HARISH NARANG,PANIPAT vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ROHTAK, ROHTAK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma& Shri Amitabh Shukla[Assessment Year: 2018-19] Harish Narang, The Principal Commissioner Of H. No.238, Ward No.8, Income Tax, Rohtak, Panipat, Haryana-132103 Vs Aayakar Bhawan, Opp. Mansarover Park, Rohtak, Haryana-124001 Pan:Acvpn4090J Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Amit Kaushik, Adv. Revenue By Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 16.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31.12.2025

disallowance under section 37(1) of the Act as they were not incurred for business purposes. The ld. PCIT, Rohtak examined the impugned order dated 16.03.2023 of the ld. AO and concluded that since the same was passed without applying the provisions of section 69C of the Act r.w.s. 115 BBE of the Act, the same fell into the category

DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), NEW DELHI vs. BAWA JEWELLERS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.352/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2017-18 बनाम Dcit Bawa Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. Circle 4(2) Vs. A-24, Tagore Market, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi. West, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaacb4823D अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

disallowance. In the second paragraph above, the Assessing Officer has alternatively applied Section 69C. Section 69C is also for unexplained expenditure. Admittedly, there is no question of any unexplained expenditure in the case under appeal before us and therefore, Section 69C is also not applicable. I.T.A. No. 352/Del/2021 > Further, we find the stand of the Assessing Officer to be contradictory

ACE INFRACITY DEVELOPERS P.LTD,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, NOIDA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

69B, section 69C or section 69D, at the rate of thirty per cent; and (b) the amount of income-tax with which the assessee would have been chargeable had his total income been reduced by the amount of income 5 referred to in clause (a). (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, no deduction in respect of any expenditure

J. M. HOUSING LIMITED,DELHI vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL) KNP MEERUT, UTTAR PRADESH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2021-22] J.M. Housing Limited, Pr.Cit (Central) Kanpur, At Meerut, 312/3T/F5 Pratap Bhawan, Aayakar Bhawan, Bhainsali Ground, Bhahadur Shah Zafar Marg, Vs Meerut, Uttar Pradesh-25001 Central Delhi, Delhi-11002 Pan-Aaccj1692E Assessee Revenue

disallowed u/s 41(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 and should be added to the total income of the assessee under the head of business income by the AO but AO failed to do so….” 4. In view of the foregoing discussed facts, the assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Income

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. R.J. CORP LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee on this ground is allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

disallowance-and capital gain on sale of shares I am partly confirming the AO’s action. The additional income resulting from part confirmation of those grounds would also be telescoped into the above stated Rs. 8,24,33,171/- as the same is covered by the narration of the surrendered income.” 25. We find that this

M/S. RJ CORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee on this ground is allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

disallowance-and capital gain on sale of shares I am partly confirming the AO’s action. The additional income resulting from part confirmation of those grounds would also be telescoped into the above stated Rs. 8,24,33,171/- as the same is covered by the narration of the surrendered income.” 25. We find that this

M/S. RJ CORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee on this ground is allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

disallowance-and capital gain on sale of shares I am partly confirming the AO’s action. The additional income resulting from part confirmation of those grounds would also be telescoped into the above stated Rs. 8,24,33,171/- as the same is covered by the narration of the surrendered income.” 25. We find that this

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. R.J. CORP LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee on this ground is allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

disallowance-and capital gain on sale of shares I am partly confirming the AO’s action. The additional income resulting from part confirmation of those grounds would also be telescoped into the above stated Rs. 8,24,33,171/- as the same is covered by the narration of the surrendered income.” 25. We find that this

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI vs. NEEL METAL PRODUCTS LTD, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

69B of the Act, made in AY 2013-14, ITA 232 for AY 2013-14 (appeal of assessee) Issue no. 5 is with regard to Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee by the CIT(A) and Revenue has filed appeals in case

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI vs. NEEL METAL PRODUCTS LTD, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

69B of the Act, made in AY 2013-14, ITA 232 for AY 2013-14 (appeal of assessee) Issue no. 5 is with regard to Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee by the CIT(A) and Revenue has filed appeals in case

NEEL METAL PRODUCTS LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

69B of the Act, made in AY 2013-14, ITA 232 for AY 2013-14 (appeal of assessee) Issue no. 5 is with regard to Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee by the CIT(A) and Revenue has filed appeals in case

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI vs. NEEL METAL PRODUCTS LTD, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

69B of the Act, made in AY 2013-14, ITA 232 for AY 2013-14 (appeal of assessee) Issue no. 5 is with regard to Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee by the CIT(A) and Revenue has filed appeals in case

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI vs. NEEL METAL PRODUCTS LTD (FORMELY KNOWN AS NEEL AUTO PVT LTD), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

69B of the Act, made in AY 2013-14, ITA 232 for AY 2013-14 (appeal of assessee) Issue no. 5 is with regard to Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee by the CIT(A) and Revenue has filed appeals in case

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI vs. NEEL METAL PRODUCTS LTD, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

69B of the Act, made in AY 2013-14, ITA 232 for AY 2013-14 (appeal of assessee) Issue no. 5 is with regard to Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee by the CIT(A) and Revenue has filed appeals in case

NEEL METAL PRODUCTS LTD (FORMELY KNOWN AS NEEL AUTO PVT LTD),NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

69B of the Act, made in AY 2013-14, ITA 232 for AY 2013-14 (appeal of assessee) Issue no. 5 is with regard to Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee by the CIT(A) and Revenue has filed appeals in case

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI vs. NEEL METAL PRODUCTS LTD (FORMELY KNOWN AS NEEL AUTO PVT LTD), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

69B of the Act, made in AY 2013-14, ITA 232 for AY 2013-14 (appeal of assessee) Issue no. 5 is with regard to Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee by the CIT(A) and Revenue has filed appeals in case

NEEL METAL PRODUCTS LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

69B of the Act, made in AY 2013-14, ITA 232 for AY 2013-14 (appeal of assessee) Issue no. 5 is with regard to Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee by the CIT(A) and Revenue has filed appeals in case

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI vs. NEEL METAL PRODUCTS LTD (FORMELY KNOWN AS NEEL AUTO PVT LTD), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

69B of the Act, made in AY 2013-14, ITA 232 for AY 2013-14 (appeal of assessee) Issue no. 5 is with regard to Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee by the CIT(A) and Revenue has filed appeals in case