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

house-keeping boy and he was not there at the time when these purchases were made and he was allowed to reside at that premises only in February 2020 onwards which is much after the date when these purchases were made. 65. Similarly, with regard to the statement of Mr. Anil Chander Jain at Dehradun, the appellant company has duly

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

house-keeping boy and he was not there at the time when these purchases were made and he was allowed to reside at that premises only in February 2020 onwards which is much after the date when these purchases were made. 65. Similarly, with regard to the statement of Mr. Anil Chander Jain at Dehradun, the appellant company has duly

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

house-keeping boy and he was not there at the time when these purchases were made and he was allowed to reside at that premises only in February 2020 onwards which is much after the date when these purchases were made. 65. Similarly, with regard to the statement of Mr. Anil Chander Jain at Dehradun, the appellant company has duly

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

house-keeping boy and he was not there at the time when these purchases were made and he was allowed to reside at that premises only in February 2020 onwards which is much after the date when these purchases were made. 65. Similarly, with regard to the statement of Mr. Anil Chander Jain at Dehradun, the appellant company has duly

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

house-keeping boy and he was not there at the time when these purchases were made and he was allowed to reside at that premises only in February 2020 onwards which is much after the date when these purchases were made. 65. Similarly, with regard to the statement of Mr. Anil Chander Jain at Dehradun, the appellant company has duly

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

house-keeping boy and he was not there at the time when these purchases were made and he was allowed to reside at that premises only in February 2020 onwards which is much after the date when these purchases were made. 65. Similarly, with regard to the statement of Mr. Anil Chander Jain at Dehradun, the appellant company has duly

PAWAN KUMAR JAIN,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 2(1), GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed on ground no

house of assessee only for service of paper dt. 24.12.2017 on dt. 26.12.2017 and there was no evidence on the file that ITI has been deputed for statement and no questionnaire available on the office records file. V. That the assessee submit all the evidence of Income and securities and commodity losses which is verified by the ITO in long

SMT. SUCHITA GOYAL,DELHI vs. PCIT,-15, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2860/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 बनाम Smt. Suchita Goyal, Pcit-15, Plot No.32, First Floor, Road No.43, Vs. Room No.1702, E-3 Block, Ashoka Park, Extension, S.P. Shivaji Park, Civic Centre, Minto Road, West Delhi. Delhi. Pan No.Aafpg5320G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

house property income has been derived during this year. We also find that the “Counsel for assessee” has submitted a certificate on the paper book that all these documents were 5 before the AO/PCIT”. We may add that the interest certificate at page 142A of the paper book is dated 17.03.2025 only and hence certainly it was not part

DCIT, DELHI vs. PERSONIV CONTACT CENTERS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2860/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 बनाम Smt. Suchita Goyal, Pcit-15, Plot No.32, First Floor, Road No.43, Vs. Room No.1702, E-3 Block, Ashoka Park, Extension, S.P. Shivaji Park, Civic Centre, Minto Road, West Delhi. Delhi. Pan No.Aafpg5320G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

house property income has been derived during this year. We also find that the “Counsel for assessee” has submitted a certificate on the paper book that all these documents were 5 before the AO/PCIT”. We may add that the interest certificate at page 142A of the paper book is dated 17.03.2025 only and hence certainly it was not part

CIT vs. NAVEEN GERA

Bench: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN

house over and above the investment disclosed in VDIS. On the basis of the DVO’s report, the AO made an addition of ` 2,24,08,820/-. 4. On an appeal being filed by the respondent-assessee, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [for short CIT(A)] allowed the same and deleted the addition made

BABLI KUKREJA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Chary(Through Video Conferencing)

142A as well as infirmities pointed out in the valuation report. The assessee also pointed out comparative sale instances stating that DVO has taken double the rate of applicable rate in the area where the property is situated. The assessee also contested that the self supervision deduction in the cost of construction is also not granted

BABLI KUKREJA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 15, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Chary(Through Video Conferencing)

142A as well as infirmities pointed out in the valuation report. The assessee also pointed out comparative sale instances stating that DVO has taken double the rate of applicable rate in the area where the property is situated. The assessee also contested that the self supervision deduction in the cost of construction is also not granted

BABLI KUKREJA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 15, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Chary(Through Video Conferencing)

142A as well as infirmities pointed out in the valuation report. The assessee also pointed out comparative sale instances stating that DVO has taken double the rate of applicable rate in the area where the property is situated. The assessee also contested that the self supervision deduction in the cost of construction is also not granted

BABLI KUKREJA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 15, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Chary(Through Video Conferencing)

142A as well as infirmities pointed out in the valuation report. The assessee also pointed out comparative sale instances stating that DVO has taken double the rate of applicable rate in the area where the property is situated. The assessee also contested that the self supervision deduction in the cost of construction is also not granted

BABLI KUKREJA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 15, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Chary(Through Video Conferencing)

142A as well as infirmities pointed out in the valuation report. The assessee also pointed out comparative sale instances stating that DVO has taken double the rate of applicable rate in the area where the property is situated. The assessee also contested that the self supervision deduction in the cost of construction is also not granted

BABLI KUKREJA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Chary(Through Video Conferencing)

142A as well as infirmities pointed out in the valuation report. The assessee also pointed out comparative sale instances stating that DVO has taken double the rate of applicable rate in the area where the property is situated. The assessee also contested that the self supervision deduction in the cost of construction is also not granted

MADHAV RASTOGI,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-61(2), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Madhav Rastogi, Vs Ito, 2, Sreeniketan Apartments, 24, Ward-61(2), Vasundhara Enclave, New Delhi. New Delhi-110096. Pan-Ahopr9376D Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Madhav Rastogi, Adv. Respondent By Shri Om Prakash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 22.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 20.05.2022

142A was made to the Valuation Officer of the Income Tax Department "" Emphasis Supplied 27. Similar to the case cited above, in the given scenario, it is not the case of the AO that the purchase of the property was not recorded or was concealed. Infact, the rental receipts from the property were added to the income in the very

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

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

142A of the Act for the purported determination of the FMV of the immovable properties owned by AJL. 6 ITA No.1251/Del./2019 2. The Appellant prays that the said reference and consequential determination of the purported FMV be held to be illegal. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUNDS NO. I TO VII GROUND NO. VIII: COMPUTING THE PURPORTED FMV BEYOND THE VALUE