LG ELECTRONICS INC., KOREA (LGEK),NOIDA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 2(2)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION , NEW DELHI

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

234D of the Act without appreciating that no refund was granted to the Appellant. 9. That the AO/DRP has grossly erred in law and facts in initiating the penalty under section 271(1 )(c) of the Act and alleging that the Appellant has concealed the true and correct particulars of its taxable income and furnished inaccurate particulars of its income

M/S. LG ELECTRONICS INC., KOREA (LGEK),NOIDA vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NOIDA

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

234D of the Act without appreciating that no refund was granted to the Appellant. 9. That the AO/DRP has grossly erred in law and facts in initiating the penalty under section 271(1 )(c) of the Act and alleging that the Appellant has concealed the true and correct particulars of its taxable income and furnished inaccurate particulars of its income

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S NALWA STEEL & POWER LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadi N. Mishraa.Y. : 2006-07 Dcit, Circle 13(1), M/S Nalwa Steel & Power New Delhi Vs. Limited, Room No. 406, Cr Building, 28, Najafgarh Road, Ip Estate, New Delhi New Delhi

234D of the IT Act, issue demand notice and challan. Penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)( c) of the IT Act, have been initiated separately." The income of the assessee was thus assessed under section

M/S. METENERE LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2008-09] M/S Metenere Ltd Vs. The A.C.I.T 138-19, Main Road Central Circle – 18, Ghazipur, Delhi New Delhi Pan No: Aaacm 8484 F [Appellant] [Respondent]

234D as per law. - Penalty proceedings u/s 271(l){c) have been initiated separately.” 5. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act were initiated on the additions made while computing the income under normal provisions of the Act. It can be seen from the computation of income, as per the assessment order exhibited above, that the tax liability

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S BHUSHAN STEEL LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri N.K. Billaiya[Assessment Year: 2008-09] The A. C.I.T Vs. M/S Bhushan Steel Ltd Circle – 3 F-Block, International Trade Tower, New Delhi Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan : Aaccb 7445 H [Appellant] [Respondent] Date Of Hearing : 20.08.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.08.2018 Assessee By : Shri Ashwini Kumar, Ca Shri Rahul Chourasia, Ca

234D of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Issue necessary forms. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are being initiated separately” 10. Thus, it can be seen that the assessment is ultimately framed u/s 143(3) of the Act whereas the penalty has been levied on the additions made for computing the book profit u/s

M/S NEW SKIES SATELLITES B.V.,,GURGAON vs. DCIT (INTL. TAXATION), NEW DELHI

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2009-10 Vs. Adit, Circle -2(1), International M/S. New Skies Satellites B.V., C/O- Pricewaterhouse Coopers Taxation, Room No. 412, Fourth (P) Ltd., Sucheta Bhawan, Gate Floor, Drum Shaped Building, No. 2, 1St Floor, 11A, Vishnu New Delhi Digamber Marg, New Delhi Pan : Aaccn1866C (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. New Skies Satellites B.V., Vs. Addl. Cit, Range-2, New Delhi C/O- Pricewaterhouse Coopers (P) Ltd., Sucheta Bhawan, Gate No. 2, 1St Floor, 11A, Vishnu Digamber Marg, New Delhi Pan : Aaccn1866C (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. New Skies Satellites B.V., Vs. Dcit, Circle -2(2)(2), C/O- Pricewaterhouse Coopers International Taxation, New (P) Ltd., Sucheta Bhawan, Gate Delhi No. 2, 1St Floor, 11A, Vishnu Digamber Marg, New Delhi Pan : Aaccn1866C (Appellant) (Respondent)

u/s 234D of the Act. 9. Without prejudice to above, on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in not granting the credit of taxes deducted at source as claimed in the return of income filed by the Appellant. 10. The Ld. AO erred in initiating penalty proceedings under section 271

NEW SKIES SATELLITES B.V.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2009-10 Vs. Adit, Circle -2(1), International M/S. New Skies Satellites B.V., C/O- Pricewaterhouse Coopers Taxation, Room No. 412, Fourth (P) Ltd., Sucheta Bhawan, Gate Floor, Drum Shaped Building, No. 2, 1St Floor, 11A, Vishnu New Delhi Digamber Marg, New Delhi Pan : Aaccn1866C (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. New Skies Satellites B.V., Vs. Addl. Cit, Range-2, New Delhi C/O- Pricewaterhouse Coopers (P) Ltd., Sucheta Bhawan, Gate No. 2, 1St Floor, 11A, Vishnu Digamber Marg, New Delhi Pan : Aaccn1866C (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. New Skies Satellites B.V., Vs. Dcit, Circle -2(2)(2), C/O- Pricewaterhouse Coopers International Taxation, New (P) Ltd., Sucheta Bhawan, Gate Delhi No. 2, 1St Floor, 11A, Vishnu Digamber Marg, New Delhi Pan : Aaccn1866C (Appellant) (Respondent)

u/s 234D of the Act. 9. Without prejudice to above, on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in not granting the credit of taxes deducted at source as claimed in the return of income filed by the Appellant. 10. The Ld. AO erred in initiating penalty proceedings under section 271

NEW SKIES SATELLITES B.V.,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2009-10 Vs. Adit, Circle -2(1), International M/S. New Skies Satellites B.V., C/O- Pricewaterhouse Coopers Taxation, Room No. 412, Fourth (P) Ltd., Sucheta Bhawan, Gate Floor, Drum Shaped Building, No. 2, 1St Floor, 11A, Vishnu New Delhi Digamber Marg, New Delhi Pan : Aaccn1866C (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. New Skies Satellites B.V., Vs. Addl. Cit, Range-2, New Delhi C/O- Pricewaterhouse Coopers (P) Ltd., Sucheta Bhawan, Gate No. 2, 1St Floor, 11A, Vishnu Digamber Marg, New Delhi Pan : Aaccn1866C (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. New Skies Satellites B.V., Vs. Dcit, Circle -2(2)(2), C/O- Pricewaterhouse Coopers International Taxation, New (P) Ltd., Sucheta Bhawan, Gate Delhi No. 2, 1St Floor, 11A, Vishnu Digamber Marg, New Delhi Pan : Aaccn1866C (Appellant) (Respondent)

u/s 234D of the Act. 9. Without prejudice to above, on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in not granting the credit of taxes deducted at source as claimed in the return of income filed by the Appellant. 10. The Ld. AO erred in initiating penalty proceedings under section 271

PEPSICO INDIA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 7, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

234D of the Act computed by the AO and are consequential in nature. (v) Ground No. 30 pertains to initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act and is consequential in nature. E. I.T.A. No. 4517/DEL/2016 pertaining to AY 2010-11, the assessee company (PepsiCo India Holdings Pvt. Ltd.) has raised the following issues

PEPSI FOODS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

234D of the Act computed by the AO and are consequential in nature. (v) Ground No. 30 pertains to initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act and is consequential in nature. E. I.T.A. No. 4517/DEL/2016 pertaining to AY 2010-11, the assessee company (PepsiCo India Holdings Pvt. Ltd.) has raised the following issues

M/S PEPSICO INDIA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD.,,GURGAON vs. ACIT,, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

234D of the Act computed by the AO and are consequential in nature. (v) Ground No. 30 pertains to initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act and is consequential in nature. E. I.T.A. No. 4517/DEL/2016 pertaining to AY 2010-11, the assessee company (PepsiCo India Holdings Pvt. Ltd.) has raised the following issues

M/S PEPSICO INDIA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD.,,GURGAON vs. ACIT,, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

234D of the Act computed by the AO and are consequential in nature. (v) Ground No. 30 pertains to initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act and is consequential in nature. E. I.T.A. No. 4517/DEL/2016 pertaining to AY 2010-11, the assessee company (PepsiCo India Holdings Pvt. Ltd.) has raised the following issues

M/S. PEPSI FOODS LIMITED,GURGAON vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

234D of the Act computed by the AO and are consequential in nature. (v) Ground No. 30 pertains to initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act and is consequential in nature. E. I.T.A. No. 4517/DEL/2016 pertaining to AY 2010-11, the assessee company (PepsiCo India Holdings Pvt. Ltd.) has raised the following issues

M/S PEPSICO INDIA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD.,,GURGAON vs. ACIT,, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

234D of the Act computed by the AO and are consequential in nature. (v) Ground No. 30 pertains to initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act and is consequential in nature. E. I.T.A. No. 4517/DEL/2016 pertaining to AY 2010-11, the assessee company (PepsiCo India Holdings Pvt. Ltd.) has raised the following issues

RAJ DUTTA,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri J.S. Reddy & Shri Kuldip Singh

section 250 of the Act is bad in law and on the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The Learned CIT (A), as well as Learned Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred as 'AO') has erred in law and on the facts and circumstances of the case by imposing the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income

SMT. SNEH LATA SAWHNEY,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, ITA.Nos.420, 421, 422, 423, 424

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandra

penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the I,.T. Act, 1961 for the A.Ys. 2006-2007 to 2011-2012. 2. Since common issues are involved in all the above appeals, the appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by the consolidated order for the sake of convenience. First, we cull-out the facts from the quantum

SMT. SNEH LATA SAWHNEY,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, ITA.Nos.420, 421, 422, 423, 424

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandra

penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the I,.T. Act, 1961 for the A.Ys. 2006-2007 to 2011-2012. 2. Since common issues are involved in all the above appeals, the appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by the consolidated order for the sake of convenience. First, we cull-out the facts from the quantum

SMT. SNEH LATA SAWHNEY,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, ITA.Nos.420, 421, 422, 423, 424

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandra

penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the I,.T. Act, 1961 for the A.Ys. 2006-2007 to 2011-2012. 2. Since common issues are involved in all the above appeals, the appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by the consolidated order for the sake of convenience. First, we cull-out the facts from the quantum