ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ELATIVE BUILDING SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

149 (SC). The relevant observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court at para 4 of the order reads as under:- “4. The language used in Section 80G(2)(a) is clear and unambiguous. On a plain reading of the section, it is apparent that an assessee is entitled to claim deduction from his income on the amount

ANIL CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing or books of account or documents seized or requisitioned belongs or belong to a person, other than the person referred to in section 153A, then the books of account or documents or assets seized

ANIL CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing or books of account or documents seized or requisitioned belongs or belong to a person, other than the person referred to in section 153A, then the books of account or documents or assets seized

ANIL CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing or books of account or documents seized or requisitioned belongs or belong to a person, other than the person referred to in section 153A, then the books of account or documents or assets seized

ANIL CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing or books of account or documents seized or requisitioned belongs or belong to a person, other than the person referred to in section 153A, then the books of account or documents or assets seized

ITO, WARD-25(2), NEW DELHI vs. TELPLAY PACKAGING SOLUTIONS P.LTD, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

149 (SC). The relevant observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court at para 4 of the order reads as under:- “4. The language used in Section 80G(2)(a) is clear and unambiguous. On a plain reading of the section, it is apparent that an assessee is entitled to claim deduction from his income on the amount

ITO, WARD- 27(4), NEW DLEHI vs. ZEXUS AIR SERVICES PVT. LTD., GURGAON

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2014-15 Ito, Vs Zexus Air Services Pvt. Ltd., Ward-27(4), 148-149, Centrum Plaza, New Delhi. Sector-53, Dlf Phase-V, Gurgaon. Pan: Aaacz6541L Co No.121/Del/2018 (Ita No.2608/Del/2018) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Zexus Air Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito, 148-149, Centrum Plaza, Ward-27(4), Sector-53, Dlf Phase-V, New Delhi. Gurgaon. Pan: Aaacz6541L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gaurav Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Smt. Sushma Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 31.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.04.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 12Th January, 2018 Of The Cit(A)-9, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. Co No.121/Del/2018 The Assessee Has Filed The Co Against The Appeal Filed By The Revenue. For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order.

section 68 cannot be applied to the instant case as there is no actual receipt of money by the assessee whether by cash or cheque during the accounting year relevant to the assessment year under consideration. Therefore, the ld. CIT(A) was fully justified in deleting the addition. The ld. Counsel for the assessee relied on the following decisions

THE HISAR LEADING BANK CO-OP NON-AGRI THRIFT & CREDIT SOCIETY,HISAR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, HISAR, HISAR

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 4. Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the order dated 19-05-23, without affording adequate opportunity. 5. Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the order dated 19-05-23, as proceeding initiated u/s 147 of the Act is without there being any reason to believe that income has escaped assessment

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. FILATEX INDIA LIMITED, DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

section 153A r.w.s 153C and 149(1) are not satisfied. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in not considering the fact that the assessment order passed by Assessing Officer had provided the new material directly in assessment order without confronting the same to the respondent company

CHANDRA VIDYA INVESTMENT & FINANCE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -28, DELHI, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal, Accountnat Member

149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing or books of account or documents seized or requisitioned belongs or belong to a person, other than the person referred to in section 153A, then the books of account or documents or assets seized

CHANDRA VIDYA INVESTMENT & FINANCE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -28, DELHI, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal, Accountnat Member

149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing or books of account or documents seized or requisitioned belongs or belong to a person, other than the person referred to in section 153A, then the books of account or documents or assets seized

CHANDRA VIDYA INVESTMENT & FINANCE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -28, DELHI, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal, Accountnat Member

149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing or books of account or documents seized or requisitioned belongs or belong to a person, other than the person referred to in section 153A, then the books of account or documents or assets seized

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-13, NEW DELHI vs. DOUBLE PLUS SOFTWARE P.LTD, NEDW DELHI

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon'Ble(As) & Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 68 of the Act. Similarly, for the assessment year 2012-13 there was another information from the investigation wing regarding the unaccounted income and this amount was also added to the total income. The CIT(A) perused the assessment orders for those two years which showed that the assessing officer has not made any adverse comment

PARVEEN,VPO KHANDA KHERI vs. ITO, WARD-1, HISAR, HISAR

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon'Ble(As) & Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 68 of the Act. Similarly, for the assessment year 2012-13 there was another information from the investigation wing regarding the unaccounted income and this amount was also added to the total income. The CIT(A) perused the assessment orders for those two years which showed that the assessing officer has not made any adverse comment

JCIT(OSD), JHANDEWALAN vs. NARENDRA AGGARWAL, FARIDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwaljcit (Osd), Jhandewalan, Vs. Narendra Aggarwal, Delhi H.No. 467, Sector-21-A, Fardidabad, Haryana (Pan: Aagpa1441D) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr.Rakesh Gupta, Adv., Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv., Saksham Agarwal, Ca & Deepesh Garg, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.11.2025 Date Of Order : 19.12.2025 O R D E R Per Sudhir Kumar, Jm :

149 taxmann.com 399 (SC) and PCIT vs. S.S. Con Build (P.) Ltd. [2023] 151 taxmann.com 317 (SC). ln addition to the above, not only there should be incriminating matenal but those incriminating material would be havingbearing on the determination of total income for such years so as to initiate proceedings under section 153C of the Act This position

FEATHER INFOTECH P.LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT, GURGAON

In the result, the captioned appeal of the assessee in ITA No891/Del/2022 concerning

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

149 taxman.com 399 would squarely apply to the facts of the case and the scope of assessment under section 153A is restricted to the incriminating material found in the course of search of the assessee owing to the fact that such assessment for A.Y. 2009-10 stood concluded / competed at the time of search and thus

FEATHER INFOTECH P.LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT, GURGAON

In the result, the captioned appeal of the assessee in ITA No891/Del/2022 concerning

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

149 taxman.com 399 would squarely apply to the facts of the case and the scope of assessment under section 153A is restricted to the incriminating material found in the course of search of the assessee owing to the fact that such assessment for A.Y. 2009-10 stood concluded / competed at the time of search and thus

M/S. GLOBAL TELEVENTURE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the 4 Appeals filed by the Assessee stand allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 vide his Order dated 27.12.2010 passed u/s. 153C r.w.s. Section 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 8. Against the aforesaid assessment order dated 27.12.2010, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide impugned Order dated 30.1.2014 has dismissed the appeal of the asseseee. 9. Aggrieved with the order

M/S. GLOBAL HERITAGE VENTURE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the 4 Appeals filed by the Assessee stand allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 vide his Order dated 27.12.2010 passed u/s. 153C r.w.s. Section 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 8. Against the aforesaid assessment order dated 27.12.2010, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide impugned Order dated 30.1.2014 has dismissed the appeal of the asseseee. 9. Aggrieved with the order