟ as defined in section 194H

PHILIA ESTATE DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-19(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

disallowance of claim of deduction U/s 57(iv) is misconceived and without proper appreciation of the specific provision of Section 56(2)(viii

PATANJALI YOGPEETH (NYAS),DELHI vs. ADIT(EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L. P. Sahu

viii) R. B. Shreeram Religious & Charitable Trust Vs. CIT (1998) 233 ITR 53 (SC); (ix) Kanahya Lal Punj Charitable Trust Vs. DIT (Exemption) (2008) 171 Taxman 134 (Del.); (x) DIT (E) Vs. Charanjiv Charitable Trust (2014) 43 Taxman.com 300 (Del.); (xi) Mundakapadam Mandirams Society Vs. CIT (2002) 125 Taxman 515 (Ker.); (xii) Kamma Sangham Vs. DIT (E) (2014) 43 Taxman.com

M/S. BHARTI AIRTEL LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee with respect to ground No

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishibharti Airtel Ltd, Addl Cit, Bharti Crescent, 1, Vs. Range-2, Cr Building, Ip Nelson Mandela Road, Vasant Estate, New Delhi Kunj, New Delhi Pan:Aaacb2894G (Appellant) (Respondent) Bharti Airtel Ltd, Addl Cit, Bharti Crescent, 1, Vs. Range-2, Cr Building, Ip Nelson Mandela Road, Vaxant Estate, New Delhi Kunj, New Delhi Pan:Aaacb2894G (Appellant) (Respondent)

viii. As stated above, Chapter XVII-B of the Act provides a complete code in itself not only specifying the provisions relating to deduction and recovery of tax but also the consequential Page 34 of 59 implications of default thereof. Being an integrated code, it is quite fundamental that default under Chapter XVII-B can only be determined