ACIT, CIRCLE- 2(2), NEW DELHI vs. ANANT RAJ LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

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

Business and profession’, as claimed by the appellant, and instead upholding the amount of claim of the appellant as assessed by the Learned Assessing Officer under the head ‘Income from Capital Gains’. iii. That within the facts and circumstances of the case and the law on the point, the learned CIT(A) has erred in sustaining addition of an amount

GE PRECISION HEALTHCARE LLC,USA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(3)(1), MINTO ROAD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

business income of the assessee taxable in India if it has a PE in India. CONCLUSION 168. Given the definition of royalties contained in Article 12 of the DAAs mentioned in paragraph 41 of this judgment, it is clear that there is no obligation on the persons mentioned in section 195 of the Income-tax Act to deduct

ACIT, CIRCLE-51(1), NEW DELHI vs. NAVEEN BATRA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Cross Objection of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usassessment Year 2017-18

reassessment. 8 ITA No.32/Del/2020 & CO No.69/Del/2020 6.4.2 The provision of section 199l state that the amount of undisclosed income declared in accordance with sub-section (1) of section 199C shall not be included in the total income of declarant for any A.Y. under Income Tax Act. 6.4.3 The provision of section 199L state that "Notwithstanding anything contained in any other

AMBIENCE DEVELOPERS AND INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), DELHI-2 JHANDEWALAN, NEW DELHI, DELHI

business income as rental income then the\nfollowing depreciation is found to be allowable to the assessee:\nRevised Computation of Income\nComputation as per Section 263\nAmount\nProfit & Loss Account\n170,920,004\nAdd:\nDepreciation as per Companies Act.\n100,054,347\nAdd:\nCSR Expenditure\n3,036,000\nGross Total\n274,010,351\nPage 28\nITA Nos.1868 & 1869/Del/2025\nAmbience Developers

M/S WEL INTERTRADE PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Amit Shukla

business expenditure) could be held as a disallowable expenditure u/s.37(1) of the Act. 3. The brief facts qua the issue involved are that assessee- company had furnished its return of income on 14.10.2010 declaring total income of Rs.1,16,05,402/-. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer had completed the assessment vide order dated 23.02.2013 determining the total income

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SUNLIGHT TOUR AND TRAVELS PVT. LTD., SAHIBABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[A.Y 2007-08]

Business Pvt Ltd, unsecured loan from these parties should not be treated as bogus and should be considered as only accommodation entries. Thereafter, the entire assessment order is silent with this query. 14. However, the Assessing Officer then proceeded to examine the amount received on account of security premium and made addition thereof. It can be seen that the computation

MR. KANWALJIT SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal are dismissed

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

reassessment proceedings by the learned assessing officer and therefore all the additional grounds raised by the assessee against the reopening of the assessment are dismissed. 30. Now coming to the original ground of appeal of the assessee with respect to the taxability of the non compete fees received by the assessee offered by him as business income

MR. KANWALJIT SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal are dismissed

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

reassessment proceedings by the learned assessing officer and therefore all the additional grounds raised by the assessee against the reopening of the assessment are dismissed. 30. Now coming to the original ground of appeal of the assessee with respect to the taxability of the non compete fees received by the assessee offered by him as business income

MR. KANWALJIT SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal are dismissed

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

reassessment proceedings by the learned assessing officer and therefore all the additional grounds raised by the assessee against the reopening of the assessment are dismissed. 30. Now coming to the original ground of appeal of the assessee with respect to the taxability of the non compete fees received by the assessee offered by him as business income

SHEELA FOAM LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 6, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.4096/Del/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2005-06 Sheela Foam Ltd., C-55, Preet Vihar, Vikas Marg, New Delhi-110092. ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan-Aaacs0189B Vs The Dcit, Central Circle-6, …………. ""यथ" / Respondent New Delhi-110016

reassessment order dated 28.03.2013 passed under section 147 r.w.s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) is beyond jurisdiction, bad in law and void-ab initio in as much as same has been passed without issuing and serving the jurisdictional notice under section 143(2) of the Act.” 4. The Ld.AR for the assessee pointed out that

AMBIENCE DEVELOPERS AND INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. PCIT (CENTRAL) DELHI-2, JHANDEWALAN NEW DELHI, DELHI

business income as rental income then the\nfollowing depreciation is found to be allowable to the assessee:\n\n| Revised Computation of Income\n| Computation as per Section 263\n| Amount\n| Profit & Loss Account\n| 170,920,004\n| Add:\n| Depreciation as per Companies Act.\n| 100,054,347\n| Add:\n| CSR Expenditure

M/S SHUBH ENGINEERING LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 1 to 3 of the appeal of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishisubh Engineering Ltd, Vs. Dcit, D-60, Okhla Industrial Area, Circle-8(1), Phase-I, New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaacs1321F (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessment proceedings as well as treating the interest income from security deposit as income from other sources. Therefore, assessee is in appeal before us challenging the assessment proceedings on the issue of reopening of assessment as well as that interest income is chargeable to tax as „business

ITO, WARD-1(4), FARIDABAD vs. KESHAV MEDICHEM P.LTD, FARIDABAD

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

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

business other than giving accommodation entries. As per report of the DDIT(Inv.) New Delhi M/s Keshav Medichem Pvt. Ltd. 1104, The Sphinex Tower, Gurugram, Haryana has received accommodation entries as per following details:- 5. No. Paper/Shell company providing entries Amount Bank A/c no. 1. M/s White Lotus Securities 670320110000269 1,57, 00, 100/- 2. Blue Sphire Health Care

ACIT, HARIDWAR vs. M/S SANT STEEL & ALLOYS (P) LTD., KOTDWAR

In the result, appeals filed by Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kant

business of Rs. 1,68,29,316/- , the reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short

ACIT, HARIDWAR vs. M/S SANT STEEL & ALLOYS (P) LTD., KOTDWAR

In the result, appeals filed by Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kant

business of Rs. 1,68,29,316/- , the reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -7 vs. SUNLIGHT TOUR AND TRAVELS PVT. LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA

Business Private Limited as assumed by the learned AO. However, the Assessee’s objections were not entertained. Digitally Signed By:DUSHYANT RAWAL Signature Not Verified ITA 222/2022 Page 4 of 15 5. During the assessment proceedings, the AO did not make any addition of an amount of ₹88,00,000/-. However, the AO noted that the balance sheet

RAJESH KUMAR,NARNAUL vs. ITO WARD - 2, NARNAUL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1465/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Rajesh Kumar, Vs Income Tax Officer, Krishan Nagar, Narnaul, Ward-2, Mohindergarh, Narnaul, Narnaul, Haryana-123001 Haryana-123001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Axqpk2406F Assessee By : Sh. Lalit Mohan, Ca & Ms. Monika Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Indu Bala Saini, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.08.2022

REASSESSMENT PROPOSED NOT ADDED BUT OTHER DEDUCTIONS REDUCED —NOT PERMISSIBLE —INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, ss. 147, 148 10 Rajesh Kumar The assessee-company was engaged in the business

DABUR INVEST CORP,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, RANGE-46, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Partially Through Video Conferencing) Dabur Invest Corp, The Joint Commissioner Of Vs. 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, 10, Income Tax , Rouse Avenue, New Delhi Range-46, Pan: Aaadfd2529G New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

business income of the assessee is computed by treating the option price received as “income”, corresponding deduction of the interest expenditure capitalized in the books of accounts of the assessee should be granted to the assessee as deductible expenditure incurred for earning the above option price. Naturally on principle, the claim of the assessee for raising such an additional ground