ACIT, CIRCLE-77(1), DELHI, DELHI vs. SHREE VARDHMAN DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the appellant is Allowed

Bench: the Hon’ble Tribunal was penalty order u/s 271C of the I.T. Act, 1961, while in this case subject matter of appeal is order u/s 201(1)/201(1A) of the I.T. Act passed by AO.

penalty order u/s 271C of the I.T. Act, 1961, while in this case subject matter of appeal is order u/s 201(1)/201(1A) of the I.T. Act passed by AO. 3. That the order of the CIT (A) being erroneous in law and on facts and needs to be vacated.” 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused

ACIT, CIRCLE-77(1), DELHI, DELHI vs. SHREE VARDHMAN DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the appellant is Allowed

Bench: the Hon’ble Tribunal was penalty order u/s 271C of the I.T. Act, 1961, while in this case subject matter of appeal is order u/s 201(1)/201(1A) of the I.T. Act passed by AO.

penalty order u/s 271C of the I.T. Act, 1961, while in this case subject matter of appeal is order u/s 201(1)/201(1A) of the I.T. Act passed by AO. 3. That the order of the CIT (A) being erroneous in law and on facts and needs to be vacated.” 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MAHATTA TOWERS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Dcit, Vs M/S. Mahatta Towers Pvt.Ltd., Circle-16(1), 614, Plot No.54, Mahatta Towers, New Delhi. B Block, Community Center, Janakpuri, New Delhi-110058. Pan-Aaacm2109F Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Koushlender Tiwari, Cit Dr Respondent By Shri Ved Jain, Adv. Date Of Hearing 13.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10.10.2024

194A on such assured return, treating the same as interest is therefore, allowable under section 36(1) (iii). Accordingly, addition of Rs 42,87,700/- is deleted and this ground is decided in favour of the appellant.” 16. The issue is with regard to the treatment of amount paid to the buyers as assured return. It is the case

JAI BHAGWAN,VPO BADSHAHPUR,GURGAON,HR. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, GURGAON,HARYANA

The appeal stands allowed and the concurrent findings of the AO and CIT(A) are hereby affirmed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishrajai Bhagwan Vs. Income Tax Officer Vpo Badshahpur Income Tax Building Gurgaon Gurugram- 122001 Haryana-122001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Amapb8989P Appellant .. Respondent

194A and previous decisions on the issue laid down the proposition that interest received as income on delayed payment of the compensation determined under Section 28 or 31 of the Acquisition Act is a taxable event being a revenue receipt. [Ref: Para 10 of the order]. 3. The interpretation of the above judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court

SNG AGRO IMPEX P.LTD,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-24(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year : 2013-14 Sng Agro Impex P. Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward-24(1) 4091, Naya Bazar, New Delhi. North Delhi, Delhi – 110 006 Pan Aaocs1732J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: None Department By : Shri Umesh Takyar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 07.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 31.05.2022 O R D E R Per Astha Chandra, Jm

194A of the Act. The Ld. AO added the difference of Rs. 3,78,207/- (Rs. 3,88,434 - 10,227) to the income of the assessee. 4.2 The Ld. AO further observed that there was increase of unsecured loans/advances taken from directors and relatives amounting to Rs. 1,63,73,325/- during the year under consideration. He added

DCM SHRIIRAM LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. NEAC, NEW DELHI

u/s 80IA of the Act\naccount of transfer of steam has taken though additional grounds\n\nPage | 42\n\nof appeal be admitted and additional evidences filed in support of\nthe additional claim may deserves to be admitted in the interest of\njustice.\n\n44. On the other hand, Ld. CIT DR seriously objected the\nadmission of additional grounds