COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI VIII vs. INDIAN FARMERS FERTILIZERS CO-OP. LTD.

The appeal stands disposed of accordingly

losses survived to be carried forward for assessment year 1993-94 and, therefore, the re-assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1993-94 were without any foundation and jurisdiction. 2. The following question of law arises for the consideration of this Court: “Whether ITAT was correct in law in quashing the reassessment order passed by Assessing Officer u/s

RUBY SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the seven captioned appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed in the aforesaid manner

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri M. Balaganesh, Accoutant Member

reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act and issuance of said notice u/s. 148, therefore, our conclusion drawn for assessment year 2013-14 (supra) would apply mutatis mutandis to the identical and similar grounds no. 2 to 2.2 of assessee in other 06 appeals. Consequently, grounds no. 2 to 2.2 of the assessee in other 06 appeals

RUBY SINGH ,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the seven captioned appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed in the aforesaid manner

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri M. Balaganesh, Accoutant Member

reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act and issuance of said notice u/s. 148, therefore, our conclusion drawn for assessment year 2013-14 (supra) would apply mutatis mutandis to the identical and similar grounds no. 2 to 2.2 of assessee in other 06 appeals. Consequently, grounds no. 2 to 2.2 of the assessee in other 06 appeals

RUBY SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the seven captioned appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed in the aforesaid manner

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri M. Balaganesh, Accoutant Member

reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act and issuance of said notice u/s. 148, therefore, our conclusion drawn for assessment year 2013-14 (supra) would apply mutatis mutandis to the identical and similar grounds no. 2 to 2.2 of assessee in other 06 appeals. Consequently, grounds no. 2 to 2.2 of the assessee in other 06 appeals

RUBY SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the seven captioned appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed in the aforesaid manner

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri M. Balaganesh, Accoutant Member

reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act and issuance of said notice u/s. 148, therefore, our conclusion drawn for assessment year 2013-14 (supra) would apply mutatis mutandis to the identical and similar grounds no. 2 to 2.2 of assessee in other 06 appeals. Consequently, grounds no. 2 to 2.2 of the assessee in other 06 appeals

RUBY SINGH ,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the seven captioned appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed in the aforesaid manner

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri M. Balaganesh, Accoutant Member

reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act and issuance of said notice u/s. 148, therefore, our conclusion drawn for assessment year 2013-14 (supra) would apply mutatis mutandis to the identical and similar grounds no. 2 to 2.2 of assessee in other 06 appeals. Consequently, grounds no. 2 to 2.2 of the assessee in other 06 appeals

RUBY SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the seven captioned appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed in the aforesaid manner

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri M. Balaganesh, Accoutant Member

reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act and issuance of said notice u/s. 148, therefore, our conclusion drawn for assessment year 2013-14 (supra) would apply mutatis mutandis to the identical and similar grounds no. 2 to 2.2 of assessee in other 06 appeals. Consequently, grounds no. 2 to 2.2 of the assessee in other 06 appeals

RUBY SINGH,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the seven captioned appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed in the aforesaid manner

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri M. Balaganesh, Accoutant Member

reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act and issuance of said notice u/s. 148, therefore, our conclusion drawn for assessment year 2013-14 (supra) would apply mutatis mutandis to the identical and similar grounds no. 2 to 2.2 of assessee in other 06 appeals. Consequently, grounds no. 2 to 2.2 of the assessee in other 06 appeals

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ENGINEERING PROJECTS INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for A

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

losses of Rs.205,05,11,020/- [221,66,35,511– 1,66,12,449 (correct figure Rs.16,61,24,491)] was allowed to be carried forward to the next year. Accordingly, the AO assessed the income of the assessee at nil. 6.1 Subsequently, the Assessing Officer initiated proceedings u/s. 147 and issued notice u/s. 06.03.2009 after recording the reason

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

forward business loss or depreciation, whichever less is as below. 3 I.T.A.NO.2673/Del/2011 FY Business Loss Depreciation Net profit / Lesser of the (loss) two 1997-98 5,05,70,134 92,28,83,320 (87,23,13,186) Nil, Since here is no business loss

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NATIONAL BUILDING CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

reassessment proceedings were completed vide order dated 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act vide order dated 16th March, 2005 at a total income of Rs. 18,75,86,422/- before set off of brought forward losses. On appeal before the CIT(A), the learned CIT(A) granted relief. The Assessing Officer while passing consequential order to the order

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NATIONAL BUILDING CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

reassessment proceedings were completed vide order dated 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act vide order dated 16th March, 2005 at a total income of Rs. 18,75,86,422/- before set off of brought forward losses. On appeal before the CIT(A), the learned CIT(A) granted relief. The Assessing Officer while passing consequential order to the order

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NATIONAL BUILDING CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

reassessment proceedings were completed vide order dated 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act vide order dated 16th March, 2005 at a total income of Rs. 18,75,86,422/- before set off of brought forward losses. On appeal before the CIT(A), the learned CIT(A) granted relief. The Assessing Officer while passing consequential order to the order

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NATIONAL BUILDING CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

reassessment proceedings were completed vide order dated 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act vide order dated 16th March, 2005 at a total income of Rs. 18,75,86,422/- before set off of brought forward losses. On appeal before the CIT(A), the learned CIT(A) granted relief. The Assessing Officer while passing consequential order to the order

MADHU APARTMENT PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 16(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

carried-out in the case of Shri S.K. Jain Group of cases and it is transpired that assessee has received accommodation entry of Rs.10 lakhs each in both the assessment years under appeal from M/s. VIP Leasing and Finance P. Ltd., and M/s. Mega Top Promoters P. Ltd., in a sum of Rs.10 lakhs each. The A.O. after giving

MADHU APARTMENT PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 16(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

carried-out in the case of Shri S.K. Jain Group of cases and it is transpired that assessee has received accommodation entry of Rs.10 lakhs each in both the assessment years under appeal from M/s. VIP Leasing and Finance P. Ltd., and M/s. Mega Top Promoters P. Ltd., in a sum of Rs.10 lakhs each. The A.O. after giving

MAHESHWARI ROLLER FLOUR MILLS PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 16(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

carry- 15 ITA.No.4257/Del./2019 Maheshwari Roller Flour Mills Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi.. out any independent enquiry and even did not verify the correctness of the information so received. The A.O. acted on the information mechanically without application of mind and initiated the re-assessment proceedings. he has further submitted that Rs.25 lakhs were received on 06.01.2009 from

CIT vs. TEI TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

u/s 10A should be strictly in respect of export profits of eligible undertaking. In this regard, it is submitted that the AO had reached at the figures of gross total income before computing the amount of exemption under section 10A of the Act. After setting off of the brought forward losses to the extent of assessed gross total income

CIT vs. TEI TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

u/s 10A should be strictly in respect of export profits of eligible undertaking. In this regard, it is submitted that the AO had reached at the figures of gross total income before computing the amount of exemption under section 10A of the Act. After setting off of the brought forward losses to the extent of assessed gross total income