ANANT RAJ LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, RANGE-2,CIRCLE-2(2), NEW DELHI

In the result assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

set-aside and the income on account of sale of the property he reassessed after giving an adequate opportunity to the appellant to represent and being heard in the matter. I.T.A. Nos.5169 & 5677/DEL/2017 3 iv. That the grounds of appeal submitted hereinabove be read with prejudice to one another in cases and circumstances wherever the context so requires

PAMAS COMMODITIES PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 19(3), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla

Set off of brought forward loss 1,06,586.00 (v) Total income u/s 2(45) r/w section 14 of the Act Nil______ 4. Thus, the return of income was filed on 27.09.2011 declaring ‘nil’ income. Thereafter, ld. AO initiated the reassessment

CIT vs. TEI TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

loss arising therefrom cannot be set off against the normal business profits. Disapproving the view taken by the Assessing Officer, the High Court held that Section 10B, as substituted by the Finance Act, 2000 was a Section providing for a deduction whereas prior to the substitution the earlier provision was in the nature of an exemption. It was thus held

CIT vs. TEI TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

loss arising therefrom cannot be set off against the normal business profits. Disapproving the view taken by the Assessing Officer, the High Court held that Section 10B, as substituted by the Finance Act, 2000 was a Section providing for a deduction whereas prior to the substitution the earlier provision was in the nature of an exemption. It was thus held

AJAY JAIN,GURGAON vs. ACIT CIRCLE-63(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Ajay Jain, Vs Acit, W2A026, Wellingtom Estate, Dlf Circle-63(1), City, Phase-5, Gurgaon-122009. New Delhi. Pan-Aagpj8481L Appellant Respondent Appellant By S/Shri Ved Jain, Adv. & Ms. Supriya Mehta, Ca Respondent By Shri Sanjay Nargas, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 16.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 07.03.2023

reassessment proceedings initiated by the learned AO without obtaining approval of the prescribed authority under the Act is bad in law and liable to be quashed. 10. (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law, in confirming the addition of Rs. 38,79,684/- on account

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S INDO RAMA SYNTHETICS (I) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

reassessment could have been made only if there was any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose any relevant material/information. There is nothing in the assessment order and/or reasons recorded to specify the failure on the part of the assessee, though the assessing officer has observed that, "The available set-off of earlier years business loss

JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Smt. Beena A. Pillaiassessment Year : 2005-06 Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., Dcit, Circle- 1(1), Jindal Centre, Gurgaon. 12, Bhikaji Cama Place, Vs. Delhi.

loss of Rs.8.83 crores pertaining to earlier assessment years. He submitted that during the pendency of the aforesaid appeal before the ld. CIT(A), revisionary proceedings were initiated by the CIT vide show cause notice dated 22.10.2013, which culminated into order dated 27.03.2015 passed u/s 263 of the I.T. Act, whereby the CIT has set aside the reassessment

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. MS. PIYA SINGH, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal is allowed partly for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2006-07 Vs. Ms. Piya Singh, 15, Aurangzeb Acit, Circle-47(1), 426, Mayur Bhavan, New Delhi Road, New Delhi Pan : Apdps6582D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. F.R. Meena, Sr.Dr Respondent By Sh. Rupesh Jain, Adv. & Sh. Deepesh Jain, Ca Date Of Hearing 03.01.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 14.02.2017 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against Order Dated 29/03/2011 Of Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Xxx, New Delhi For Assessment Year 2006-07, Raising Following Grounds: “I) Deleting The Assessing Officer To Allow The Long Term Capital Loss & Thereby Deleting The Addition Of Rs.2,09,90,799/- Made By The Ao On Account Of Long Term Capital Gain On Sale Of Apartment: Ii) Concluding The Fact That The Assessee Incurred Capital Loss First In Point Of Time & Capital Gains Were Arrived At Much Later Date Not Considering That It Was Not Only On 01.03.2006 I.E. On The Date Of Sale That The Assessee Came To Know That She Was Going To Earn Profit On Her Investment In The Apartment Rather It Was Well Within Her Knowledge That The Value Of Investment In The Property Was Appreciating & As She Invested In The Property Only For The Purpose Of Earning Profit, The Sale Of Shares Seven Months Before

loss can be allowed to be set, off. In the appeal preferred before the Tribunal, the said findings of facts arrived at by the CIT(A) have been upheld and it has been held that the learned CIT(A) has given cogent reasons for coming to the conclusion that both the transactions were genuine and that

HINDUSTAN AQUA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 12(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usm/S. Hindustan Aqua Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 25, Bazar Lane, Bengali Circle-12(1), Market, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaach3298J

reassessment proceedings and observed that the assessee had indeed taxable business profits in Asst Years 2008-09 and 2009-10 and accordingly the business loss of Asst Year 2005-06 should have been set

ACIT, HARIDWAR vs. M/S SANT STEEL & ALLOYS (P) LTD., KOTDWAR

In the result, appeals filed by Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kant

reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), were completed in the case of the assessee on 31/12/2010 making additions of Rs. 1,68,29,316/- under section 68 of the Act and simultaneously not allowed to set off the business loss

ACIT, HARIDWAR vs. M/S SANT STEEL & ALLOYS (P) LTD., KOTDWAR

In the result, appeals filed by Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kant

reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), were completed in the case of the assessee on 31/12/2010 making additions of Rs. 1,68,29,316/- under section 68 of the Act and simultaneously not allowed to set off the business loss

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

loss of an assessee in any order of assessment or reassessment and if such order contains a direction for initiation of penalty proceedings under sub-section (1), such an order of assessment or 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

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

loss of an assessee in any order of assessment or reassessment and if such order contains a direction for initiation of penalty proceedings under sub-section (1), such an order of assessment or 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

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

loss of an assessee in any order of assessment or reassessment and if such order contains a direction for initiation of penalty proceedings under sub-section (1), such an order of assessment or 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

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

loss of an assessee in any order of assessment or reassessment and if such order contains a direction for initiation of penalty proceedings under sub-section (1), such an order of assessment or 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

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

loss of an assessee in any order of assessment or reassessment and if such order contains a direction for initiation of penalty proceedings under sub-section (1), such an order of assessment or 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

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

loss of an assessee in any order of assessment or reassessment and if such order contains a direction for initiation of penalty proceedings under sub-section (1), such an order of assessment or 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

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

loss of an assessee in any order of assessment or reassessment and if such order contains a direction for initiation of penalty proceedings under sub-section (1), such an order of assessment or 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