COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI-XI vs. INDIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS/ALL INDIA CONGRESS COMMITTEE

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

29A of the Representation of People Act, 1951 (‘RP Act’). ITA Nos. 145/2001 & 180/2001 Page 5 of 71 3. The central issue in these appeals involves the interpretation of the words ‘income by way of voluntary contributions received by a political party’ occurring in Section 13A of the Act. The ITAT by its impugned order held that the accounts

INDIAN NATIONAL CONG. (I) AICC vs. C.I.T.- XI

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

29A of the Representation of People Act, 1951 (‘RP Act’). ITA Nos. 145/2001 & 180/2001 Page 5 of 71 3. The central issue in these appeals involves the interpretation of the words ‘income by way of voluntary contributions received by a political party’ occurring in Section 13A of the Act. The ITAT by its impugned order held that the accounts

INDIAN NATIONAL CONG. (I) AICC vs. C.I.T.- XI

29A of the Representation of People Act, 1951 (‘RP Act’). 2016:DHC:2463-DB ITA Nos. 145/2001 & 180/2001 Page 5 of 71 3. The central issue in these appeals involves the interpretation of the words ‘income by way of voluntary contributions received by a political party’ occurring in Section 13A of the Act. The ITAT by its impugned order held

GURBAKSHISH SINGH BATRA,NEW DELHI vs. PR. CIT - 12, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2016-17 Gurbakshish Singh Batra, Vs Pr.Cit-12, E-1511, Wazir Nagr, New Delhi. Kotla Mubarakpur, New Delhi. Pan: Adspb2480J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R.S. Singhvi, Ca Revenue By : Shri Shashi Bhushan Sukla, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.03.2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 22Nd March, 2021 Of The Pcit, Delhi-12, Passed U/S 263 Of The It Act For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed His Return Of Income On 6Th October, 2016 Declaring The Total Income At Rs.44,86,160/-. The Return Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The It Act. Subsequently, The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For ‘Limited Scrutiny’ Based On The Following Reasons:-

House Ltd. [2012] 344 ITR 554 (Delhi HC); viii. M/s. Virtusa Consulting Services Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT (March 30 , 2021) (T.C.A. No. 997 of 2018) (Delhi HC); ix. CIT vs. Smt. Padmavathi [2020] 120 taxmann.com 187 (Madras HC) [06- 10- 2020] x. M/s SUTURES INDIA PVT. LTD vs. PCIT (ITA No. 115 OF 2010) (Dt. 02/12/2020) (Karnataka

INDIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS ALL INDIA CONGRESS COMMITTEE,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-19, NEW DELHI

house property\" or \"Income from other sources\" or\n\"Capital gains\" or any income by way of voluntary contributions received\nby a political party from any person shall not be included in the total income\nof the previous year of such political party:\nProvided that-\n1. such political party keeps and maintains such books of account\nand other documents

PUBLIC POLITICAL PARTY,DELHI vs. DCIT, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

29A of the Representation of the People P a g e | 4 8 appeals Public Political Party (AY: 2015-16 to2017-18, 2021-22 & 2022-23) Act, 1951, with its office at A-42, 4th Floor, RoopDarshan, Juhu Lane, Andheri (West), Mumbai, Maharashtra. On 07.09.2022, a search and seizure operation under Section 132 of the Income

PUBLIC POLITICAL PARTY,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 31, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

29A of the Representation of the People P a g e | 4 8 appeals Public Political Party (AY: 2015-16 to2017-18, 2021-22 & 2022-23) Act, 1951, with its office at A-42, 4th Floor, RoopDarshan, Juhu Lane, Andheri (West), Mumbai, Maharashtra. On 07.09.2022, a search and seizure operation under Section 132 of the Income

PUBLIC POLITICAL PARTY,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 31, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

29A of the Representation of the People P a g e | 4 8 appeals Public Political Party (AY: 2015-16 to2017-18, 2021-22 & 2022-23) Act, 1951, with its office at A-42, 4th Floor, RoopDarshan, Juhu Lane, Andheri (West), Mumbai, Maharashtra. On 07.09.2022, a search and seizure operation under Section 132 of the Income

PUBLIC POLITICAL PARTY,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-31, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

29A of the Representation of the People P a g e | 4 8 appeals Public Political Party (AY: 2015-16 to2017-18, 2021-22 & 2022-23) Act, 1951, with its office at A-42, 4th Floor, RoopDarshan, Juhu Lane, Andheri (West), Mumbai, Maharashtra. On 07.09.2022, a search and seizure operation under Section 132 of the Income

PUBLIC POLITICAL PARTY,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-31, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

29A of the Representation of the People P a g e | 4 8 appeals Public Political Party (AY: 2015-16 to2017-18, 2021-22 & 2022-23) Act, 1951, with its office at A-42, 4th Floor, RoopDarshan, Juhu Lane, Andheri (West), Mumbai, Maharashtra. On 07.09.2022, a search and seizure operation under Section 132 of the Income

PUBLIC POLITICAL PARTY,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 31, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

29A of the Representation of the People P a g e | 4 8 appeals Public Political Party (AY: 2015-16 to2017-18, 2021-22 & 2022-23) Act, 1951, with its office at A-42, 4th Floor, RoopDarshan, Juhu Lane, Andheri (West), Mumbai, Maharashtra. On 07.09.2022, a search and seizure operation under Section 132 of the Income

PUBLIC POLITICAL PARTY,DELHI vs. DCIT, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

29A of the Representation of the People P a g e | 4 8 appeals Public Political Party (AY: 2015-16 to2017-18, 2021-22 & 2022-23) Act, 1951, with its office at A-42, 4th Floor, RoopDarshan, Juhu Lane, Andheri (West), Mumbai, Maharashtra. On 07.09.2022, a search and seizure operation under Section 132 of the Income

PUBLIC POLITICAL PARTY,DELHI vs. DCIT, DELHI

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

29A of the Representation of the People P a g e | 4 8 appeals Public Political Party (AY: 2015-16 to2017-18, 2021-22 & 2022-23) Act, 1951, with its office at A-42, 4th Floor, RoopDarshan, Juhu Lane, Andheri (West), Mumbai, Maharashtra. On 07.09.2022, a search and seizure operation under Section 132 of the Income

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. MAHESH KUMAR, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita No. 173/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Dcit, Vs Sh. Mahesh Kumar, Circle-21(1), C-13/170, Sector-3, Rohini, New Delhi Delhi-110085 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aalpk4117B Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. P. Dum Kanunjna, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.09.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.12.2016 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 17.10.2011 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xxii, New Delhi.

house property, capital gain, dividend and interest income for the financial year under consideration. ii. The appellant has neither incurred nor claimed any expenses like salary, consultancy, Securities transaction tax, interest paid, Rent, office maintenance, staff welfare, printing & stationery etc., which are basic expenses to carry out any business activity. The appellant also not adjusted the value of Investment

ANALJIT SINGH,DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 16(2), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P.Kant

section 45 read withsection48oftheAct. 33. Coming to the actual consideration received as per the share purchase agreement dated 12.03.2014, Mr. Vohra submitted that although in terms of original framework agreement’s was entitled to receive aggregate consideration of Rs.855 crores (Rs.1088 crores - Rs.533 crores) from transfer of their remaining shareholding in Scorpio to CGP/GSPL, however, the parties mutually agreed

DBG LEASING AND HOUSING LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ITO-7(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Krinwant Sahayasstt. Year : 2008-09 Dbg Leasing & Housing Ltd., Vs Ito, Ward 7(1), New Delhi C-88, Gali No. 8, Jyoti Colony, Shahdara, Delhi – 110 032 (Pan: Aaacd0473F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Ved Jain, Adv. & Ms. Uma Upadhyay, Ca Respondent By : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr

HOUSING LTD., VS ITO, Ward 7(1), NEW DELHI C-88, GALI NO. 8, JYOTI COLONY, SHAHDARA, DELHI – 110 032 (PAN: AAACD0473F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Ved Jain, Adv. & Ms. Uma Upadhyay, CA Respondent by : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, SR. DR Date of Hearing 16.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement 16.09.2025 ORDER PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT : This appeal

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -3 vs. TELSTRA SINGAPORE PTE LTD.

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

section 9(1)(vi) of the Act brought into force by the Finance Act, 2012 are applicable to domestic laws and the said amended definition cannot be extended to DTAA, where the term has been defined originally and not amended." xxxx xxxx xxxx 26. In view of the above said facts, we hold that there is no merit

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -3 vs. TELSTRA SINGAPORE PTE LTD.

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

section 9(1)(vi) of the Act brought into force by the Finance Act, 2012 are applicable to domestic laws and the said amended definition cannot be extended to DTAA, where the term has been defined originally and not amended." xxxx xxxx xxxx 26. In view of the above said facts, we hold that there is no merit