DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NOIDA vs. M/S ALLURE DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

section 68 stood fulfilled.( Refer Page No. 103-104 of the CIT(A) order of M/s Allure Developers Pvt Ltd. for AY 2020-21). In this regard reliance is being placed upon the following judicial pronouncements:- i. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-4 Vs. Hi-Tech Residency (P.) Ltd. [2018] 96 Taxmann.Com 403 (Sc)/[2018] 257 Taxman

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 NOIDA, NOIDA vs. M/S ACE RESIDENCY PVT. LTD, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

section 68 stood fulfilled.( Refer Page No. 103-104 of the CIT(A) order of M/s Allure Developers Pvt Ltd. for AY 2020-21). In this regard reliance is being placed upon the following judicial pronouncements:- i. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-4 Vs. Hi-Tech Residency (P.) Ltd. [2018] 96 Taxmann.Com 403 (Sc)/[2018] 257 Taxman

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 NOIDA, NOIA vs. M/S AJAY REALCON PVT. LTD., NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

section 68 stood fulfilled.( Refer Page No. 103-104 of the CIT(A) order of M/s Allure Developers Pvt Ltd. for AY 2020-21). In this regard reliance is being placed upon the following judicial pronouncements:- i. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-4 Vs. Hi-Tech Residency (P.) Ltd. [2018] 96 Taxmann.Com 403 (Sc)/[2018] 257 Taxman

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 NOIDA, NOIDA vs. M/S ALLURE DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

section 68 stood fulfilled.( Refer Page No. 103-104 of the CIT(A) order of M/s Allure Developers Pvt Ltd. for AY 2020-21). In this regard reliance is being placed upon the following judicial pronouncements:- i. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-4 Vs. Hi-Tech Residency (P.) Ltd. [2018] 96 Taxmann.Com 403 (Sc)/[2018] 257 Taxman

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NOIDA vs. STAR LANDCRAFT PRIVATE LIMITED, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

section 68 stood fulfilled.( Refer Page No. 103-104 of the CIT(A) order of M/s Allure Developers Pvt Ltd. for AY 2020-21). In this regard reliance is being placed upon the following judicial pronouncements:- i. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-4 Vs. Hi-Tech Residency (P.) Ltd. [2018] 96 Taxmann.Com 403 (Sc)/[2018] 257 Taxman

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NOIDA vs. STAR LANDCRAFT PRIVATE LIMITED, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

section 68 stood fulfilled.( Refer Page No. 103-104 of the CIT(A) order of M/s Allure Developers Pvt Ltd. for AY 2020-21). In this regard reliance is being placed upon the following judicial pronouncements:- i. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-4 Vs. Hi-Tech Residency (P.) Ltd. [2018] 96 Taxmann.Com 403 (Sc)/[2018] 257 Taxman

ACIT, CIRCLE-18(2), NEW DELHI vs. NIIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

section 68 stood fulfilled.( Refer Page No. 103-104 of the CIT(A) order of M/s Allure Developers Pvt Ltd. for AY 2020-21). In this regard reliance is being placed upon the following judicial pronouncements:- i. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-4 Vs. Hi-Tech Residency (P.) Ltd. [2018] 96 Taxmann.Com 403 (Sc)/[2018] 257 Taxman

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. FILATEX INDIA LIMITED, DELHI

section 68)\n3. Regarding Self Contradictory Findings of the Assessing Officer\nAddition made by AO is not tenable as Ld. AO himself has accepted that out of\n1235 Lakhs received from ANM Fincap Rs.1035 Lakhs is not bogus and out of\n965 Lakhs received from RMP Holdings 800 Lakhs is not bogus. (Page 46, Para

LAKSHYA EDUCATIONAL TRUST,GHAZIABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE-1, GHAZIABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishilakshya Educational Trust, Vs. Addl. Cit, Range-1, Akhilesh Kumar, Adv., Chamber Ghaziabad No. 206-207, Ansal Satyam, Rdc Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad, Pan: Aatl6943M (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 68 does not provide that the business of the assessee must start and then after the addition u/s 68 can be made. 9. The ld AR stated that assessee has furnished all the evidence available with him for proving the identity. He further submitted that assessee has started working after two years and in the impugned assessment year

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. FILATAX INIDA LIMITED, DELHI

section 68)\n\n3.\nRegarding Self Contradictory Findings of the Assessing Officer\nAddition made by AO is not tenable as Ld. AO himself has accepted that out of\n1235 Lakhs received from ANM Fincap Rs.1035 Lakhs is not bogus and out of\n965 Lakhs received from RMP Holdings 800 Lakhs is not bogus. (Page 46, Para

SINGHAL SUNRISE STEELS PVT. LTD.,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 3103/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Singhal Sunrise Steels Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income Tax Officer, 241, Loha Mandi, Ward-2(3), Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajcs7938P Assessee By : Sh. M. S. Sekhon, Ca Revenue By : Sh. N. K. Bansal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.09.2019 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:

section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 3. The facts have been taken from the orders of the revenue and submissions of the assessee. 2 Singhal Sunrise Steels Pvt. Ltd. 4. Brief facts of the case are that Assessee is a closely held Private Limited Company. Assessee has filed it’s income Tax Return on Dt.30/9/2010 declaring

SANJAY GUPTA,PANIPAT vs. PR, CIT , ROHTAK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C, or 69D if such income is not reflected in the return of income furnished under section 139 of the Act, income tax payable shall be @ 60% on income so referred in the said section. 16. Change which has been brought about in the provisions relates to income so referred to in the afore

MR. INDER PAL SINGH WADHAWAN,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiinder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Jcit, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, East Patel Vs. Circle-33, Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Circle-33(1), Room No.1505, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, Vs. 15Th Floor, Dr. Shyama Prasad East Patel Nagar, New Delhi Mukherjee Civil Centre, New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Acit, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, East Patel Circle-33, Vs. Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Circle-33(1), Room No.1505, 15Th E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, Vs. Floor, Dr. Shyama Prasad East Patel Nagar, New Delhi Mukherjee Civil Centre, Pan: Aarps6904L New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 68 of the IT Act, 1961, Inderpal Singh Wadhawan V JCIT & JCIT V Inderpal singh Wadhawan ITA No 1155 & 1589 / Del/2013 & 1489 & 952 /Del/2013 A Y 2007-08 & 2008-09 Page 32 of 59 empowers the Assessing Officer to make enquiry regarding the credit. If he is satisfied that the entries are not genuine, the Assessing Officer

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. INDERPAL SINGH WADHAWAN, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiinder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Jcit, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, East Patel Vs. Circle-33, Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Circle-33(1), Room No.1505, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, Vs. 15Th Floor, Dr. Shyama Prasad East Patel Nagar, New Delhi Mukherjee Civil Centre, New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Acit, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, East Patel Circle-33, Vs. Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Circle-33(1), Room No.1505, 15Th E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, Vs. Floor, Dr. Shyama Prasad East Patel Nagar, New Delhi Mukherjee Civil Centre, Pan: Aarps6904L New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 68 of the IT Act, 1961, Inderpal Singh Wadhawan V JCIT & JCIT V Inderpal singh Wadhawan ITA No 1155 & 1589 / Del/2013 & 1489 & 952 /Del/2013 A Y 2007-08 & 2008-09 Page 32 of 59 empowers the Assessing Officer to make enquiry regarding the credit. If he is satisfied that the entries are not genuine, the Assessing Officer

MR. INDER PAL SINGH WADHAWAN,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiinder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Jcit, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, East Patel Vs. Circle-33, Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Circle-33(1), Room No.1505, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, Vs. 15Th Floor, Dr. Shyama Prasad East Patel Nagar, New Delhi Mukherjee Civil Centre, New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Acit, E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, East Patel Circle-33, Vs. Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aarps6904L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Inder Pal Singh Wadhawan, Circle-33(1), Room No.1505, 15Th E/1/7, Ii Nd Floor, Vs. Floor, Dr. Shyama Prasad East Patel Nagar, New Delhi Mukherjee Civil Centre, Pan: Aarps6904L New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 68 of the IT Act, 1961, Inderpal Singh Wadhawan V JCIT & JCIT V Inderpal singh Wadhawan ITA No 1155 & 1589 / Del/2013 & 1489 & 952 /Del/2013 A Y 2007-08 & 2008-09 Page 32 of 59 empowers the Assessing Officer to make enquiry regarding the credit. If he is satisfied that the entries are not genuine, the Assessing Officer

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. JAGUAR BUILDCON PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

68,00,000 98,61,00,000 108,29,00,00 4. The Ld. Assessing Officer observed that company was incorporated only on 26.8.2009 and had shown receipt of premium in the month of September/October, 2010 and all the share applicants, i.e., investors are private limited companies out of which two were Kolkata based companies. As per the assessment order

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. JAGUAR BUILDCON PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

68,00,000 98,61,00,000 108,29,00,00 4. The Ld. Assessing Officer observed that company was incorporated only on 26.8.2009 and had shown receipt of premium in the month of September/October, 2010 and all the share applicants, i.e., investors are private limited companies out of which two were Kolkata based companies. As per the assessment order

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-29, DELHI vs. SH BASANT JAIN, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

section 115BBE of the Act.\n\n4. Further he observed that assessee has taken advances from various persons\nduring the year under consideration and assessee was asked to submit\ncomplete details. In response, assessee furnished a list wherein only name\nand amount were disclosed. No other details were furnished and he came to\nthe conclusion that assessee failed