GAUTAM KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 12, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Anubhav Sharma

234B and 234C of I.T. Act 1961 as per provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961. Issue demand notice and challan alongwith a copy of this order to the assessee. Penalty proceeding u/s 271(1) (c) of the Income Tax Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income are initiated separately. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(b) of the Income

GAUTAM KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 12, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Anubhav Sharma

234B and 234C of I.T. Act 1961 as per provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961. Issue demand notice and challan alongwith a copy of this order to the assessee. Penalty proceeding u/s 271(1) (c) of the Income Tax Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income are initiated separately. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(b) of the Income

VIKAS MALIK,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 39(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

section 44AD of the Act, the assessee having disclosed the nature of business and in the absence of books of account. 10. On the facts and the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the addition despite the same having been made by the A.O. following own surmises

M/S H.B. LEASING & FINANCE COMPANY LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

234B of Income Tax Act, 1961. 9. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of Income Tax Act, 1961 has been wrongly initiated.” 4. When the matter was called for hearing, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that Grounds No.4 and 5 are not pressed in view

M/S. H.B. LEASING & FINANCE COMPANY LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

234B of Income Tax Act, 1961. 9. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of Income Tax Act, 1961 has been wrongly initiated.” 4. When the matter was called for hearing, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that Grounds No.4 and 5 are not pressed in view

FR. SAUTER AG,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD INTERNATIONAL TAX 1(3)(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2012-13]

234B of the Act, if at all leviable, ought to be computed on the net tax liability calculated after giving credit of the prepaid taxes paid by the Appellant. 8. Ground No. 8: Initiating penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(b) of the Act On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

SMS MEER GMBH,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-3(1)(2), NEW DELHI

penalty\nproceedings under section 271(1) (C) of the Income Tax, Act, 1961. The\nprovisions of which are not attracted on the facts.\n9. That the assessee may be allowed to add, supplement, revise,\namend grounds as raised hereinabove.\n\n2. Facts of the case: The assessee is a company incorporated in\nGermany. During the year under consideration

SMS GROUP GMBH (FORMERLY SMS SIEMAG AG),NEW DELHI vs. AACIT, CIRCLE- 3(1)(2), INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vs. Addl. Dit/Ddit, M/S. Sms Siemag Ag (Formerly Sms Demag Ag) Circle-2(2), Intl. Taxation, C/O- Mohinder Puri & Co., New Delhi Ca, 1A-D, Vandhna, 11 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi Pan: Aadcs1173J (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2012-13 With Assessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2014-15

penalty proceedings under section 271(1) (C) of the Income Tax, Act, 1961. The provisions of which are not attracted on the facts. 9. That the assessee may be allowed to add, supplement, revise, amend grounds as raised hereinabove. 2. Facts of the case: The assessee is a company incorporated in Germany. During the year under consideration it was engaged

SMS GROUP GMBH (FORMERLY SMS SIEMAG AG),NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. DIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vs. Addl. Dit/Ddit, M/S. Sms Siemag Ag (Formerly Sms Demag Ag) Circle-2(2), Intl. Taxation, C/O- Mohinder Puri & Co., New Delhi Ca, 1A-D, Vandhna, 11 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi Pan: Aadcs1173J (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2012-13 With Assessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2014-15

penalty proceedings under section 271(1) (C) of the Income Tax, Act, 1961. The provisions of which are not attracted on the facts. 9. That the assessee may be allowed to add, supplement, revise, amend grounds as raised hereinabove. 2. Facts of the case: The assessee is a company incorporated in Germany. During the year under consideration it was engaged

SMS GROUP GMBH,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vs. Addl. Dit/Ddit, M/S. Sms Siemag Ag (Formerly Sms Demag Ag) Circle-2(2), Intl. Taxation, C/O- Mohinder Puri & Co., New Delhi Ca, 1A-D, Vandhna, 11 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi Pan: Aadcs1173J (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2012-13 With Assessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2014-15

penalty proceedings under section 271(1) (C) of the Income Tax, Act, 1961. The provisions of which are not attracted on the facts. 9. That the assessee may be allowed to add, supplement, revise, amend grounds as raised hereinabove. 2. Facts of the case: The assessee is a company incorporated in Germany. During the year under consideration it was engaged

SMS GROUP GMBH (FORMERLY SMS SIEMAG AG),NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 3(1)(2), INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vs. Addl. Dit/Ddit, M/S. Sms Siemag Ag (Formerly Sms Demag Ag) Circle-2(2), Intl. Taxation, C/O- Mohinder Puri & Co., New Delhi Ca, 1A-D, Vandhna, 11 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi Pan: Aadcs1173J (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2012-13 With Assessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2014-15

penalty proceedings under section 271(1) (C) of the Income Tax, Act, 1961. The provisions of which are not attracted on the facts. 9. That the assessee may be allowed to add, supplement, revise, amend grounds as raised hereinabove. 2. Facts of the case: The assessee is a company incorporated in Germany. During the year under consideration it was engaged

SMS GROUP GMBH,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2) (INT. TAX.), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vs. Addl. Dit/Ddit, M/S. Sms Siemag Ag (Formerly Sms Demag Ag) Circle-2(2), Intl. Taxation, C/O- Mohinder Puri & Co., New Delhi Ca, 1A-D, Vandhna, 11 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi Pan: Aadcs1173J (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2012-13 With Assessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2014-15

penalty proceedings under section 271(1) (C) of the Income Tax, Act, 1961. The provisions of which are not attracted on the facts. 9. That the assessee may be allowed to add, supplement, revise, amend grounds as raised hereinabove. 2. Facts of the case: The assessee is a company incorporated in Germany. During the year under consideration it was engaged

SMS GROUP GMBH,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-3(1)(2), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vs. Addl. Dit/Ddit, M/S. Sms Siemag Ag (Formerly Sms Demag Ag) Circle-2(2), Intl. Taxation, C/O- Mohinder Puri & Co., New Delhi Ca, 1A-D, Vandhna, 11 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi Pan: Aadcs1173J (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2012-13 With Assessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2014-15

penalty proceedings under section 271(1) (C) of the Income Tax, Act, 1961. The provisions of which are not attracted on the facts. 9. That the assessee may be allowed to add, supplement, revise, amend grounds as raised hereinabove. 2. Facts of the case: The assessee is a company incorporated in Germany. During the year under consideration it was engaged

SMS MEVAC UK LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-3(1)(2), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vs. Addl. Dit/Ddit, M/S. Sms Siemag Ag (Formerly Sms Demag Ag) Circle-2(2), Intl. Taxation, C/O- Mohinder Puri & Co., New Delhi Ca, 1A-D, Vandhna, 11 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi Pan: Aadcs1173J (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2012-13 With Assessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2014-15

penalty proceedings under section 271(1) (C) of the Income Tax, Act, 1961. The provisions of which are not attracted on the facts. 9. That the assessee may be allowed to add, supplement, revise, amend grounds as raised hereinabove. 2. Facts of the case: The assessee is a company incorporated in Germany. During the year under consideration it was engaged

SMS GROUP GMBH (SMS SIEMAG AG),NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 3(1)(2), INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vs. Addl. Dit/Ddit, M/S. Sms Siemag Ag (Formerly Sms Demag Ag) Circle-2(2), Intl. Taxation, C/O- Mohinder Puri & Co., New Delhi Ca, 1A-D, Vandhna, 11 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi Pan: Aadcs1173J (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2012-13 With Assessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2014-15

penalty proceedings under section 271(1) (C) of the Income Tax, Act, 1961. The provisions of which are not attracted on the facts. 9. That the assessee may be allowed to add, supplement, revise, amend grounds as raised hereinabove. 2. Facts of the case: The assessee is a company incorporated in Germany. During the year under consideration it was engaged

SMS GROUP GMBH (FORMERLY SMS SIEMAG AG),NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 3(1)(2), INTL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vs. Addl. Dit/Ddit, M/S. Sms Siemag Ag (Formerly Sms Demag Ag) Circle-2(2), Intl. Taxation, C/O- Mohinder Puri & Co., New Delhi Ca, 1A-D, Vandhna, 11 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi Pan: Aadcs1173J (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2012-13 With Assessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2014-15

penalty proceedings under section 271(1) (C) of the Income Tax, Act, 1961. The provisions of which are not attracted on the facts. 9. That the assessee may be allowed to add, supplement, revise, amend grounds as raised hereinabove. 2. Facts of the case: The assessee is a company incorporated in Germany. During the year under consideration it was engaged

SMS MEVAC UK LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-3(1)(2), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vs. Addl. Dit/Ddit, M/S. Sms Siemag Ag (Formerly Sms Demag Ag) Circle-2(2), Intl. Taxation, C/O- Mohinder Puri & Co., New Delhi Ca, 1A-D, Vandhna, 11 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi Pan: Aadcs1173J (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2012-13 With Assessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2014-15

penalty proceedings under section 271(1) (C) of the Income Tax, Act, 1961. The provisions of which are not attracted on the facts. 9. That the assessee may be allowed to add, supplement, revise, amend grounds as raised hereinabove. 2. Facts of the case: The assessee is a company incorporated in Germany. During the year under consideration it was engaged

SMS GROUP GMBH (SMS SIEMAG AG),NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 3(1)(2), INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vs. Addl. Dit/Ddit, M/S. Sms Siemag Ag (Formerly Sms Demag Ag) Circle-2(2), Intl. Taxation, C/O- Mohinder Puri & Co., New Delhi Ca, 1A-D, Vandhna, 11 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi Pan: Aadcs1173J (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2012-13 With Assessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2014-15

penalty proceedings under section 271(1) (C) of the Income Tax, Act, 1961. The provisions of which are not attracted on the facts. 9. That the assessee may be allowed to add, supplement, revise, amend grounds as raised hereinabove. 2. Facts of the case: The assessee is a company incorporated in Germany. During the year under consideration it was engaged