A2Z MAINTENANCE & ENGINEERING SERVICES LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

u/s 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act is also enclosed” 15.2 In the absence of nature of default discernible from the directions of AO at the time of framing the assessment order, consequent penalty proceedings itself is unsustainable in law. In parity with ITA no. 2631/D/2019 and 939/D/2019 supra, the entire penalty proceedings is void

DCIT CC-2 , FARIDABAD vs. A2Z MAINTENANCE AND ENGINEERING SERVICES LTD., GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

u/s 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act is also enclosed” 15.2 In the absence of nature of default discernible from the directions of AO at the time of framing the assessment order, consequent penalty proceedings itself is unsustainable in law. In parity with ITA no. 2631/D/2019 and 939/D/2019 supra, the entire penalty proceedings is void

DCIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, FARIDABAD vs. A2Z INFRA ENGINEERS LTD., GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

u/s 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act is also enclosed” 15.2 In the absence of nature of default discernible from the directions of AO at the time of framing the assessment order, consequent penalty proceedings itself is unsustainable in law. In parity with ITA no. 2631/D/2019 and 939/D/2019 supra, the entire penalty proceedings is void

A2Z INFRA ENGINEERING LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT CC-2 , FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

u/s 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act is also enclosed” 15.2 In the absence of nature of default discernible from the directions of AO at the time of framing the assessment order, consequent penalty proceedings itself is unsustainable in law. In parity with ITA no. 2631/D/2019 and 939/D/2019 supra, the entire penalty proceedings is void

A2Z INFRA ENGINEERING LIMITED,GURGAON vs. CCIT- CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

u/s 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act is also enclosed” 15.2 In the absence of nature of default discernible from the directions of AO at the time of framing the assessment order, consequent penalty proceedings itself is unsustainable in law. In parity with ITA no. 2631/D/2019 and 939/D/2019 supra, the entire penalty proceedings is void

A2Z INFRA ENGINEERING LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT- CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

u/s 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act is also enclosed” 15.2 In the absence of nature of default discernible from the directions of AO at the time of framing the assessment order, consequent penalty proceedings itself is unsustainable in law. In parity with ITA no. 2631/D/2019 and 939/D/2019 supra, the entire penalty proceedings is void

INFRA ENGINEERS LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CC-2, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

u/s 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act is also enclosed” 15.2 In the absence of nature of default discernible from the directions of AO at the time of framing the assessment order, consequent penalty proceedings itself is unsustainable in law. In parity with ITA no. 2631/D/2019 and 939/D/2019 supra, the entire penalty proceedings is void

SAGA DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmasaga Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit B-67, Sarita Vihar, Central Circle – 19 New Delhi – 76 New Delhi - 55 Pan No. Aajcs 4932 K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri M. P. Rastogi, Adv. Revenue By Shri Abhishek Kumar, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 26.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 05.08.2022 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am :

section 271(1)(c) of the Act are not applicable. 3 4. That the above grounds of appeal are independent and without prejudice to one another. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw any of the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing.” 5. Before us, at the outset, Learned AR submitted that in the present

THAPAR HOMES LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 570, 571 & 41 /िद"ी/2017 (िन.व. 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2009-10)

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is initiated separately.” The AO has made addition after referring to alleged incriminating material Annexure A-21 page no. 78 and 79 seized from the premises of assessee company. The CIT(A) has deleted the addition for the following reasons:- “I have considered the facts of the case, the basis of the additions made

THAPAR HOMES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 570, 571 & 41 /िद"ी/2017 (िन.व. 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2009-10)

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is initiated separately.” The AO has made addition after referring to alleged incriminating material Annexure A-21 page no. 78 and 79 seized from the premises of assessee company. The CIT(A) has deleted the addition for the following reasons:- “I have considered the facts of the case, the basis of the additions made

THAPAR HOMES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 570, 571 & 41 /िद"ी/2017 (िन.व. 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2009-10)

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is initiated separately.” The AO has made addition after referring to alleged incriminating material Annexure A-21 page no. 78 and 79 seized from the premises of assessee company. The CIT(A) has deleted the addition for the following reasons:- “I have considered the facts of the case, the basis of the additions made

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. THAPAR HOMES LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 570, 571 & 41 /िद"ी/2017 (िन.व. 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2009-10)

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is initiated separately.” The AO has made addition after referring to alleged incriminating material Annexure A-21 page no. 78 and 79 seized from the premises of assessee company. The CIT(A) has deleted the addition for the following reasons:- “I have considered the facts of the case, the basis of the additions made

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. THAPAR HOMER LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 570, 571 & 41 /िद"ी/2017 (िन.व. 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2009-10)

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is initiated separately.” The AO has made addition after referring to alleged incriminating material Annexure A-21 page no. 78 and 79 seized from the premises of assessee company. The CIT(A) has deleted the addition for the following reasons:- “I have considered the facts of the case, the basis of the additions made

THAPAR HOMES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is\nallowed

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is\ninitiated separately.”\nThe AO has made addition after referring to alleged incriminating material\nAnnexure A-21 page no. 78 and 79 seized from the premises of assessee company.\nThe CIT(A) has deleted the addition for the following reasons:-\n“I have considered the facts of the case, the basis of the additions made

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. THAPAR HOMES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is\nallowed

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is\ninitiated separately.”\nThe AO has made addition after referring to alleged incriminating material\nAnnexure A-21 page no. 78 and 79 seized from the premises of assessee company.\nThe CIT(A) has deleted the addition for the following reasons:-\n“I have considered the facts of the case, the basis of the additions made

DCIT-CC-27, NEW DELHI vs. ANSHIKA CONSULTANTS PVT LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal.” Cross Objection

Penalty U/s 271(1)(c) is being initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 5.7 In view of the above discussion, average amount of investment is computed as follows:- Opening Balance Investment 533951321 Closing Balance Investment 569955593 1103906914: Average Investment 551953457 0.5% of Average Investments 2759767 Total expenditures as per P & L A/c 590554 Less: Expenses disallowed by assessee itself

RIVET ELECTRICAL PVT LTD,FARIDABAD vs. PR. CIT, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia[Assessment Year : 2014-15] Rivet Electrical Pvt.Ltd., Vs Pr.Cit, Ff-9, Vishnu Place, Faridabad, Near Neelam Flyover, Sec-20B, Haryana. Faridabad, Haryana-121002. Pan-Aafcr8803C Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Rajeev Saxena, Adv., Ms. Sumangl Saxena, Adv. & Shri Sahyamsunder, Adv. Respondent By Shri Anuj Garg, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 12.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 15.11.2022

35D. At point 35, no bad debts have been claimed. At point 36, no penalty or fine has been incurred by the assessee. At point 37, no payment by way of commission or brokerage has been made during the year. At point 38, details regarding the expenses on which TDS is required to be deducted has been provided. At point