DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD vs. SALUJA OVERSEAS PVT. LTD., GHAZIABAD

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Krinwant Sahaydcit, Ghaziabad, Vs. Saluja Overseas Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 201, First Floor, A-1, Plot No. 1, Delhi Meerut Road, Cgo Complex, Hapur Chungi, New Arya Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad, Up-201002 Up-201001 (Pan: Aaucs6233L) (Appellant) (Respondent)

145(3) of the Act. In view of the aforesaid factual matrix and respectfully following the precedents, as referred above, we are of the considered view that Ld. CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition, which does not need any interference on our part, hence, we affirm the same and dismiss this ground of appeal. 6. We further note that

AMOL AWASTHI,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, C.C.1, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M Balaganesh

3) of section 143, section 144 and section 145 shall, so far as may be, apply: (b)the Assessing Officer, on determination of the 22 ITAs No.1342, 1343, 1344, 1345, 1346, 1347 & 1348/DEL/2024 undisclosed income of the block period in accordance with this Chapter, shall pass an order of assessment and determine the tax payable by him on the basis

AMOL AWASTHI,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, C.C.1, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M Balaganesh

3) of section 143, section 144 and section 145 shall, so far as may be, apply: (b)the Assessing Officer, on determination of the 22 ITAs No.1342, 1343, 1344, 1345, 1346, 1347 & 1348/DEL/2024 undisclosed income of the block period in accordance with this Chapter, shall pass an order of assessment and determine the tax payable by him on the basis

AMOL AWASTHI,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-I, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M Balaganesh

3) of section 143, section 144 and section 145 shall, so far as may be, apply: (b)the Assessing Officer, on determination of the 22 ITAs No.1342, 1343, 1344, 1345, 1346, 1347 & 1348/DEL/2024 undisclosed income of the block period in accordance with this Chapter, shall pass an order of assessment and determine the tax payable by him on the basis

AMOL AWASTHI,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, C.C.1, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M Balaganesh

3) of section 143, section 144 and section 145 shall, so far as may be, apply: (b)the Assessing Officer, on determination of the 22 ITAs No.1342, 1343, 1344, 1345, 1346, 1347 & 1348/DEL/2024 undisclosed income of the block period in accordance with this Chapter, shall pass an order of assessment and determine the tax payable by him on the basis

AMOL AWASTHI,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M Balaganesh

3) of section 143, section 144 and section 145 shall, so far as may be, apply: (b)the Assessing Officer, on determination of the 22 ITAs No.1342, 1343, 1344, 1345, 1346, 1347 & 1348/DEL/2024 undisclosed income of the block period in accordance with this Chapter, shall pass an order of assessment and determine the tax payable by him on the basis

AMOL AWASTHI,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M Balaganesh

3) of section 143, section 144 and section 145 shall, so far as may be, apply: (b)the Assessing Officer, on determination of the 22 ITAs No.1342, 1343, 1344, 1345, 1346, 1347 & 1348/DEL/2024 undisclosed income of the block period in accordance with this Chapter, shall pass an order of assessment and determine the tax payable by him on the basis

AMOL AWASTHI,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, C.C.1, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M Balaganesh

3) of section 143, section 144 and section 145 shall, so far as may be, apply: (b)the Assessing Officer, on determination of the 22 ITAs No.1342, 1343, 1344, 1345, 1346, 1347 & 1348/DEL/2024 undisclosed income of the block period in accordance with this Chapter, shall pass an order of assessment and determine the tax payable by him on the basis

ANIL KUMAR JAIN,NEW DELHI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, JHANDEWALAN, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

reassessment u/s 148 qua genuineness of unsecured loan as well as purchases disclosed, considered and accepted during the original assessment under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2013-14 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order dated 10th December 2024 passed by the CIT(A) as well as order dated

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SAHARA INDIA POWER CORPORATION LTD., PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue for the AY 2005-06 in I

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

3." 41. From perusal of all the judgments it has been consistently held rather a settled law that the action of revenue authorities cannot be held justified if they substitute another method of accounting on the assessee which in the instant case was imposing of percentage completion method on the assessee even when it has been consistently maintaining the regular

SAHARA INDIA POWER CORPORATION LTD.,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue for the AY 2005-06 in I

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

3." 41. From perusal of all the judgments it has been consistently held rather a settled law that the action of revenue authorities cannot be held justified if they substitute another method of accounting on the assessee which in the instant case was imposing of percentage completion method on the assessee even when it has been consistently maintaining the regular

SAHARA INDIA POWER CORPORATION LTD,PUNE vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue for the AY 2005-06 in I

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

3." 41. From perusal of all the judgments it has been consistently held rather a settled law that the action of revenue authorities cannot be held justified if they substitute another method of accounting on the assessee which in the instant case was imposing of percentage completion method on the assessee even when it has been consistently maintaining the regular

RAJAN GUPTA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is allowed as aforesaid

3) of Section 143, Section 144 and Section 145 shall, so far as may be, apply;‖ 9. Section 158BC(c) stipulates as under:- “158BC. Procedure for block assessment.– xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx (c) the Assessing Officer, on determination of the undisclosed income of the block period in accordance with this Chapter, shall pass an order of assessment and determine

ARGOS HOLDINGS PTE. LTD.,SINGAPORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE INT TAX 1(1)(1), DELHI, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

reassessment order was passed under Section 147 on 31.03.2025, together with corresponding demand notices under Section 156. It is pertinent to note that just after a day of receiving the DRP Order, the A.O. passed the impugned order on 31st March 2025, for A.Y. 2015-2016 under Sec.147 of the Act, thereby adding Rs. 448 Crore (NCD subscription

ARGOS HOLDINGS PTE. LTD.,SINGAPORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE INT TAX 1(1)(1), DELHI, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

reassessment order was passed under Section 147 on 31.03.2025, together with corresponding demand notices under Section 156. It is pertinent to note that just after a day of receiving the DRP Order, the A.O. passed the impugned order on 31st March 2025, for A.Y. 2015-2016 under Sec.147 of the Act, thereby adding Rs. 448 Crore (NCD subscription

EBRO INDIA PVT.LTD. ,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-7(1), DELHI

In the result, the ground no 4 raised by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Accountant Member)

145-146 of paperbook];  Copy of Foreign Inward Remittance Certificate (FIRC) [refer pages 147- 150 of paperbook];  Copy of share certificates [refer pages 151-154 of paperbook]. 51. Considering the objections and the documents/ evidences placed on record by the appellant, the DRP held as under: “3.2.3 It is submitted that the assessee has issued shares to its related party

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NOIDA vs. M/S ACE MEGA STRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalsl. Ita No(S) Asst. Appeal(S) By No Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 4067/Del/2025 2019-20 M/S. Ace Mega Dcit/Acit Structures Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle I-B, 7Th Floor, Ace Studio, Noida Sector-126, Noida, Sector- 37, S.O. Gautam Budh Nagar-201303 Pan-Aakca8694D M/S. Ace Mega 2. 4115/Del/2025 2019-20 Dcit, Structures Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-1, A.R.T.O Complex, Sector-33, I-B, 7Th Floor, Ace Studio, Noida-201301. Sector-126, Noida, Sector- 37, S.O. Gautam Budh Nagar-201303 Pan-Aakca8694D Appellant By Shri Rohit Kapoor, Adv. & Shri Virsain Aggarwal, Itp Respondent By Shri Mahesh Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 17.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27.11.2025

reassessment proceedings to tax same under section 68 deserved to be quashed” On the above issue, the Hon'ble High Court of Mumbai in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Bairagra Builders (P.) Ltd. reported at [2024] 164 taxmann.com 162 (Bombay) has held as under: "Where assessee had taken unsecured loan from two companies and had submitted

ACE MEGA STRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,UTTAR PRADESH vs. DCIT/ACIT CEN CIR, NOIDA, NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalsl. Ita No(S) Asst. Appeal(S) By No Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 4067/Del/2025 2019-20 M/S. Ace Mega Dcit/Acit Structures Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle I-B, 7Th Floor, Ace Studio, Noida Sector-126, Noida, Sector- 37, S.O. Gautam Budh Nagar-201303 Pan-Aakca8694D M/S. Ace Mega 2. 4115/Del/2025 2019-20 Dcit, Structures Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-1, A.R.T.O Complex, Sector-33, I-B, 7Th Floor, Ace Studio, Noida-201301. Sector-126, Noida, Sector- 37, S.O. Gautam Budh Nagar-201303 Pan-Aakca8694D Appellant By Shri Rohit Kapoor, Adv. & Shri Virsain Aggarwal, Itp Respondent By Shri Mahesh Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 17.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27.11.2025

reassessment proceedings to tax same under section 68 deserved to be quashed” On the above issue, the Hon'ble High Court of Mumbai in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Bairagra Builders (P.) Ltd. reported at [2024] 164 taxmann.com 162 (Bombay) has held as under: "Where assessee had taken unsecured loan from two companies and had submitted