M.L. SINGHI & ASSOCIATES (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CC-15, NEW DELHI

In the result, these four appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

penalty amounting to Rs.3,41,59,950/- was levied under Section 271(1)(c) in respect of aforesaid quantum additions of Rs.6,36,50,000/- and Rs.33,50,000/-. The assessee filed appeals against aforesaid order dated 30.03.2019 passed by the AO u/s. 271(1)(c) of IT Act, vide the appeal numbers 10015/19- 20 and 10067/19-20. Vide aforesaid appeal

M.L. SINGHI & ASSOCIATES (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CC-15, NEW DELHI

In the result, these four appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

penalty amounting to Rs.3,41,59,950/- was levied under Section 271(1)(c) in respect of aforesaid quantum additions of Rs.6,36,50,000/- and Rs.33,50,000/-. The assessee filed appeals against aforesaid order dated 30.03.2019 passed by the AO u/s. 271(1)(c) of IT Act, vide the appeal numbers 10015/19- 20 and 10067/19-20. Vide aforesaid appeal

M.L. SINGHI & ASSOCIATES (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CC-15, NEW DELHI

In the result, these four appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

penalty amounting to Rs.3,41,59,950/- was levied under Section 271(1)(c) in respect of aforesaid quantum additions of Rs.6,36,50,000/- and Rs.33,50,000/-. The assessee filed appeals against aforesaid order dated 30.03.2019 passed by the AO u/s. 271(1)(c) of IT Act, vide the appeal numbers 10015/19- 20 and 10067/19-20. Vide aforesaid appeal

M.L. SINGHI & ASSOCIATES (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CC-15, NEW DELHI

In the result, these four appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

penalty amounting to Rs.3,41,59,950/- was levied under Section 271(1)(c) in respect of aforesaid quantum additions of Rs.6,36,50,000/- and Rs.33,50,000/-. The assessee filed appeals against aforesaid order dated 30.03.2019 passed by the AO u/s. 271(1)(c) of IT Act, vide the appeal numbers 10015/19- 20 and 10067/19-20. Vide aforesaid appeal

SHRI CHETAN SETH,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara\Nand\Nshri Brajesh Kumar Singh\Nita Nos.1808/Del/2023 & 2983, 2984 & 2985/Del/2015\N[Assessment Years: 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08]\Nshri Chetan Seth,\Nplot No.14, Lcs, Sector-B-1,\Nvasant Kunj,\Nnew Delhi-110070\Npan-Aolps2992A\Nappellant\Nincome Tax Officer,\Nward-15(3),\Nvs New Delhi\Nrespondent\Nappellant By\Nrespondent By\Nshri Arun Kishore, Ca &\Nshri Alok Suri, Ca\Nshri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr.\N(Dr)\Ndate Of Hearing\Ndate Of Pronouncement\N28.03.2025\N25.06.2025\Norder\Nper Brajesh Kumar Singh, Am,\Nthese Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The\Norder Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Delhi, Dated\N24.02.2015 For Ay 2004-05, 27.02.2015 For Ay 2005-06, 2006-07 And\N2007-08 Respectively Arising Out Of Assessment Orders Passed U/S 147/144\Nof The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To ‘The Act') Dated\N31.10.2011 For All The Above Assessment Years, Respectively. Since, The\Nissues Are Common & Connected, Hence, These Appeals Were Heard\Ntogether & Are Disposed Of By This Common Order.\N2. First, We Shall Take Up The Ita No.1808/Del/2023 Pertaining To Ay\N2004-05.\N2.

271 (1) (c) of the Act for the above\nadditions were successfully represented by the same previous counsel\nbefore CIT (Appeals). Departmental appeals against the deletion of penalties\nwere dismissed.\n7. Appeals against additions u/s 2 (22) (e) for the three years 2005-06 to 2007-\n08 were also being represented till last year by the same previous counsel.It\nwas

ASSOCIATED MACHINERY CORP. PVT. LTD.,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

Deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) 5,12,200/- iv) Bogus creditors 12,97,079/- v) Surrender on account of unverifiable creditors 100,00,000/- 4. On the aforesaid additions, penalty proceedings u/s 271

SUDESH GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 5(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usa.Yr. : 2013-14 Sudesh Gupta, Vs. Acit, Circle 5(1), B-15, Kalindi Colony, Opp. Room No. G-15-B, C.R. Maharani Bagh, Building, New Delhi – 2 New Delhi (Pan: Aahpg5645G) (Appellant) (Respondent)

penalty of Rs. 1,360,455/- u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. Prior to this, AO made the assessment u/s. 143(3)/147 on 24.11.2016. Addition of deemed dividend

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NAGAR DAIRY PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.

penalty u/s 271(1)(c); though no separate addition was made considering the disallowance of higher amount on account of bogus purchases. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in adjudicating the addition made under section 40A(3) of the Act when the assessee had not taken any ground

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NAGAR DAIRY PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.

penalty u/s 271(1)(c); though no separate addition was made considering the disallowance of higher amount on account of bogus purchases. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in adjudicating the addition made under section 40A(3) of the Act when the assessee had not taken any ground

TRIUNE ENERGY PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-25(2), NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Ani Chaturvedi & Shri Anubhav Sharmatriune Energy Pvt Ltd, Vs. Dcit, B-1/H-4, Mohan Circle-25(2), Cooperative Indl. Estate, New Delhi Mathura Road, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aakcs1045E

u/s 271(1 )(c) is initiated 62,89,890/- Tax sought to be evaded 20,40,755/- Minimum penalty imposable @ 100% 20,40,755/- Maximum penalty imposable @300% 61,22,265/- Penalty imposed 20,40,755/- 4. The ld CIT(A) had partly allowed the appeal of the Assessee while upholding the penalty on account of additions for provision

ACIT, CIRCLE- 27(1), NEW DELHI vs. UNITECH LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

271(1)(c) of the Act. The relevant operative paragraphs of the order of the CIT(A) is extracted hereunder:- “5.1 I have considered the facts of the case and contention of the AR of the appellant. At the outset, the contentions of the AR in stating that the order levying penalty is liable to be set aside

MITHLESH KUMAR TRIPATHI,DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-24(4), DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the AO is without basis. There was no concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate 2 Mithlesh Kumar Tripathi particulars by the appellant, and thus, the penalty proceedings should be dropped. 7. Erroneous Levy of Interest: That the CIT(A) erred in confirming the levy of interest under Sections 234A

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL)-2 vs. NAGAR DAIRY PVT. LTD.

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act. Accordingly, we dismiss the Ground No. 7 of the Revenue. 33. In the result, Appeal of the Revenue in ITA No. 5474/Del/2015 and the Cross Objection No. 29/De1/2016 filed by the Assessee are partly allowed.” We find that no substantial issue of law arises therefrom. 9. We consequently admit the appeal

Commissioner of Income Tax-IV

deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act.” 11. It is noticeable from the aforesaid grounds that the Revenue did not specifically challenge the finding of the CIT (Appeals) that income from the three properties was taxable under the head ‘income from business or profession’ and not under the head ‘income from house property’. In these circumstances, we fail

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NAGAR DAIRY PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, C.O. Nos. 26, 27 & 28/Del/2016 filed by the assessee are allowed, accordingly the Assessment Orders dated 28

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.

penalty u/s 271(1)(c); though no separate addition was made considering the disallowance of higher amount on account of bogus purchases. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in adjudicating the addition made under section 40A(3) of the Act when the assessee had not taken any ground

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NAGAR DAIRY PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, C.O. Nos. 26, 27 & 28/Del/2016 filed by the assessee are allowed, accordingly the Assessment Orders dated 28

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.

penalty u/s 271(1)(c); though no separate addition was made considering the disallowance of higher amount on account of bogus purchases. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in adjudicating the addition made under section 40A(3) of the Act when the assessee had not taken any ground

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NAGAR DAIRY PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, C.O. Nos. 26, 27 & 28/Del/2016 filed by the assessee are allowed, accordingly the Assessment Orders dated 28

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.

penalty u/s 271(1)(c); though no separate addition was made considering the disallowance of higher amount on account of bogus purchases. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in adjudicating the addition made under section 40A(3) of the Act when the assessee had not taken any ground

ACIT, CIRCLE- 27(1), NEW DELHI vs. UNITECH LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2007-08 & Assessment Year: 2013-14

penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) pertaining to assessment years 2007-08 and 2013- 14. ITA No.8913/Del/2019 & 8915/Del/2019 2. When the appeals were called for hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Even, there is no application seeking adjournment. Considering the fact that the assessee has failed