TRANS WORLD INTERNATIONAL LLC,DELAWARE, USA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) - 3(1)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 9(1)(vi) and Article 12(3) of the\nIndo-US DTAA. The Tribunal further held that, the term 'process'\nbeing not defined, the extant definition of the same, i.e. as per the\ndomestic law, shall apply in terms of Article 3(2) of the said treaty. To\nconclude, the Assessing Officer held that in view of the exposition

AMAZON WEB SERVICES, INC.,USA vs. ACIT CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAX 1(1)(1), NEW DELHI

Accordingly, ground No. 3 along with its sub-grounds 3.1 to 3.4, ground No. 4 and ground No. 5 along with its sub-ground 5.1 r.w ground No. 2 are allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

9(1)(vi) of the Act and under the provisions of the India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (“India-USA DTAA”). M/s. Snapdeal Private Limited had made foreign remittances towards “Hosting and Bandwidth Charges” and no tax has been withheld on this remittance which clearly falls under the purview of royalty as per the Act as well as India

AMAZON WEB SERVICES, INC.,USA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), NEW DELHI

Accordingly, ground No. 3 along with its sub-grounds 3.1 to 3.4, ground No. 4 and ground No. 5 along with its sub-ground 5.1 r.w ground No. 2 are allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

9(1)(vi) of the Act and under the provisions of the India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (“India-USA DTAA”). M/s. Snapdeal Private Limited had made foreign remittances towards “Hosting and Bandwidth Charges” and no tax has been withheld on this remittance which clearly falls under the purview of royalty as per the Act as well as India

HCL SINGAPORE PTE. LTD (SUCCESSOR TO AXON SOLUTIONS SINGAPORE PTE LIMITED),DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI

In the result, similar grounds of appeal, in all the captioned

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

reassessment proceedings have been initiated and final assessment order has been passed in contravention of the procedure prescribed under section 151A of the Act. RECEIPTS OF THE APPELLANT FROM HCLT NOT TAXABLE IN INDIA 4. Issue squarely covered in favour of the Appellant by binding decision of the Tribunal 41 That, at the outset, the assessing officer erred on facts

HCL TECHNOLOGIES NORWAY AS ,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI

In the result, similar grounds of appeal, in all the captioned

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

reassessment proceedings have been initiated and final assessment order has been passed in contravention of the procedure prescribed under section 151A of the Act. RECEIPTS OF THE APPELLANT FROM HCLT NOT TAXABLE IN INDIA 4. Issue squarely covered in favour of the Appellant by binding decision of the Tribunal 41 That, at the outset, the assessing officer erred on facts

HCL AUSTRALIA SERVICES PTY LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI

In the result, similar grounds of appeal, in all the captioned

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

reassessment proceedings have been initiated and final assessment order has been passed in contravention of the procedure prescribed under section 151A of the Act. RECEIPTS OF THE APPELLANT FROM HCLT NOT TAXABLE IN INDIA 4. Issue squarely covered in favour of the Appellant by binding decision of the Tribunal 41 That, at the outset, the assessing officer erred on facts

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

1) of the Act. 6. That on the facts & circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) did not appreciate that since the assessment for the assessment year 2015-16 made under section 153A r/w 143(3) of the Act has been annulled because no incrementing material was found during search, hence, there was fundamental lack of jurisdiction

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

1) of the Act. 6. That on the facts & circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) did not appreciate that since the assessment for the assessment year 2015-16 made under section 153A r/w 143(3) of the Act has been annulled because no incrementing material was found during search, hence, there was fundamental lack of jurisdiction

PROFORM INTERIORS PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT CC-20, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals for Assessment Years 2013-14 to 2022-23 in ITA

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalita Nos. 4153 & 4008/Del/2025 (Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2018-19) Dcit, Proform Interiors Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-20, Ground Floor, Jmd Regent Room No. 269A, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Plaza, Mg Road, Gurgaon, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Haryana-122001. Extn., Delhi-110055. Pan-Aahcs5999J

9. 2715/Del/2025 Assessee 2020-21 1 10. 2716/Del/2025 Assessee 2021-22 1 11. 2717/Del/2025 Assessee 2022-23 1 17. Before us, Ld. AR for the assessee submits that the approval granted u/s 148B of the Act before passing the assessment order was granted in mechanical manner and without application of mind and, therefore, the same is invalid approval

COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX vs. S.S. AHLUWALIA

vi) The respondent was reverted to Nagaland in 1984 and instruction No. 1739 of the CBDT was issued on 19th December, 1986. The search was conducted only on 19th March, 1987 at which date the respondent was residing within the jurisdiction of ITO, Dimapur. Thus, AO, Delhi should have transferred the records to ITO, Dimapur in terms of instruction

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)

vi. The aforesaid receipt of share capital by the very same shareholder to the tune of Rs.175 crores in financial year 2013-14 (relevant assessment year 2014-15) was accepted and genuine by the Revenue Department after thorough examination as explained hereunder:  During the assessment proceedings for assessment year 2014-15, the assessing officer vide notice dated 26.07.2016 required

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:

9) The provisions of this section as they stood immediately before the commencement of the Finance Act, 2016, shall apply to and in relation to any order of assessment, reassessment or recomputation made before the 1st day of June, 2016: Provided that where a notice under sub-section (1) of section 142 or sub-section (2) of section

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:

9) The provisions of this section as they stood immediately before the commencement of the Finance Act, 2016, shall apply to and in relation to any order of assessment, reassessment or recomputation made before the 1st day of June, 2016: Provided that where a notice under sub-section (1) of section 142 or sub-section (2) of section

DHARAMVIR KHOSLA ,. vs. DCIT CC-5, NEW DELHI , .

The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes and ld

9\nITA Nos. 3976 & 3977/Del/2025\nDharamvirKhosla (AY: 2019-20 & 2020-21)\ntotaling Rs.17,03,974/- was though deducted but not deposited. Due to which\ncredit was not allowed while computing the tax.”\n8.\nThe ld. DR has primarily relied the decision of Bangalore Bench in\nAreca Trust, ITA No. 433/Bang/2023 dated 26.07.2023 to contend that\nwhen no separate addition

PROFORM INTERIORS PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT CC-20, DELHI

vi) of\nExplanation 2 to Section 148, except with the prior approval of the specified higher\nauthority. The relevant statutory provisions reads as under:\n“Prior approval for assessment, reassessment or recomputation in certain\ncases.\n148B. No order of assessment or reassessment or recomputation under\nthis Act shall be passed by an Assessing Officer below the rank of Joint\nCommissioner

(Now known as Sony India Limited)

reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee under section 154 for any assessment year the proceedings of which have been completed before the 1st day of October, 2009. (3) Where during the course of any proceeding for the assessment of income

PROFORM INTERIORS PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT CC-20, NEW DELHI

vi) of\nExplanation 2 to Section 148, except with the prior approval of the specified higher\nauthority. The relevant statutory provisions reads as under:\n“Prior approval for assessment, reassessment or recomputation in certain\ncases.\n148B. No order of assessment or reassessment or recomputation under\nthis Act shall be passed by an Assessing Officer below the rank of Joint\nCommissioner

PROFORM INTERIORS PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT CC-20, NEW DELHI

vi) of\nExplanation 2 to Section 148, except with the prior approval of the specified higher\nauthority. The relevant statutory provisions reads as under:\n“Prior approval for assessment, reassessment or recomputation in certain\ncases.\n148B. No order of assessment or reassessment or recomputation under\nthis Act shall be passed by an Assessing Officer below the rank of Joint\nCommissioner