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

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SUBASH DABAS, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2009-10]

194A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, payment of interest on which TDS was not deduction amounting to Rs. 5,94,317/- was added back to the income of the assessee. On this issue the assessee submission is as under: “total interest payable to M/s Swam Software Ltd. was Rs. 7,48,510/- on which

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

R.N. KHEMKA ENTERPRISES (P) LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO WARD- 20(3), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2011-12]

section 153C of the Act as per ground of appeal no.2, for which the learned DR has no objection. Therefore, the ground of appeal no. 2 is dismissed as not pressed. 11. Ground of appeal no.8 being general in nature and is dismissed. 12. Ground of appeal nos.1, 3, 3.1 and 4 relate to the validity of reassessment proceedings

GM OVERSEAS,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-48(1), NEW DELHI

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

reassessment proceedings are held to be void ab initio. 9. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, in his another plank of argument, submitted that a perusal of the reasons recorded would show that the AO does not dispute the fact that the transaction of loan of Rs.4,00,00,112/- was part of the disclosure made in the return

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

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment

Bench: Shri Amit Shuklaas S.M.C. (Through Video Conferencing)

reassessment proceedings are liable to be quashed. 3. Whether the Ld. AO justified in disallowing the claim of Interest income on the basis of concept of mutuality of Rs. 2,91,155/- 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 as per verdict

GALLERIA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION,GURGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(5), GURGAON, GURUGRAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment

Bench: Shri Amit Shuklaas S.M.C. (Through Video Conferencing)

reassessment proceedings are liable to be quashed. 3. Whether the Ld. AO justified in disallowing the claim of Interest income on the basis of concept of mutuality of Rs. 2,91,155/- 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 as per verdict

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

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment

Bench: Shri Amit Shuklaas S.M.C. (Through Video Conferencing)

reassessment proceedings are liable to be quashed. 3. Whether the Ld. AO justified in disallowing the claim of Interest income on the basis of concept of mutuality of Rs. 2,91,155/- 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 as per verdict

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

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), FARIDABAD, FARIDABAD vs. AGARWAL EARTH MOVERS PRIVATE LIMITED, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumarincome Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Vs. Agarwal Earth Movers B-Block, New Cgo Complex, Private Limited, Nh-Iv, Nit Fartidabad 1316, Sector-29, Faridabad Haryana Haryana-121001 [Pan: Aadca7184K) (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessment order. During the course of appellate proceedings, the appellant has made a detailed submission and has stated that, “4. Appellant furnished overwhelming 5 evidences in support of taking the impugned loan to prove the identity of the lender, genuineness of loan taken and credit worthiness of the lender and also the facts that loans were repaid during the same