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

reassessment or re-computation exceeds the tax on the total income determined under sub-section (1) of section 143 or on the basis of the regular assessment aforesaid. (4) Where, as a result of an order under section 154 or section 155 or section 250 or section 254

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-14, NEW DELHI vs. SH. VIJAY KUMAR SONI, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Sudhir Kumarita No. 1883/Del/2023 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Bijay Kumar Soni, Vs Dcit, C/O Anil Jain Dd & Co., Central Circle-14, 611, Surya Kiran Building, 19, New Delhi-110055 K. G. Marg, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aolps5917H Ita No. 2144/Del/2023 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Dcit, Vs Bijay Kumar Soni, Central Circle-14, 61/14, Block No. 61, Ram Jas, New Delhi-110055 Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aolps5917H Assessee By : Sh. Anil Jain, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Monika Dhami, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.09.2023 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:

reassessment, as the case may be, under the said 46[sub-sections (1), (1A), (2), (3) and (3A)], shall be extended by twelve months. (5) Where effect to an order under section 250 or section 254

BIJAY KUMAR SONI,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-14, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Sudhir Kumarita No. 1883/Del/2023 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Bijay Kumar Soni, Vs Dcit, C/O Anil Jain Dd & Co., Central Circle-14, 611, Surya Kiran Building, 19, New Delhi-110055 K. G. Marg, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aolps5917H Ita No. 2144/Del/2023 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Dcit, Vs Bijay Kumar Soni, Central Circle-14, 61/14, Block No. 61, Ram Jas, New Delhi-110055 Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aolps5917H Assessee By : Sh. Anil Jain, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Monika Dhami, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.09.2023 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:

reassessment, as the case may be, under the said 46[sub-sections (1), (1A), (2), (3) and (3A)], shall be extended by twelve months. (5) Where effect to an order under section 250 or section 254

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)

254 (Gauhati)  CIT v. Talbros Engineering Ltd.: 386 ITR 454 (P&H)  CIT v. Pranav Foundations Ltd.: T. C. (A.) NO. 262 OF 2014 (Mad.) 66. The ratio decidendi emanating from the aforesaid decisions may be summarized as under: (i) The assessee has to provide documents to prove the identity and creditworthiness of the creditor as well as genuineness

LENIENT CONSULTANTS PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed\nas indicated above

254\n5.\nHon'ble Delhi High Court in case of PCIT vs. MDLR Hotels Pvt. Ltd.\nITA 593/2023 (30.07.2024) approving ITAT impugned order on sec.\n153D.\n6.\nHon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Vinod Solanki vs. ACIT W.P.\n(C) 4196/2002 (14.08.2024) on issue of quality of\nsanction/approval u/s 151 and sec. 153D.\n7.\nHon'ble Delhi High

ARTIFICIAL LIMBS MANUFACTURING CORPORATION OF INDIA,KANPUR vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,EXEMPTION RANGE , GHAZIABAD

In the result, we are inclined to accept the findings of Ld CIT(A) and AO

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Judicialmember

reassessment order dated 19.12.2017, on the grounds that Accumulation of 15% was to be computed on the basis of gross receipts and not net income. (3) In any case, the NFAC/ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts, in upholding the validity of method adopted by the ld. Assessing Officer, in computing 'accumulation' under section

ARTIFICIAL LIMBS MANUFACTURING CORPORATION OF INDIA,KANPUR vs. ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,EXEMOPTION CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD , GHAZIABAD

In the result, we are inclined to accept the findings of Ld CIT(A) and AO

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Judicialmember

reassessment order dated 19.12.2017, on the grounds that Accumulation of 15% was to be computed on the basis of gross receipts and not net income. (3) In any case, the NFAC/ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts, in upholding the validity of method adopted by the ld. Assessing Officer, in computing 'accumulation' under section

SANJAY SAWHNEY vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is allowed in the above terms

section 254 (1) of the Act, gives power to the Appellate Tribunal to pass such orders thereon as it thinks fit, implies that the tribunal would confine itself to the subject matter of appeal only. Under Rule 11 of the ITAT Rules, an appellant can, by leave of the Tribunal, urge or be heard in support of any ground

ACIT, CC- 15, NEW DELHI vs. SALONI NARANG, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2012-13] Asst. Commissioner Of Income Saloni Narang, Tax, Central Circle-15, 5, Dr. G.G. Narang Marg, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Vs Cavalary Lane, Centre, Jhandewalan Ext. Delhi-110007 New Delhi-110055 Pan-Aafpn2692C Appellant Respondent Assessee By Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By Ms. Rajinder Kaur, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 31.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27.10.2025

254(1) to entertain the argument of the respondent which amounted to a new ground. It was further held by the Supreme Court as follows: It is necessary to state that Rules 12 and 27 are not exhaustive and the powers of the Appellate Tribunal. The rules are merely procedural in character and do not, in any way, circumscribe

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. PAWAN GUPTA

The appeals are dismissed

1) of section 142 setting forth his total income including undisclosed income for the block period. The officer shall proceed to determine the undisclosed income of the block period and provisions of section 142, subsections (2) and (3) of section 143 and section 144 shall apply accordingly. ..." (emphasis supplied) 28. Thus, it was contended that even as per the understanding

DONALDSON INDIA FILTERS SYSTEMS PVT. LTD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 10(1)

254(2) of the Income Tax Act seeking rectification of the order dated 27.05.2013 reiterating its position about there being no material showing failure on its part to make full and true disclosure and questioning the grounds on which the assessing authority had re-opened 2015:DHC:489-DB ITA 86/2014 Page 4 the case. The said application is pending

BEST CITY PROJECTS INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 4(3), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2008-09] M/S Best City Projects India Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(3), Pvt. Ltd. Room No.385A, C.R. Building, Plot No.H-8, 1St Floor, Best Vs New Delhi110002 Plaza, Netaji Subhash Place, Pitampura, New Delhi-110034 Pan-Aaccb7635D Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Salil Kapoor, Shri Shivam Yadav Shri Sumit Lal Chandani, Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Advocates. Revenue By Ms. Rajinder Kaur, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 30.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27.10.2025

1) of section 153B, except with the prior approval of the Joint Commissioner: Provided that nothing contained in this section shall apply where the assessment or reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner under sub-section (12) of section 144BA

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs. JCT LIMITED, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal for the revenue for the A

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

254 / 251 /143(3) of the Act for A.Y.1999-2000 and u/s. 144B r.w. 147 of the Act for the A.Y.2013-14. 2. Inspite of issue of notice none appeared on behalf of Assesseenor any adjournment application was moved. These appeals are disposed of on hearing the Ld. DR. 3. In so far as appeal for the A.Y. 1999-2000 is concerned

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI, DELHI vs. JCT LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, the appeal for the revenue for the A

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

254 / 251 /143(3) of the Act for A.Y.1999-2000 and u/s. 144B r.w. 147 of the Act for the A.Y.2013-14. 2. Inspite of issue of notice none appeared on behalf of Assesseenor any adjournment application was moved. These appeals are disposed of on hearing the Ld. DR. 3. In so far as appeal for the A.Y. 1999-2000 is concerned

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 18, NEW DELHI vs. NKG INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jain, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 7101/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 7102/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 7103/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Dcit, Vs Nkg Infrastructure Ltd., Central Circle-18, 6, Todermal Lane, Ground Floor, New Delhi Near Bengali Market, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccn1659D Assessee By : Sh. Akshit Jain, Ca & Sh. Rajat Jain, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Sarita Kumari, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.03.2022

254 only to decide the grounds which arise from the order of the Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeals). Both the assessee as well as the Department have a right to file an appeal/cross- objections before the Tribunal. We fail to see why the Tribunal should be prevented from considering questions of law arising in assessment proceedings although not raised earlier

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 18, NEW DELHI vs. NKG INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jain, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 7101/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 7102/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 7103/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Dcit, Vs Nkg Infrastructure Ltd., Central Circle-18, 6, Todermal Lane, Ground Floor, New Delhi Near Bengali Market, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccn1659D Assessee By : Sh. Akshit Jain, Ca & Sh. Rajat Jain, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Sarita Kumari, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.03.2022

254 only to decide the grounds which arise from the order of the Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeals). Both the assessee as well as the Department have a right to file an appeal/cross- objections before the Tribunal. We fail to see why the Tribunal should be prevented from considering questions of law arising in assessment proceedings although not raised earlier

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 18, NEW DELHI vs. NKG INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jain, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 7101/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 7102/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 7103/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Dcit, Vs Nkg Infrastructure Ltd., Central Circle-18, 6, Todermal Lane, Ground Floor, New Delhi Near Bengali Market, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccn1659D Assessee By : Sh. Akshit Jain, Ca & Sh. Rajat Jain, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Sarita Kumari, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.03.2022

254 only to decide the grounds which arise from the order of the Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeals). Both the assessee as well as the Department have a right to file an appeal/cross- objections before the Tribunal. We fail to see why the Tribunal should be prevented from considering questions of law arising in assessment proceedings although not raised earlier

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 DELHI, DELHI vs. SAHARA INDIA FINANCIAL CORPORATION LTD, LUCKNOW

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

1) of\nthe Act restrict the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to the subject-matter of\nthe appeal. However, what is the subject-matter of an appeal before\nthe ITAT is largely a question of fact. In the case of Sundaram &\nCo.(supra), the Hon'ble Madras HighCourt had also examined as to what\nconstituted 'subject-matter of an appeal

M/S. JINDAL PHOTO LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

reassessment made in pursuance to section 153A of\nthe Act, is not a denovo assessment and, therefore, it was not open to the\nassessee to claim and be allowed such deduction or allowance of\nexpenditure which it had not claimed in the original assessment\nproceedings which in the case of assessee stood completed vide order dated\n15.01.2009 passed under section