M/S. LORD KRISHNA DWELLERS (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh[Assessment Year: 2006-07] & [Assessment Year: 2007-08]

40A(3) of the Act squarely applied. 6. All that we have to consider is as to whether these sale deeds constitute incriminating material to trigger the provisions of section 153A of the Act. There is no dispute that the purchases of land reflected in the seized sale deeds are duly recorded in the regular books of account. There

M/S. LORD KRISHNA DWELLERS (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh[Assessment Year: 2006-07] & [Assessment Year: 2007-08]

40A(3) of the Act squarely applied. 6. All that we have to consider is as to whether these sale deeds constitute incriminating material to trigger the provisions of section 153A of the Act. There is no dispute that the purchases of land reflected in the seized sale deeds are duly recorded in the regular books of account. There

DAAWAT FOODS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conferencing) & Daawat Foods Ltd., Vs. Acit, Unit No.134, 1St Floor, Central Circle – 19, Rectangle I, New Delhi Saket District Centre, Saket, New Delhi-110 017 Pan No. Aaccd 3698 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. Ms. Deepashree Rao, C.A. Shri Vibhu Gupta, C.A. Revenue By Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, Cit-D.R Date Of Hearing: 17/12/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/01/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Dated 28.03.2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-Xxxiii, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Years 2007-08 & 2008-09. Ita Nos.4157 & 4158/Del/2013 Daawat Foods Ltd Vs. Acit A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 2 2. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under:

40A(3) paid as freight and CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the same. The CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that payment is made out of commercial expediency and is allowable expenditure Addition on account of personal expenses 11. That in view of the facts and circumstances of the case

DAAWAT FOODS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conferencing) & Daawat Foods Ltd., Vs. Acit, Unit No.134, 1St Floor, Central Circle – 19, Rectangle I, New Delhi Saket District Centre, Saket, New Delhi-110 017 Pan No. Aaccd 3698 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. Ms. Deepashree Rao, C.A. Shri Vibhu Gupta, C.A. Revenue By Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, Cit-D.R Date Of Hearing: 17/12/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/01/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Dated 28.03.2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-Xxxiii, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Years 2007-08 & 2008-09. Ita Nos.4157 & 4158/Del/2013 Daawat Foods Ltd Vs. Acit A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 2 2. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under:

40A(3) paid as freight and CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the same. The CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that payment is made out of commercial expediency and is allowable expenditure Addition on account of personal expenses 11. That in view of the facts and circumstances of the case

UMAR DARAJ,MEERUT vs. ITO WARD-1(2)(4), MEERUT

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

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Umar Daraj, Vs. Ito, Ward 1(2)(4), 153/1, Hapur Road, Meerut. Umar Nagar, Meerut – 250 001 (Uttar Pradesh). (Pan : Ainpd8766H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sumit Lal Chandani, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Citdr Date Of Hearing : 17.09.2025 Date Of Order : 10.12.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman:

reassessment order without addressing the detailed written submissions, thereby violating the principles of natural justice and rendering the appellate order perverse and unsustainable in law. 8. That the Assessing Officer has erred in making an addition of Rs.82,89,00,000/- under Section 40A(3

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

In the result, we reverse the order of the learned CIT – A income from the above disallowances and allow the appeal of the assessee to these extent

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

40A(3) of the Act even though the said disallowance was made de-hors any document/material found during the course of search. 6. That the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in affirming the action of the assessing officer in withdrawing the entire claim of deduction under section 80HHC of the Act. 6.1. That

UGC BUILDWELL PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble(Through Video Conferencing)

40A(3) of Rs. 4,08,490/- despite the fact that similar disallowance made under similar circumstances was deleted by ITAT vide order dated 22.08.2014 in ITA No. 1752/Del/2013 in case of M/s Westland Developer Pvt. Ltd. for the Assessment Year 2006-07 being a group company copy of which order was filed before the CIT(A) and whose facts

USG BUILDWELL PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble(Through Video Conferencing)

40A(3) of Rs. 4,08,490/- despite the fact that similar disallowance made under similar circumstances was deleted by ITAT vide order dated 22.08.2014 in ITA No. 1752/Del/2013 in case of M/s Westland Developer Pvt. Ltd. for the Assessment Year 2006-07 being a group company copy of which order was filed before the CIT(A) and whose facts

CIT vs. CUSHMAN AND WAKEFIELD INDIA PVT LTD

The appeal is partly allowed

40A(2), 80IA(10) and 80IB(13) of the Act provide powers to the AO to interfere with the pricing or costing of certain transactions in certain cases in order to determine the correct quantum of deduction permissible. 2014:DHC:2764-DB ITA 475/2012 Page 15 21. The Finance Act, 2001, recognized that international transactions between associated enterprises

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL LTD.,, DELHI

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

reassessment proceedings u/s 147 for AY 2004-05 were quashed by Hon‘ble ITAT vide its order dated 8th January 2016 on ground that there was no tangible/incriminating material and as such on parity of reasoning and principle laid down, there is no legal basis for assuming jurisdiction u/s 153 A of I.T. Act, 1961. (iii) That scope of proceedings

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NAGAR DAIRY PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, C.O. Nos. 24 & 25/Del/2016 filed by the assessee are allowed, accordingly the Assessment Orders dated 28

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.

40A(3) of the Act has been deleted. The Ld. CIT(A) has also restricted disallowance of transport expenses at 20% as against the ad-hoc estimated addition being 30% of the transport expenses. 8. As against the above deletion the Department has preferred the Appeals in ITA No. 5469/Del/2015 (A.Y 2005-06) and ITA No. 5470/Del/2015

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NAGAR DAIRY PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, C.O. Nos. 24 & 25/Del/2016 filed by the assessee are allowed, accordingly the Assessment Orders dated 28

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.

40A(3) of the Act has been deleted. The Ld. CIT(A) has also restricted disallowance of transport expenses at 20% as against the ad-hoc estimated addition being 30% of the transport expenses. 8. As against the above deletion the Department has preferred the Appeals in ITA No. 5469/Del/2015 (A.Y 2005-06) and ITA No. 5470/Del/2015

M/S. LOTUS BUILDTECH LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

section 153A of the Act, the initiation of assessment or reassessment for all six A.Ys in the case of searched person is not dependent on the findings of any incriminating material. But once notice u/s 153A of the Act has been issued, then the AO is duty bound to assess or reassess income of the person searched

M/S. LOTUS BUILDTECH LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

section 153A of the Act, the initiation of assessment or reassessment for all six A.Ys in the case of searched person is not dependent on the findings of any incriminating material. But once notice u/s 153A of the Act has been issued, then the AO is duty bound to assess or reassess income of the person searched

VENETIAN LDF PROJECTS LLP,GURGAON vs. ACIT CIRCLE-4(1), GURGAON

In the result, grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

section 263 of the Act. 45 173 In fact, it is pertinent to note that section 263 nowhere refers to an assessment order passed by the NaFAC under section 144B of the Faceless Assessment Scheme to be subjected to revisionary jurisdiction. It only confers revisionary jurisdiction to revise any order passed by the ‘Assessing Officer’ or the ‘Transfer Pricing Officer

ASHOK KUMAR JAIN,MEERUT vs. PCIT, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by appellant/assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Vimal Kumar & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhita No. 2627/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Ita No.2628/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Ashok Kumar Jain, Vs. Principal Cit, Prop. Mange Lal Prakash Ghaziabad Chand, 45-B Gupta Colony, (Uttar Pradesh) T.P. Nagar, Meerut Pin: 250002 Pan: Aeipj3089E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Piyush Agarwal, Ca Department By: Mr. Javed Akhtar, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 20.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.06.2025 O R D E R Per Vimal Kumar: The Appeals Filed By The Appellant/Assessee Are Against Separate Orders Dated 27.03.2024 Of Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Appeals), Ghaziabad (Hereinafter Referred As ‘Ld. Pcit’ ) Under Section 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As “The Act”) Arising Out Of Separate Assessment Orders, Both Dated 29.03.2022 Of National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred As “Ld. Ao”) Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act For Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively.

40A(3) in point number 11 in 142(1) dated 28.02.2022 and 13.02.2022. In response to it, the assessee submitted detailed reply on 24.02.2022 along with all relevant documents i.e. ITR, audited balance sheet and profit and loss account, VAT order, G.P.& N.P. comparison, order under Section 143(3) etc. Ld. AO passed reassessment

M/S UNITECH LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeals is allowed and revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Unitech Ltd., Vs. Additional Cit, 6-Community Centre, Range-18, Saket, New Delhi-1100 17 New Delhi. (Pan: Aaacu1482H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Additional Cit, Vs. M/S. Unitech Ltd., Range-18, 6-Community Centre, New Delhi. Saket, New Delhi (Pan: Aaacu1482H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: S/Shri Salil Aggarwal, Adv., Gautam And, Ca & Shjalesh Gupta, Ca Department By: S/Shri Dilip Shivpuri & Ruchir Bhatia, Government Standing Counsels Date Of Hearing : 12 .01.2016 Date Of Pronouncement: 08 :04.2016 Order Per I.C. Sudhir:These Cross Appeals Preferred By Assessee & Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Of Learned Cit(A)-Xxi, New Delhi Dated 16.8.2013 & Relate To Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Appellant-Assessee Is A Public Limited Company Engaged In The Business Of Construction & Development Of Real Estate Projects. For The Assessment Year Under Consideration, It Filed A Return Declaring An Income Of Rs. 922,30,17,671/- On 29.9.2009, Which Came To Be Assessed At An Income Of Rs. 3361,18,87,560/- In An Order Dated 1.8.2012 Under Section 143(3) Of The Act. On Appeal, Learned Cit(A) Granted Part Relief To The Appellant & Hence The Appeals Before Us.

40a(ia) of the Act as the entire sum stood paid during the year. 11 That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred both in law and on facts in upholding the levy of interest under section 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act which is not leviable on the facts and circumstances of the case

M/S. PRIMUS REAL ESTATES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

40A(3) of the Act. A perusal of the assessment orders does not reveal that the impugned additions made in respect of both the assessment years, have neither been based on any incriminating material seized, nor there is any whisper in the assessment orders. 5.1. Now, the law is well settled that, no assessments can be made under Section 153A

M/S. PRIMUS REAL ESTATES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

40A(3) of the Act. A perusal of the assessment orders does not reveal that the impugned additions made in respect of both the assessment years, have neither been based on any incriminating material seized, nor there is any whisper in the assessment orders. 5.1. Now, the law is well settled that, no assessments can be made under Section 153A