ARUN DWIVEDI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-9(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 56(2)(vii)(b)\nwhich is being reproduced here for ready reference:\n(vii) where an individual or a Hindu undivided family\nreceives, in any previous year, from any person or persons on\nor after the 1st day of October, 2009,—\n(a) any sum of money, without consideration, the\naggregate value of which exceeds fifty thousand\nrupees

INDIA TODAY ONLINE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 12(2), NEW DELHI

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuita Nos. 6453 & 6454/Del/2018 Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15

vii)(b) in this year. 24. Thereafter, Ld. CIT(A) proceeded to make enhancement of income on the ground that during the year, the shares aggregating to 2,40,83,333 were allotted during this year for which premium of Rs. 20 per share was paid which needs to be examined. The main reason for the proposal to make enhancement

INDIA TODAY ONLINE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 12(2), NEW DELHI

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuita Nos. 6453 & 6454/Del/2018 Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15

vii)(b) in this year. 24. Thereafter, Ld. CIT(A) proceeded to make enhancement of income on the ground that during the year, the shares aggregating to 2,40,83,333 were allotted during this year for which premium of Rs. 20 per share was paid which needs to be examined. The main reason for the proposal to make enhancement

POTENT FOODS PRIVATE LIMTED,FARIDABAD vs. ITO WARD-2(1), FARIDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda

penalty proceedings u/s 271(l)(c) are being initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of the income on the above account. Accordingly, notice u/s 274 read with section 271(l)(c) of the Act, is being issued separately to the appellant. The AO is directed to give appeal effect on this account and issue demand notice u/s

BRIJ GOPAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2017-18

271(1)(c) of the Act. Accordingly, ground Nos. 1, 4, 6 and 7 raised by the assessee are hereby allowed." xi) 179 taxmann.com 421(Mumbai- Trib.) dated 13.10.2025 Bharatkumar Jaishinh vs. ITO (pages 1-5 of JPB) 26 xiii) ITA No. 1285/Ahd/2025 dated 30.10.2025 Krunal Sanghvi vs. ITO (pages 6-12 of JPB) xiv) ITA No. 1054/Bang/2024 dated

GOPESH FABRICS PVT. LTD.,BALLABHGARH vs. ITO WARD-1(3) , FARIDABAD

In the result, Appeals in ITA No

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No.84/Del/2021, A.Y.2016-17)

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. The above grounds of appeals are independent of and without prejudice to each other. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw all or any grounds herein or add any further grounds as may be considered necessary either before or during the hearing of these grounds.” The issues

SHANTA BLANKETS PVT. LTD.,HARYANA vs. ITO WARD-2(3) , FARIDABAD

In the result, Appeals in ITA No

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No.84/Del/2021, A.Y.2016-17)

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. The above grounds of appeals are independent of and without prejudice to each other. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw all or any grounds herein or add any further grounds as may be considered necessary either before or during the hearing of these grounds.” The issues

PINGASH MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED,BALLABHGARH vs. ITO WARD-2(1), FARIDABAD

In the result, Appeals in ITA No

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No.84/Del/2021, A.Y.2016-17)

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. The above grounds of appeals are independent of and without prejudice to each other. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw all or any grounds herein or add any further grounds as may be considered necessary either before or during the hearing of these grounds.” The issues

VIDHI CINEMAS PVT.LTD.,HARYANA vs. ITO WARD-2(5), FARIDABAD

In the result, Appeals in ITA No

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No.84/Del/2021, A.Y.2016-17)

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. The above grounds of appeals are independent of and without prejudice to each other. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw all or any grounds herein or add any further grounds as may be considered necessary either before or during the hearing of these grounds.” The issues

ZHILMIL ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.,HARYANA vs. ITO WARD-2(5), FARIDABAD

In the result, Appeals in ITA No

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No.84/Del/2021, A.Y.2016-17)

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. The above grounds of appeals are independent of and without prejudice to each other. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw all or any grounds herein or add any further grounds as may be considered necessary either before or during the hearing of these grounds.” The issues

SPARSH BEAUTY CARE PVT. LTD.,HARYANA vs. ITO WARD-2(4), HARYANA

In the result, the appeals of the assesses are allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R.R. Kumar & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Punyah Building Vs Ito Materials Pvt. Ltd. Ward-2 (1) House No.1002, Near Talab Faridabad Shiv Colony, Old Faridabad Haryana Ballahgarh Haryana 122002 Pan No.Aagcp8742B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sparsh Beauty Care Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ito Plot No.1066, Near Janta Barat Ward-2 (4) Ghar Baba Nagar, Faridabad Faridabad Haryana 121002 Haryana Pan No.Aascs2575D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Speedy Courier Services Pvt. Vs Ito Ltd. Ward- 2 (4) Plot No.1022, Near Talab Shiv Faridabad Colony, Faridabad Haryana Pan No.Aascs2579R (Appellant) (Respondent)

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 2. The brief facts of the cases are that the returns of income were e- filed by the assessees and the same were processed u/s. 143 (1). The cases were selected for limited scrutiny under CASS to verify “whether the funds received in the form of share premium are from disclosed

PUNYAH BUILDING MATERIALS PVT LTD,FARIDABAD vs. ITO WARD - 2(1), FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assesses are allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R.R. Kumar & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Punyah Building Vs Ito Materials Pvt. Ltd. Ward-2 (1) House No.1002, Near Talab Faridabad Shiv Colony, Old Faridabad Haryana Ballahgarh Haryana 122002 Pan No.Aagcp8742B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sparsh Beauty Care Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ito Plot No.1066, Near Janta Barat Ward-2 (4) Ghar Baba Nagar, Faridabad Faridabad Haryana 121002 Haryana Pan No.Aascs2575D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Speedy Courier Services Pvt. Vs Ito Ltd. Ward- 2 (4) Plot No.1022, Near Talab Shiv Faridabad Colony, Faridabad Haryana Pan No.Aascs2579R (Appellant) (Respondent)

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 2. The brief facts of the cases are that the returns of income were e- filed by the assessees and the same were processed u/s. 143 (1). The cases were selected for limited scrutiny under CASS to verify “whether the funds received in the form of share premium are from disclosed

SPEEDY COURIER SERVICES PVT LTD,FARIDABAD vs. ITO WARD - 2(4), FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assesses are allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R.R. Kumar & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Punyah Building Vs Ito Materials Pvt. Ltd. Ward-2 (1) House No.1002, Near Talab Faridabad Shiv Colony, Old Faridabad Haryana Ballahgarh Haryana 122002 Pan No.Aagcp8742B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sparsh Beauty Care Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ito Plot No.1066, Near Janta Barat Ward-2 (4) Ghar Baba Nagar, Faridabad Faridabad Haryana 121002 Haryana Pan No.Aascs2575D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Speedy Courier Services Pvt. Vs Ito Ltd. Ward- 2 (4) Plot No.1022, Near Talab Shiv Faridabad Colony, Faridabad Haryana Pan No.Aascs2579R (Appellant) (Respondent)

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 2. The brief facts of the cases are that the returns of income were e- filed by the assessees and the same were processed u/s. 143 (1). The cases were selected for limited scrutiny under CASS to verify “whether the funds received in the form of share premium are from disclosed

PEOPLE CARE HOSPITALS PRIVATE LIMITED,FARIDABAD vs. ITO, WARD 2(1), FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assesses are allowed

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 People Care Hospitals Private Vs Ito Limited, Plot No.1066, Baba Ward- 2 (1) Nagar, Near Janta Barat Ghar, Faridabad Old Faridabad, Haryana 121002 Pan No.Aagcp8745G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Geranium Barkers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ito 103/B, Near Shyamji Mandir Ward-1 (3) Malerna Road, Adarsh Nagar, Faridabad Ballabgarh Haryana -122004 Pan No.Aafcg3396P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Riven Health Club Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ito Ff-9, Vishnu Place Near Ward- 2 (2) Neelam Flyover Sector-20B Faridabad Faridabad Haryana121001 Pan No. Aagcr1343A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellants By Sh. Rajeev Saxena, Advocate Ms. Sumangla Saxena, Advocate Sh. Dishant Sethi, Advocate

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4. The brief facts of the cases are that the returns of income were e- filed by the assessee and the same were processed u/s. 143 (1). The cases were selected for limited scrutiny under CASS to verify “whether the funds received in the form of share premium are from disclosed

GERANIUM BAKERS PRIVATE LMITED,BALLABHGARH vs. ITO WARD-1(3), FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assesses are allowed

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 People Care Hospitals Private Vs Ito Limited, Plot No.1066, Baba Ward- 2 (1) Nagar, Near Janta Barat Ghar, Faridabad Old Faridabad, Haryana 121002 Pan No.Aagcp8745G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Geranium Barkers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ito 103/B, Near Shyamji Mandir Ward-1 (3) Malerna Road, Adarsh Nagar, Faridabad Ballabgarh Haryana -122004 Pan No.Aafcg3396P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Riven Health Club Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ito Ff-9, Vishnu Place Near Ward- 2 (2) Neelam Flyover Sector-20B Faridabad Faridabad Haryana121001 Pan No. Aagcr1343A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellants By Sh. Rajeev Saxena, Advocate Ms. Sumangla Saxena, Advocate Sh. Dishant Sethi, Advocate

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4. The brief facts of the cases are that the returns of income were e- filed by the assessee and the same were processed u/s. 143 (1). The cases were selected for limited scrutiny under CASS to verify “whether the funds received in the form of share premium are from disclosed

RIVEN HEALTH CLUB PVT. LTD.,FARIDABAD vs. ITO WARD-2(2), FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assesses are allowed

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 People Care Hospitals Private Vs Ito Limited, Plot No.1066, Baba Ward- 2 (1) Nagar, Near Janta Barat Ghar, Faridabad Old Faridabad, Haryana 121002 Pan No.Aagcp8745G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Geranium Barkers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ito 103/B, Near Shyamji Mandir Ward-1 (3) Malerna Road, Adarsh Nagar, Faridabad Ballabgarh Haryana -122004 Pan No.Aafcg3396P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Riven Health Club Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ito Ff-9, Vishnu Place Near Ward- 2 (2) Neelam Flyover Sector-20B Faridabad Faridabad Haryana121001 Pan No. Aagcr1343A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellants By Sh. Rajeev Saxena, Advocate Ms. Sumangla Saxena, Advocate Sh. Dishant Sethi, Advocate

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4. The brief facts of the cases are that the returns of income were e- filed by the assessee and the same were processed u/s. 143 (1). The cases were selected for limited scrutiny under CASS to verify “whether the funds received in the form of share premium are from disclosed

SMT. TRIPAT KAUR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishismt. Tripat Kaur Vs. The Assistant A-29, Friends Colony, East Commissioner Of Income New Delhi Tax Pan: Aaapk8020A Central Circle- 14 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

56,260/- making an addition of unexplained stock of Rs. 15,96,224/- over and above disclosure of ₹ 3 crores in the return of income. Penalty notices u/s 271AAA of the Act was issued to the assessee as she has disclosed a sum of ₹ 3 crores voluntarily during the course of search and offered the same as income

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S JAY METAL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

Penalty proceedin.9s under section 271 (1)(c) are initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. (Addition of Rs.24,73,500/-)" 6 Asstt.Year: 2009-10 9. From the vigilant reading of the impugned order, we note that the CIT(A) has granted relief to the assessee for the year under consideration i.e A. Y 2009- 10 while passing the impugned

TSI YATRA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE-25, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the act, without appreciating the fact that the appellant has neither concealed particulars of income nor furnished inaccurate particulars.” 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that that appellant is engaged in the business of providing travel related services by way of air ticket booking, hotel booking, etc to travel