MAHARASHTRA FEEDS P. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

194A, section 194C, section 194D, section 195 and section 196A so far as such tax relates to income subject to advance tax and so far as it is not due to variations in the rates of tax made by the Finance Act enacted for the year for which the regular assessment is made. (6) Where, in relation to an assessment

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI, DELHI vs. BIJWASAN REALTY ONE PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed being devoid of any merit

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं.7131/धिल्ली/2025 (नि.व. 2018-19) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-25, R.No 317, 3Rd Floor, Ara Centre, ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Jhandewalan Extn. Delhi 110055 बिाम Vs. Bijwasan Realty One P. Ltd., 85A, Rishy Amook, Panchkuian Road, New Delhi 110001 ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Pan: Aafcr-3144-L अपीलार्थी द्वारा/Appellant By : Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr प्रधििािीद्वारा/Respondent By : Shri Abhishek Jain, Chartered Accountant & Ms. Sunidhi Sharma, Advocate सुिवाई की निथर्थ/ Date Of Hearing : 15/12/2025 घोषणा की निथर्थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 02/01/2026 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-29, New Delhi [In Short ‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 16.07.2025, For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Appeal Is Time Barred By 7 Days. The Revenue Has Filed An Application Citing Reasons For Delay In Filing Of Appeal. After Perusal Of The Same, I Am Satisfied That Delay In Filing Of Appeal Is Not Intentional, The Delay Has Been Caused For The Reasons Stated In Application Which Appears To Be Bonafide. Considering The 2 Explanation Furnished By The Department, Delay Of 7 Days In Filing Of Appeal Is Condoned & Appeal Is Taken Up For Adjudication On Merits.

section 194A of the Act. It was further submitted that the entire loan along with interest was repaid during the same financial year. The transaction was genuine and undertaken in the normal course of business. The AO rejected submissions of the assessee and made addition of Rs.25,97,503/- u/s.69C of the Act. The assessee filed appeal before the CITT

GULSHAN HOMES AND INFRASTRUCTURE (P) LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DR. MANOJ KUMAR, DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-31, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

194A\n| AYAP: 75020 Ashley Jam\n| Salaried Perso\n| 5\n240000.00\n24000.00 2019-20\nD5-1944\n| ADPSC354A Divya Parashar\n| Salaried Perso\n| 5\n240000.00\n1400000 2019-20\nDS 1944\n| AVCP58/58C Ashok lain\n| Salaried Perso\n| 30\n240000.00\n24000.00 2019-20\n105-1944\n| AAAP551629 Sachin V Shah\n| Proprwtor\n| 3\n131250.00

GALLERIA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION,GURGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), GURGAON, GURGAON

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg[Assessment Year : 2014-15] Galleria Condominium Vs Ito, Association, Galleria Building, Ward-1(3), Dlf Phase Iv, Dlf City, Gurgaon. Gurgaon, Haryana-122002. Pan-Aaaag3018P Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Rishabh Aggarwal, Ca & Ms. Jaishree, Ca Respondent By Shri Mithalesh Kumar Pandey, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 19.09.2022

reassessment proceedings are liable to be quashed. 3. Whether the Ld. AO is not justified in disallowing the claim of Interest income on the basis of concept of mutuality of Rs. 41,69,909/- under section 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. As interest income is disbursed to members who had contributed to it. 4. Further