VENETIAN LDF PROJECTS LLP,GURGAON vs. ACIT CIRCLE-4(1), GURGAON

In the result, grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

House: 139 ITR 182 (P&H) 158 In the facts of the present case, the Pr. CIT, in respect of all the issues, have merely held that further enquiry and examination is required, without even recording as to how the assessment order sought to be revised is erroneous on such issues; no error whatsoever has been pointed out regarding

AMAZON SMART COMMERCE SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-1, DELHI

In the result, grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed

House: 139 ITR 182 (P&H)\n158 In the facts of the present case, the Pr. CIT, in respect of all the issues, have merely held that further enquiry and examination is required, without even recording as to how the assessment order sought to be revised is erroneous on such issues; no error whatsoever has been pointed out regarding

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

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

144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) passed on 30th April, 2021. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “1. That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in completing assessment under section 143(3) read with section 144C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), vide order dated 30.04.2021, at an income

DUGGAL & SONS BUILDWELL (P) LTD.,FARIDABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 4, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

xvi) No detail of persons belonging to sales team, who have administered gift distribution (as claimed by Sh. Rajnish Talwar), was provided by Sh. Rajnish Talwar, so that facts could be verified by this office. xvii) It is highly improbable that HO/Head Office of M/s Jagatjit Industries Limited was buying the gifts instead of field offices/sales team. xviii) Sh. Sanjay

DUGGAL & SONS BUILDWELL (P) LTD.,FARIDABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 4, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

xvi) No detail of persons belonging to sales team, who have administered gift distribution (as claimed by Sh. Rajnish Talwar), was provided by Sh. Rajnish Talwar, so that facts could be verified by this office. xvii) It is highly improbable that HO/Head Office of M/s Jagatjit Industries Limited was buying the gifts instead of field offices/sales team. xviii) Sh. Sanjay

RATNASHRI BUILDTECH PVT LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CICRLE 4, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

xvi) No detail of persons belonging to sales team, who have administered gift distribution (as claimed by Sh. Rajnish Talwar), was provided by Sh. Rajnish Talwar, so that facts could be verified by this office. xvii) It is highly improbable that HO/Head Office of M/s Jagatjit Industries Limited was buying the gifts instead of field offices/sales team. xviii) Sh. Sanjay

RAJNISH TALWAR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

xvi) No detail of persons belonging to sales team, who have administered gift distribution (as claimed by Sh. Rajnish Talwar), was provided by Sh. Rajnish Talwar, so that facts could be verified by this office. xvii) It is highly improbable that HO/Head Office of M/s Jagatjit Industries Limited was buying the gifts instead of field offices/sales team. xviii) Sh. Sanjay

RATNASHRI BUILDTECH PVT LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CICRLE 4, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

xvi) No detail of persons belonging to sales team, who have administered gift distribution (as claimed by Sh. Rajnish Talwar), was provided by Sh. Rajnish Talwar, so that facts could be verified by this office. xvii) It is highly improbable that HO/Head Office of M/s Jagatjit Industries Limited was buying the gifts instead of field offices/sales team. xviii) Sh. Sanjay

RAJNISH TALWAR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

xvi) No detail of persons belonging to sales team, who have administered gift distribution (as claimed by Sh. Rajnish Talwar), was provided by Sh. Rajnish Talwar, so that facts could be verified by this office. xvii) It is highly improbable that HO/Head Office of M/s Jagatjit Industries Limited was buying the gifts instead of field offices/sales team. xviii) Sh. Sanjay

RAJNISH TALWAR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

xvi) No detail of persons belonging to sales team, who have administered gift distribution (as claimed by Sh. Rajnish Talwar), was provided by Sh. Rajnish Talwar, so that facts could be verified by this office. xvii) It is highly improbable that HO/Head Office of M/s Jagatjit Industries Limited was buying the gifts instead of field offices/sales team. xviii) Sh. Sanjay

RAJNISH TALWAR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

xvi) No detail of persons belonging to sales team, who have administered gift distribution (as claimed by Sh. Rajnish Talwar), was provided by Sh. Rajnish Talwar, so that facts could be verified by this office. xvii) It is highly improbable that HO/Head Office of M/s Jagatjit Industries Limited was buying the gifts instead of field offices/sales team. xviii) Sh. Sanjay

RAJNISH TALWAR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

xvi) No detail of persons belonging to sales team, who have administered gift distribution (as claimed by Sh. Rajnish Talwar), was provided by Sh. Rajnish Talwar, so that facts could be verified by this office. xvii) It is highly improbable that HO/Head Office of M/s Jagatjit Industries Limited was buying the gifts instead of field offices/sales team. xviii) Sh. Sanjay

KRITIKA TALWAR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 4 , NEW DEHLI, NEW DEHLI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

xvi) No detail of persons belonging to sales team, who have administered gift distribution (as claimed by Sh. Rajnish Talwar), was provided by Sh. Rajnish Talwar, so that facts could be verified by this office. xvii) It is highly improbable that HO/Head Office of M/s Jagatjit Industries Limited was buying the gifts instead of field offices/sales team. xviii) Sh. Sanjay

RATNASHRI BUILDTECH PVT LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CICRLE 4, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

xvi) No detail of persons belonging to sales team, who have administered gift distribution (as claimed by Sh. Rajnish Talwar), was provided by Sh. Rajnish Talwar, so that facts could be verified by this office. xvii) It is highly improbable that HO/Head Office of M/s Jagatjit Industries Limited was buying the gifts instead of field offices/sales team. xviii) Sh. Sanjay

RATNASHRI BUILDTECH PVT LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CICRLE 4, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

xvi) No detail of persons belonging to sales team, who have administered gift distribution (as claimed by Sh. Rajnish Talwar), was provided by Sh. Rajnish Talwar, so that facts could be verified by this office. xvii) It is highly improbable that HO/Head Office of M/s Jagatjit Industries Limited was buying the gifts instead of field offices/sales team. xviii) Sh. Sanjay

RAJNISH TALWAR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

xvi) No detail of persons belonging to sales team, who have administered gift distribution (as claimed by Sh. Rajnish Talwar), was provided by Sh. Rajnish Talwar, so that facts could be verified by this office. xvii) It is highly improbable that HO/Head Office of M/s Jagatjit Industries Limited was buying the gifts instead of field offices/sales team. xviii) Sh. Sanjay

RAJNISH TALWAR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

xvi) No detail of persons belonging to sales team, who have administered gift distribution (as claimed by Sh. Rajnish Talwar), was provided by Sh. Rajnish Talwar, so that facts could be verified by this office. xvii) It is highly improbable that HO/Head Office of M/s Jagatjit Industries Limited was buying the gifts instead of field offices/sales team. xviii) Sh. Sanjay

KRITIKA TALWAR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 4 , NEW DEHLI, NEW DEHLI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

xvi) No detail of persons belonging to sales team, who have administered gift distribution (as claimed by Sh. Rajnish Talwar), was provided by Sh. Rajnish Talwar, so that facts could be verified by this office. xvii) It is highly improbable that HO/Head Office of M/s Jagatjit Industries Limited was buying the gifts instead of field offices/sales team. xviii) Sh. Sanjay