ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. STAR LIGHT CONSUMER ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

D Not challenged (alleged commission expenses) - sec 69C TOTAL 10,68,85,85,409 4. Thus, out of total addition of Rs. 10,65,22,85,409/- made u/ss. 68, 69C & 14A in the cases of the Assessees herein, additions aggregating to Rs. 10,22,02,85,409/- have been deleted from the first appellate stage. The additions

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SUKHNA REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD., GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

D Not challenged (alleged commission expenses) - sec 69C TOTAL 10,68,85,85,409 4. Thus, out of total addition of Rs. 10,65,22,85,409/- made u/ss. 68, 69C & 14A in the cases of the Assessees herein, additions aggregating to Rs. 10,22,02,85,409/- have been deleted from the first appellate stage. The additions

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SUNLIGHT TOUR AND TRAVELS PVT. LTD., SAHIBABAD

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

D Not challenged (alleged commission expenses) - sec 69C TOTAL 10,68,85,85,409 4. Thus, out of total addition of Rs. 10,65,22,85,409/- made u/ss. 68, 69C & 14A in the cases of the Assessees herein, additions aggregating to Rs. 10,22,02,85,409/- have been deleted from the first appellate stage. The additions

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SINTEX CONSUMERS ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD., DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

D Not challenged (alleged commission expenses) - sec 69C TOTAL 10,68,85,85,409 4. Thus, out of total addition of Rs. 10,65,22,85,409/- made u/ss. 68, 69C & 14A in the cases of the Assessees herein, additions aggregating to Rs. 10,22,02,85,409/- have been deleted from the first appellate stage. The additions

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SUKHNA STEEL PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

D Not challenged (alleged commission expenses) - sec 69C TOTAL 10,68,85,85,409 4. Thus, out of total addition of Rs. 10,65,22,85,409/- made u/ss. 68, 69C & 14A in the cases of the Assessees herein, additions aggregating to Rs. 10,22,02,85,409/- have been deleted from the first appellate stage. The additions

M/S GLOBUS REAL INFRA PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

D Not challenged (alleged commission expenses) - sec 69C TOTAL 10,68,85,85,409 4. Thus, out of total addition of Rs. 10,65,22,85,409/- made u/ss. 68, 69C & 14A in the cases of the Assessees herein, additions aggregating to Rs. 10,22,02,85,409/- have been deleted from the first appellate stage. The additions

KASPER INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD-14(2), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

D Not challenged (alleged commission expenses) - sec 69C TOTAL 10,68,85,85,409 4. Thus, out of total addition of Rs. 10,65,22,85,409/- made u/ss. 68, 69C & 14A in the cases of the Assessees herein, additions aggregating to Rs. 10,22,02,85,409/- have been deleted from the first appellate stage. The additions

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S STYLISH CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

D Not challenged (alleged commission expenses) - sec 69C TOTAL 10,68,85,85,409 4. Thus, out of total addition of Rs. 10,65,22,85,409/- made u/ss. 68, 69C & 14A in the cases of the Assessees herein, additions aggregating to Rs. 10,22,02,85,409/- have been deleted from the first appellate stage. The additions

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SUPREME PLACEMENT SERVICES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

D Not challenged (alleged commission expenses) - sec 69C TOTAL 10,68,85,85,409 4. Thus, out of total addition of Rs. 10,65,22,85,409/- made u/ss. 68, 69C & 14A in the cases of the Assessees herein, additions aggregating to Rs. 10,22,02,85,409/- have been deleted from the first appellate stage. The additions

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S ANGEL CEMENT PVT. LTD.,, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

D Not challenged (alleged commission expenses) - sec 69C TOTAL 10,68,85,85,409 4. Thus, out of total addition of Rs. 10,65,22,85,409/- made u/ss. 68, 69C & 14A in the cases of the Assessees herein, additions aggregating to Rs. 10,22,02,85,409/- have been deleted from the first appellate stage. The additions

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SUR BUILDCON PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

D Not challenged (alleged commission expenses) - sec 69C TOTAL 10,68,85,85,409 4. Thus, out of total addition of Rs. 10,65,22,85,409/- made u/ss. 68, 69C & 14A in the cases of the Assessees herein, additions aggregating to Rs. 10,22,02,85,409/- have been deleted from the first appellate stage. The additions

ITO, WARD-7(1), NEW DELHI vs. DELIGHT RESORTS P.LTD, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

D Not challenged (alleged commission expenses) - sec 69C TOTAL 10,68,85,85,409 4. Thus, out of total addition of Rs. 10,65,22,85,409/- made u/ss. 68, 69C & 14A in the cases of the Assessees herein, additions aggregating to Rs. 10,22,02,85,409/- have been deleted from the first appellate stage. The additions

LANDSKY REAL ESTATES P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-15(1), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

D Not challenged (alleged commission expenses) - sec 69C TOTAL 10,68,85,85,409 4. Thus, out of total addition of Rs. 10,65,22,85,409/- made u/ss. 68, 69C & 14A in the cases of the Assessees herein, additions aggregating to Rs. 10,22,02,85,409/- have been deleted from the first appellate stage. The additions

KASPER INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-14(2), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

D Not challenged (alleged commission expenses) - sec 69C TOTAL 10,68,85,85,409 4. Thus, out of total addition of Rs. 10,65,22,85,409/- made u/ss. 68, 69C & 14A in the cases of the Assessees herein, additions aggregating to Rs. 10,22,02,85,409/- have been deleted from the first appellate stage. The additions

JINGLE BELLS ALUMINIUM,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 13(3), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

D Not challenged (alleged commission expenses) - sec 69C TOTAL 10,68,85,85,409 4. Thus, out of total addition of Rs. 10,65,22,85,409/- made u/ss. 68, 69C & 14A in the cases of the Assessees herein, additions aggregating to Rs. 10,22,02,85,409/- have been deleted from the first appellate stage. The additions

ITO WARD - 13(3), NEW DELHI vs. JINGLE BELLS ALUMINIUM PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

D Not challenged (alleged commission expenses) - sec 69C TOTAL 10,68,85,85,409 4. Thus, out of total addition of Rs. 10,65,22,85,409/- made u/ss. 68, 69C & 14A in the cases of the Assessees herein, additions aggregating to Rs. 10,22,02,85,409/- have been deleted from the first appellate stage. The additions

ITO WARD - 14(2), NEW DELHI vs. KASPER INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PVT LTD, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

D Not challenged (alleged commission expenses) - sec 69C TOTAL 10,68,85,85,409 4. Thus, out of total addition of Rs. 10,65,22,85,409/- made u/ss. 68, 69C & 14A in the cases of the Assessees herein, additions aggregating to Rs. 10,22,02,85,409/- have been deleted from the first appellate stage. The additions

DCIT, FARIDABAD vs. M/S. SPAZE TOWER PVT. LTD., GURGAON

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the application filed under Rule 27 of the ITAT Rules by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant, Accountnat Member & Shri Kuldip Singh

131(1) on 5-1-2006 and offered to surrender amount attributable to him in investment in property. Hon’ble P&H High Court held that no immunity could be claimed by assessee from levy of penalty in terms of Explanation 5 to section 271(1)(c) 2 CIT Vs Prasanna Duqar T20151 59 taxmann.com 99 (Calcutta)/T20151