A2Z INFRA ENGINEERING LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT- CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

reassessment shall be deemed to constitute satisfaction of the Assessing Officer for initiation of the penalty proceedings under sub-section (1). This amendment will take effect retrospectively from 1st April, 1989.” 9.2.4 As self evident from the Memorandum to the Finance Bill 2008, the new section 271(1B) was inserted with the intention to give validity to the ‘satisfaction’ made

DCIT CC-2 , FARIDABAD vs. A2Z MAINTENANCE AND ENGINEERING SERVICES LTD., GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

reassessment shall be deemed to constitute satisfaction of the Assessing Officer for initiation of the penalty proceedings under sub-section (1). This amendment will take effect retrospectively from 1st April, 1989.” 9.2.4 As self evident from the Memorandum to the Finance Bill 2008, the new section 271(1B) was inserted with the intention to give validity to the ‘satisfaction’ made

DCIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, FARIDABAD vs. A2Z INFRA ENGINEERS LTD., GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

reassessment shall be deemed to constitute satisfaction of the Assessing Officer for initiation of the penalty proceedings under sub-section (1). This amendment will take effect retrospectively from 1st April, 1989.” 9.2.4 As self evident from the Memorandum to the Finance Bill 2008, the new section 271(1B) was inserted with the intention to give validity to the ‘satisfaction’ made

INFRA ENGINEERS LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CC-2, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

reassessment shall be deemed to constitute satisfaction of the Assessing Officer for initiation of the penalty proceedings under sub-section (1). This amendment will take effect retrospectively from 1st April, 1989.” 9.2.4 As self evident from the Memorandum to the Finance Bill 2008, the new section 271(1B) was inserted with the intention to give validity to the ‘satisfaction’ made

A2Z INFRA ENGINEERING LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT- CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

reassessment shall be deemed to constitute satisfaction of the Assessing Officer for initiation of the penalty proceedings under sub-section (1). This amendment will take effect retrospectively from 1st April, 1989.” 9.2.4 As self evident from the Memorandum to the Finance Bill 2008, the new section 271(1B) was inserted with the intention to give validity to the ‘satisfaction’ made

A2Z MAINTENANCE & ENGINEERING SERVICES LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

reassessment shall be deemed to constitute satisfaction of the Assessing Officer for initiation of the penalty proceedings under sub-section (1). This amendment will take effect retrospectively from 1st April, 1989.” 9.2.4 As self evident from the Memorandum to the Finance Bill 2008, the new section 271(1B) was inserted with the intention to give validity to the ‘satisfaction’ made

GOLF TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

35D. Accordingly, he has disallowed sum of Rs.11,085 in both the years and added back to the income. 4. Apart from that, the Assessing Officer observes that in the course of assessment proceeding the assessee company was required to furnish details of purchases made during the relevant year and in the Assessment Year 2006-07 the assessee has made

GOLF TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

35D. Accordingly, he has disallowed sum of Rs.11,085 in both the years and added back to the income. 4. Apart from that, the Assessing Officer observes that in the course of assessment proceeding the assessee company was required to furnish details of purchases made during the relevant year and in the Assessment Year 2006-07 the assessee has made

VNG AUTOMOTIVE P. LTD. vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME

The appeals are disposed of as allowed

reassessment, as there was no order passed under Section 143(3) of the Act, rather only intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act was issued by the Revenue. 33. He submitted that, besides the agreement with CDB Holding Pte. Ltd, the appellant had imported certain raw materials (chemicals) and made advances to manufacturers towards purchase of machinery and land

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. IFCI LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

35D of the act. Therefore respectfully following that decision of the even date, we allow this ground of appeal. Accordingly, ground number 1 of the appeal is allowed. 08. Ground number 2 is with respect to the disallowance of depreciation on plant and machinery which is leased out by the assessee to various parties amounting

M/S IFCI LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

35D of the act. Therefore respectfully following that decision of the even date, we allow this ground of appeal. Accordingly, ground number 1 of the appeal is allowed. 08. Ground number 2 is with respect to the disallowance of depreciation on plant and machinery which is leased out by the assessee to various parties amounting

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S IFCI LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

35D of the act. Therefore respectfully following that decision of the even date, we allow this ground of appeal. Accordingly, ground number 1 of the appeal is allowed. 08. Ground number 2 is with respect to the disallowance of depreciation on plant and machinery which is leased out by the assessee to various parties amounting

THAPAR HOMES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is\nallowed

35D of the Act. We find no\ninfirmity in findings of the CIT(A) on this issue, hence, the same are upheld. Ground\nno. 8 of appeal is dismissed, accordingly.\n22.\nIn the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.\n23.\nThe Id. Counsel for the assessee made statement at Bar that the assessee does\nnot wish to press appeal

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. THAPAR HOMES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is\nallowed

35D of the Act. We find no\ninfirmity in findings of the CIT(A) on this issue, hence, the same are upheld. Ground\nno. 8 of appeal is dismissed, accordingly.\n22. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.\n23. The Id. Counsel for the assessee made statement at Bar that the assessee does\nnot wish to press appeal

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. BARISTA COFFEE COMPANY LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result cross objection filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, Barista Coffee Company Ltd, Circle-2(1), Room No. 398D, Shop No. 55, Community Centre, Vs. Cr Building, New Delhi Basant Lok Market, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi Pan:Aabcb798A (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessed and made addition on 06-12-2010 even after protest and even without providing the break-up and composition of gross receipt of Rs2829976/- on the ground that Head of receipt as mentioned on the TDS certificates not specifically matching with the details submitted by the assessee hence income not disclosed in the return of income which

LT FOODS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

reassessment proceedings, claim was reduced by the Assessing Officer. 55. Similar fate was in Assessment Years 2005-06 and 2006-07. The said assessments were completed u/s 153A of the Act. Assessment orders for Assessment Years 2004-05 to 2006-07 were quashed by the Tribunal as the same were based de hors any incriminating material. 56. However, in Assessment

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. L.T. FOODS LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the Assessee is allowed in part and for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri K.Narasimha Charydcit Vs. L.T. Foods Ltd., Central Circle-19, Unit No. 134, First Floor, 3Rd Floor, Ara Centre, Rectangle-I, Saket District Centre Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi. New Delhi.

reassessment proceedings initiated under section 148 of the Act for the said year, the claim of deduction made under section 80IB(11A) of the Act was reduced to Rs.1,46,47,227 by the assessing officer; and that subsequently, the assessing officer proceeded to deny such claim in the subsequent assessments framed under section 153A r.w.s

M/S L.T. FOODS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the Assessee is allowed in part and for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri K.Narasimha Charydcit Vs. L.T. Foods Ltd., Central Circle-19, Unit No. 134, First Floor, 3Rd Floor, Ara Centre, Rectangle-I, Saket District Centre Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi. New Delhi.

reassessment proceedings initiated under section 148 of the Act for the said year, the claim of deduction made under section 80IB(11A) of the Act was reduced to Rs.1,46,47,227 by the assessing officer; and that subsequently, the assessing officer proceeded to deny such claim in the subsequent assessments framed under section 153A r.w.s