LG ELECTRONICS INDIA LTD.,GR. NOIDA vs. ITO (TDS) INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NOIDA

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated above

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice-Assessment Year: 2005-06 With Assessment Year: 2006-07 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Lg Electronics India Ltd., Vs. Ito (Tds), Plot No.51, Udyog Vihar, International Taxation, Surajpur Industrial Area, Noida Greater Noida (Up) Pan :Aaacl1745Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 148 and 201) has been knocked out of existence by the DRP’s order in the reassessment proceedings of SEC for the same

L.G. ELECTRONICS INDIA LTD., NOIDA vs. ITO, WARD- 2(2)(1)(INT. TAXATION), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated above

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice-Assessment Year: 2005-06 With Assessment Year: 2006-07 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Lg Electronics India Ltd., Vs. Ito (Tds), Plot No.51, Udyog Vihar, International Taxation, Surajpur Industrial Area, Noida Greater Noida (Up) Pan :Aaacl1745Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 148 and 201) has been knocked out of existence by the DRP’s order in the reassessment proceedings of SEC for the same

LG ELECTRONICS INDIA LTD.,GR. NOIDA vs. ITO (TDS) INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NOIDA

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated above

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice-Assessment Year: 2005-06 With Assessment Year: 2006-07 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Lg Electronics India Ltd., Vs. Ito (Tds), Plot No.51, Udyog Vihar, International Taxation, Surajpur Industrial Area, Noida Greater Noida (Up) Pan :Aaacl1745Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 148 and 201) has been knocked out of existence by the DRP’s order in the reassessment proceedings of SEC for the same

LG ELECTRONICS INDIA LTD.,GR. NOIDA vs. ITO (TDS) INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NOIDA

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated above

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice-Assessment Year: 2005-06 With Assessment Year: 2006-07 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Lg Electronics India Ltd., Vs. Ito (Tds), Plot No.51, Udyog Vihar, International Taxation, Surajpur Industrial Area, Noida Greater Noida (Up) Pan :Aaacl1745Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 148 and 201) has been knocked out of existence by the DRP’s order in the reassessment proceedings of SEC for the same

LG ELECTRONICS INDIA LTD.,GR. NOIDA vs. ITO (TDS) INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NOIDA

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated above

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice-Assessment Year: 2005-06 With Assessment Year: 2006-07 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Lg Electronics India Ltd., Vs. Ito (Tds), Plot No.51, Udyog Vihar, International Taxation, Surajpur Industrial Area, Noida Greater Noida (Up) Pan :Aaacl1745Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 148 and 201) has been knocked out of existence by the DRP’s order in the reassessment proceedings of SEC for the same

LG ELECTRONICS INDIA LTD.,GR. NOIDA vs. ITO (TDS) INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NOIDA

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated above

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice-Assessment Year: 2005-06 With Assessment Year: 2006-07 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Lg Electronics India Ltd., Vs. Ito (Tds), Plot No.51, Udyog Vihar, International Taxation, Surajpur Industrial Area, Noida Greater Noida (Up) Pan :Aaacl1745Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 148 and 201) has been knocked out of existence by the DRP’s order in the reassessment proceedings of SEC for the same

BEST BULL STOCK TRADING PVT LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-18, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Sh. C.N. Prasad & Sh. M. Balaganesh

reassessment or recomputation under section 147, the Income-tax Officer shall serve on the assessee a notice containing all or any of the requirements which may be included in a notice under sub-section (2) of section 139; and the provisions of the Act shall, so far as may be, apply accordingly as if the notice were a notice issued

BEST BULL STOCK TRADING PVT LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-18, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Sh. C.N. Prasad & Sh. M. Balaganesh

reassessment or recomputation under section 147, the Income-tax Officer shall serve on the assessee a notice containing all or any of the requirements which may be included in a notice under sub-section (2) of section 139; and the provisions of the Act shall, so far as may be, apply accordingly as if the notice were a notice issued

DIT-I, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION vs. ALCATEL LUCENT USA, INC

The appeals are allowed

reassessment notices under Section 148 were also issued to the other assessee concerned in the present appeals, i.e. Alcatel Lucent World Services INC. for the very same assessment years; in addition, for the assessment year 2008-09, a notice under Section 142 (1) was also 2013:DHC:5710-DB ITA Nos.327-330 & 336-340/2012 Page 4 of 33 issued

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION vs. GE PACKAGED POWER INC

201 of the Act. 23. For the above reasons, this Court finds that no interest is leviable on the respondent assessees under Section 234B, even though they filed returns declaring NIL income at the stage of reassessment

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(2)(1), GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD vs. VIKAS SHARMA, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in AY 2013-14 is dismissed

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

201 012. (PAN : AVJPS8784R) Date of Hearing : 09.10.2025 Date of Order : 30.12.2025 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate Shri Sumit Lalchandani, Advocate Ms. Sakshi Rustogi, Advocate Shri Shivam Yadav, Advocate REVENUE BY : Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT DR O R D E R PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : 1. The Revenue has filed appeals against the order

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(2)(1), GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD vs. VIKAS SHARMA, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in AY 2013-14 is dismissed

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

201 012. (PAN : AVJPS8784R) Date of Hearing : 09.10.2025 Date of Order : 30.12.2025 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate Shri Sumit Lalchandani, Advocate Ms. Sakshi Rustogi, Advocate Shri Shivam Yadav, Advocate REVENUE BY : Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT DR O R D E R PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : 1. The Revenue has filed appeals against the order

DCIT, CC-20, DELHI vs. LOTUS HERBALS PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

reassessment proceedings beyond the period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, where the assessment has been previously undertaken under section 143(3) of the Act unless the income has escaped assessment by reason of the "failure of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment" In the present case, during

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, DELHI vs. LOTUS HERBALS PVT. LTD, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

reassessment proceedings beyond the period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, where the assessment has been previously undertaken under section 143(3) of the Act unless the income has escaped assessment by reason of the "failure of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment" In the present case, during

DCIT, CC-20, DELHI vs. LOTUS HERBALS PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

reassessment proceedings beyond the period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, where the assessment has been previously undertaken under section 143(3) of the Act unless the income has escaped assessment by reason of the "failure of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment" In the present case, during

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, NEW DELHI vs. LOTUS HERBALS P.LTD, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

reassessment proceedings beyond the period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, where the assessment has been previously undertaken under section 143(3) of the Act unless the income has escaped assessment by reason of the "failure of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment" In the present case, during

DCIT, CC-20, DELHI vs. LOTUS HERBALS PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

reassessment proceedings beyond the period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, where the assessment has been previously undertaken under section 143(3) of the Act unless the income has escaped assessment by reason of the "failure of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment" In the present case, during

COSMIC INFORMATICS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

reassessment proceedings beyond the period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, where the assessment has been previously undertaken under section 143(3) of the Act unless the income has escaped assessment by reason of the "failure of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment" In the present case, during