DELHI POLICY GROUP (REG),NEW DELHI vs. ITO(E),WARD 1(3), DELHI

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

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2013-14

12A registration had been obtained by it. The assessee filed rectification application on 15.01.2018 under section 154 of the Act which vide order dated 22.2.2018 the Ld. Assessing Officer (“AO”) rejected saying that benefit of exemption under section 12A/12AA cannot be allowed as there is no claim for the same in the return of income which could have been rectified

AP GOYAL CHARITABLE TRUST,EAST DELHI, DELHI INDIA vs. ITO, CIVIC CENTRE,NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

12A of eh Act. The assessment was originally completed u/s 143(3) at Nil. The case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the Act on the basis of information received from DCIT, Central Circle, Mumbai that assessee has received bogus donation from M./s Anandilal & Ganesh Podar Society of Rs.50,00,000/- lacs and based on such information

VRINDA SALES P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-26(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

12A, section 44AB [, section 44DA, section 50B], section 80-IA, section 80-IB, section 80-IC, section 9 ITA No. 5568/Del./2019 80-ID, section 80JJAA, section 80LA, section 92E, [section 115JB, 5[section 115JC] or section 115VW] [or to give a notice under clause (a) of sub-section (2) of section 11] of the Act, he shall furnish

ANAND KUMAR JAIN,FARIDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person 17[for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant

SAJAN KUMAR JAIN,DELHI vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person 17[for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant

ANAND JAIN HUF,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person 17[for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant

ANAND KUMAR JAIN,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person 17[for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant

ANAND KUMAR JAIN,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person 17[for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant

SATISH DEV JAIN,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person 17[for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant

ANAND JAIN HUF,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person 17[for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant

ITO WARD - 23(3), NEW DELHI vs. SHREE BHAWANI POWER PROJECTS PVT LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue Department stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri N.K. Choudhry

reassessment order which was passed on 07.12.2019, therefore, following the appellate order for A.Y. 2016-17, as referred above, the addition of Rs.1,85,97,591/- is hereby deleted and the Assessing Officer is directed to allow the claim of deduction u/s. 80IA of the Act to the appellant. 8.2 In order to adjudicate the issue under controversy properly

ITO WARD - 23(3), NEW DELHI vs. SHREE BHAWANI POWER PROJECTS PVT LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue Department stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri N.K. Choudhry

reassessment order which was passed on 07.12.2019, therefore, following the appellate order for A.Y. 2016-17, as referred above, the addition of Rs.1,85,97,591/- is hereby deleted and the Assessing Officer is directed to allow the claim of deduction u/s. 80IA of the Act to the appellant. 8.2 In order to adjudicate the issue under controversy properly

JAIBHARAT MANDAL RAMLILA AND DHARAMSHALA SOCIETY,HISAR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), ROHTAK

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat1. Ita No. 5273/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2008-09) 2. Ita No. 5274/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2009-10) 3. Ita No. 5275/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2010-11) 4. Ita No. 5276/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2012-13) 5. Ita No. 5277/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2014-15) 6. Ita No. 291/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2016-17)

reassessed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act at Rs. 6,54,890 and 16 ITA 5273 to 5277/D/19 & 291/D/20 Jaibharat Mandal Ramlila & Dharamshala Society Vs. ITO Rs. 7,67,320 respectively. For the remaining assessment years, that is, 2010- 11, 2012-13 and 2014-15, the case of the Appellant was selected for scrutiny and assessed under section

JAIBHARAT MANDAL RAMLILA AND DHARAMSHALA SOCIETY,HISAR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), ROHTAK

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat1. Ita No. 5273/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2008-09) 2. Ita No. 5274/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2009-10) 3. Ita No. 5275/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2010-11) 4. Ita No. 5276/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2012-13) 5. Ita No. 5277/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2014-15) 6. Ita No. 291/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2016-17)

reassessed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act at Rs. 6,54,890 and 16 ITA 5273 to 5277/D/19 & 291/D/20 Jaibharat Mandal Ramlila & Dharamshala Society Vs. ITO Rs. 7,67,320 respectively. For the remaining assessment years, that is, 2010- 11, 2012-13 and 2014-15, the case of the Appellant was selected for scrutiny and assessed under section

JAIBHARAT MANDAL RAMLILA AND DHARAMSHALA SOCIETY,HISAR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), ROHTAK

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat1. Ita No. 5273/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2008-09) 2. Ita No. 5274/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2009-10) 3. Ita No. 5275/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2010-11) 4. Ita No. 5276/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2012-13) 5. Ita No. 5277/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2014-15) 6. Ita No. 291/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2016-17)

reassessed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act at Rs. 6,54,890 and 16 ITA 5273 to 5277/D/19 & 291/D/20 Jaibharat Mandal Ramlila & Dharamshala Society Vs. ITO Rs. 7,67,320 respectively. For the remaining assessment years, that is, 2010- 11, 2012-13 and 2014-15, the case of the Appellant was selected for scrutiny and assessed under section

JAIBHARAT MANDAL RAMLILA AND DHARAMSHALA SOCIETY,HISAR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), ROHTAK

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat1. Ita No. 5273/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2008-09) 2. Ita No. 5274/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2009-10) 3. Ita No. 5275/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2010-11) 4. Ita No. 5276/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2012-13) 5. Ita No. 5277/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2014-15) 6. Ita No. 291/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2016-17)

reassessed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act at Rs. 6,54,890 and 16 ITA 5273 to 5277/D/19 & 291/D/20 Jaibharat Mandal Ramlila & Dharamshala Society Vs. ITO Rs. 7,67,320 respectively. For the remaining assessment years, that is, 2010- 11, 2012-13 and 2014-15, the case of the Appellant was selected for scrutiny and assessed under section

JAIBHARAT MANDAL RAMLILA AND DHARAMSHALA SOCIETY,HISAR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), ROHTAK

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat1. Ita No. 5273/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2008-09) 2. Ita No. 5274/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2009-10) 3. Ita No. 5275/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2010-11) 4. Ita No. 5276/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2012-13) 5. Ita No. 5277/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2014-15) 6. Ita No. 291/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2016-17)

reassessed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act at Rs. 6,54,890 and 16 ITA 5273 to 5277/D/19 & 291/D/20 Jaibharat Mandal Ramlila & Dharamshala Society Vs. ITO Rs. 7,67,320 respectively. For the remaining assessment years, that is, 2010- 11, 2012-13 and 2014-15, the case of the Appellant was selected for scrutiny and assessed under section

JAIBHARAT MANDAL RAMLILA AND DHARAMSHALA SOCIETY,HISAR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), ROHTAK

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat1. Ita No. 5273/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2008-09) 2. Ita No. 5274/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2009-10) 3. Ita No. 5275/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2010-11) 4. Ita No. 5276/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2012-13) 5. Ita No. 5277/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2014-15) 6. Ita No. 291/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2016-17)

reassessed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act at Rs. 6,54,890 and 16 ITA 5273 to 5277/D/19 & 291/D/20 Jaibharat Mandal Ramlila & Dharamshala Society Vs. ITO Rs. 7,67,320 respectively. For the remaining assessment years, that is, 2010- 11, 2012-13 and 2014-15, the case of the Appellant was selected for scrutiny and assessed under section