ALEXIS GLOBAL PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(2), DELHI, DELHI

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR (Judicial Member)

68 of the Act and the Tribunal was not competent to make the said addition under Section 69-A of the Act, the TANVI entire order of the Tribunal stand vitiated in law." Hence, from the aforesaid, it is clear that the addition made as unexplained expenditure is not sustainable in law and the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate

M M CREATIONS,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 32(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes on grounds no

Bench: SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG (Judicial Member), DR. B.R.R. KUMAR (Accountant Member)

section 194C(6) and 194C(7) of the Act. 12. On careful consideration of above submissions and perusal of material available on record, first of all, we note that the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ansal Land Mark Township (1) Pvt. Ltd., in ITA No.160/2015 Judgment dated 26.8.2015 4 has taken the view

M/S. CEAR INDIA MULTITRONICS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Sh. R.K.Panda & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

194C in the hands of assessee, and on the other hand invoked provisions of section 68 on such receipts

DURGESH AUTOFIN P.LTD,BIJNOR vs. PRCIT, MUZAFFARNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 2539/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Durgesh Autofin P. Ltd., Vs Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, C/O Sh. Pankaj Kumar, Director, Muzaffarnagar-251002 S/O Late Sh. Tejpal Singh, Mandi Kotla, Near Nehru Murti, Chandpur, Bijnot, Bijnor, Uttar Pradesh (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccd0768P Assessee By : Sh. Vivek Bansal, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Rachna Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.08.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2018 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 13.03.2018 Of Ld. Pr. Cit, Muzaffarnagar U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Act).

68 of the Act. In the present case, it is an admitted fact that the ld. Pr. CIT exercised his revisionary powers u/s 263 of the Act, the said power may be summarized as under: "(i) The CIT must record satisfaction that the order of the AO is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Both the conditions

HERO MOTOCORP LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Sh. I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Motocorp Limited, Jcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Range-1, New Delhi Vs. Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0812J (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Vs. New Delhi Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community

194C of the Act applied by the assessee. 17.2 Without prejudice, that on the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessing officer failed to appreciate that an expenditure cannot be disallowed under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act if tax has been deducted at source there from under the provisions of the Act, notwithstanding that

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PARAGON XT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2010-11

194C, section 194D, section 194E, section 194EE, section 194F, section 194G,section 194H, section 1941, section 194J, section 194K, section 195, section 196A, section 196B, section 196C and section 196D to be treated as an income received. The purpose of section

BSC C&C JOINT VENTURE,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-61(1),, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2017-18

68,95,11,290 (Through road from km 2.8 to km 89 Project on Muzaffarpur- Sonbarsa Company Section of National North Bihar Highway No.-77 in the State Highway Ltd. of Bihar by Two-Laning on design, built, finance, operate and transfer. 9. SH-83 Bihar State Two laning of Baghi- 8,90,99,286 Bardiha- Barbigha Road Road

M/S. NEW OKHLA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,NOIDA vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

194C, it was held that AO has rightly charged short deduction of tax under section 201 (1) and interest under section 201 (A) upon the assessee. As far as the issue regarding verification of double taxation by AO whether the (Deductee)U.P Jal Nigam has paid due taxes on the payment received from the assessee. If on verification

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JHANDEWALAN, NEW DELHI vs. ISRANI BUILDWELL PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

68 of the Act even when the assessee failed to discharge its onus during assessment proceedings? 2) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.17,92,814/-on account of unexplained expenditure under section 69C of the Act even 1 Israni Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. when the assessee failed to discharge its onus during assessment proceedings

BSC C&C JOINT VENTURE,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-61(1), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: SHRI G.S. PANNU (Vice President), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

68,95,11,290 (Through existing road from Project km 2.8 to km 89 Company on Muzaffarpur- North Bihar Sonbarsa Section Highway Ltd. of National Highway No.-77 in the State of Bihar by Two-Laning on design, built, finance, operate and transfer. 9. SH-83 Bihar State Two laning of 8,90,99,286 Road Baghi-Bardiha- Development

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. JAIDKA WOOLEN & HOSSIERY MILLS P LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

194C(5) of the Income Tax Act, no TDS was made by the appellant company. In future the AO should refer these matters to 17 ITA.No.5302/Del./2015 & C.O.No.409/Del./2015 M/s. Jaidka Woolen & Hosiery Mills P. Ltd., New Delhi. local TDS authority of the department and local AO. For verification of these figures and facts so that proper revenue

ORAVEL STAYS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS ORAVEL STAYS PRIVATE LIMITED),GURUGRAM vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 6, NEW DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

68,934/- pertaining to provision for onerous contracts which has already been disallowed by the appellant, for further verification with the assessing officer. 4. That the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in confirming disallowance of INR 62,04,444 made by the assessing officer under section 2(24)(x) read with section

ORAVEL STAYS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS ORAVEL STAYS PRIVATE LIMITED),GURUGRAM vs. DCIT CIRCLE 76(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

68,934/- pertaining to provision for onerous contracts which has already been disallowed by the appellant, for further verification with the assessing officer. 4. That the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in confirming disallowance of INR 62,04,444 made by the assessing officer under section 2(24)(x) read with section

SUMITA SINGHAL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-17(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

68,934/- pertaining to provision for onerous contracts which has already been disallowed by the appellant, for further verification with the assessing officer. 4. That the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in confirming disallowance of INR 62,04,444 made by the assessing officer under section 2(24)(x) read with section

R V INTERIOR PVT. LTD. ,DELHI vs. PCIT, DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

68,934/- pertaining to provision for onerous contracts which has already been disallowed by the appellant, for further verification with the assessing officer. 4. That the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in confirming disallowance of INR 62,04,444 made by the assessing officer under section 2(24)(x) read with section

HERO MOTOCORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal No. 2424/Del/ 2015 filed by the revenue in assessment year 2010-11 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

194C are not applicable and consequently the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) is to be deleted. 14.96. It would be pertinent to point that section 194C was amended by the Finance (2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 1.10.2009, whereby the definition of “work” was enlarged to include contract for manufacturing or supplying a product according to the requirement or specification

ITO, DELHI vs. APACE DEVELOPERS PVT LTD, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2016-17] Apace Developers Pvt.Ltd. Vs Ito Flat No.1034, Ground Floor, C.R.Building Kondli Gharol, Mayur Vihar, I.P.Estate Phase-Iii, Delhi-110096 Delhi-110002. Pan-Aahca5732D Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2016-17] Ito Vs Apace Developers Pvt.Ltd. C.R.Building Flat No.1034, Ground Floor, I.P.Estate Kondli Gharol, Mayur Vihar, Delhi-110002. Phase-Iii, Delhi-110096 Pan-Aahca5732D Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Adv. & Shri Govind Agarwal, Ca Respondent By Shri Jitender Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 03.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 01.04.2026

section 194C of the Act @ 2.2% on such advances which comes to Rs. 20,40,816/-. Accordingly, total amount including TDS i.e. Rs. 10,20,40,816/- was credited by the assessee under the head “Advance received”. The assessee has filed confirmation of the principal, relevant pages of the its bank account, bank account of the party, copy

APACE DEVELOPERS PVT LTD,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO WARD-3(1), DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2016-17] Apace Developers Pvt.Ltd. Vs Ito Flat No.1034, Ground Floor, C.R.Building Kondli Gharol, Mayur Vihar, I.P.Estate Phase-Iii, Delhi-110096 Delhi-110002. Pan-Aahca5732D Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2016-17] Ito Vs Apace Developers Pvt.Ltd. C.R.Building Flat No.1034, Ground Floor, I.P.Estate Kondli Gharol, Mayur Vihar, Delhi-110002. Phase-Iii, Delhi-110096 Pan-Aahca5732D Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Adv. & Shri Govind Agarwal, Ca Respondent By Shri Jitender Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 03.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 01.04.2026

section 194C of the Act @ 2.2% on such advances which comes to Rs. 20,40,816/-. Accordingly, total amount including TDS i.e. Rs. 10,20,40,816/- was credited by the assessee under the head “Advance received”. The assessee has filed confirmation of the principal, relevant pages of the its bank account, bank account of the party, copy