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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section Regarding addition on account  That the address mentioned Resorts Pvt. 68: share capital received: Ltd. Share by assessee in letter dated  capital September 5, 2014 as “F-1- Replies filed by -Revenue’s (SC) – 10 200/13, Sec-13A, Vaishali, appellant stands Appeal crores Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh – corroborated by replies 201010”, notices sent at this in response to notice

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section Regarding addition on account  That the address mentioned Resorts Pvt. 68: share capital received: Ltd. Share by assessee in letter dated  capital September 5, 2014 as “F-1- Replies filed by -Revenue’s (SC) – 10 200/13, Sec-13A, Vaishali, appellant stands Appeal crores Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh – corroborated by replies 201010”, notices sent at this in response to notice

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section Regarding addition on account  That the address mentioned Resorts Pvt. 68: share capital received: Ltd. Share by assessee in letter dated  capital September 5, 2014 as “F-1- Replies filed by -Revenue’s (SC) – 10 200/13, Sec-13A, Vaishali, appellant stands Appeal crores Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh – corroborated by replies 201010”, notices sent at this in response to notice

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section Regarding addition on account  That the address mentioned Resorts Pvt. 68: share capital received: Ltd. Share by assessee in letter dated  capital September 5, 2014 as “F-1- Replies filed by -Revenue’s (SC) – 10 200/13, Sec-13A, Vaishali, appellant stands Appeal crores Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh – corroborated by replies 201010”, notices sent at this in response to notice

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section Regarding addition on account  That the address mentioned Resorts Pvt. 68: share capital received: Ltd. Share by assessee in letter dated  capital September 5, 2014 as “F-1- Replies filed by -Revenue’s (SC) – 10 200/13, Sec-13A, Vaishali, appellant stands Appeal crores Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh – corroborated by replies 201010”, notices sent at this in response to notice

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section Regarding addition on account  That the address mentioned Resorts Pvt. 68: share capital received: Ltd. Share by assessee in letter dated  capital September 5, 2014 as “F-1- Replies filed by -Revenue’s (SC) – 10 200/13, Sec-13A, Vaishali, appellant stands Appeal crores Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh – corroborated by replies 201010”, notices sent at this in response to notice

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section Regarding addition on account  That the address mentioned Resorts Pvt. 68: share capital received: Ltd. Share by assessee in letter dated  capital September 5, 2014 as “F-1- Replies filed by -Revenue’s (SC) – 10 200/13, Sec-13A, Vaishali, appellant stands Appeal crores Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh – corroborated by replies 201010”, notices sent at this in response to notice

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section Regarding addition on account  That the address mentioned Resorts Pvt. 68: share capital received: Ltd. Share by assessee in letter dated  capital September 5, 2014 as “F-1- Replies filed by -Revenue’s (SC) – 10 200/13, Sec-13A, Vaishali, appellant stands Appeal crores Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh – corroborated by replies 201010”, notices sent at this in response to notice

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section Regarding addition on account  That the address mentioned Resorts Pvt. 68: share capital received: Ltd. Share by assessee in letter dated  capital September 5, 2014 as “F-1- Replies filed by -Revenue’s (SC) – 10 200/13, Sec-13A, Vaishali, appellant stands Appeal crores Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh – corroborated by replies 201010”, notices sent at this in response to notice

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section Regarding addition on account  That the address mentioned Resorts Pvt. 68: share capital received: Ltd. Share by assessee in letter dated  capital September 5, 2014 as “F-1- Replies filed by -Revenue’s (SC) – 10 200/13, Sec-13A, Vaishali, appellant stands Appeal crores Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh – corroborated by replies 201010”, notices sent at this in response to notice

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SUPERSTAR AGENCY PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section Regarding addition on account  That the address mentioned Resorts Pvt. 68: share capital received: Ltd. Share by assessee in letter dated  capital September 5, 2014 as “F-1- Replies filed by -Revenue’s (SC) – 10 200/13, Sec-13A, Vaishali, appellant stands Appeal crores Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh – corroborated by replies 201010”, notices sent at this in response to notice

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section Regarding addition on account  That the address mentioned Resorts Pvt. 68: share capital received: Ltd. Share by assessee in letter dated  capital September 5, 2014 as “F-1- Replies filed by -Revenue’s (SC) – 10 200/13, Sec-13A, Vaishali, appellant stands Appeal crores Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh – corroborated by replies 201010”, notices sent at this in response to notice

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section Regarding addition on account  That the address mentioned Resorts Pvt. 68: share capital received: Ltd. Share by assessee in letter dated  capital September 5, 2014 as “F-1- Replies filed by -Revenue’s (SC) – 10 200/13, Sec-13A, Vaishali, appellant stands Appeal crores Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh – corroborated by replies 201010”, notices sent at this in response to notice

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section Regarding addition on account  That the address mentioned Resorts Pvt. 68: share capital received: Ltd. Share by assessee in letter dated  capital September 5, 2014 as “F-1- Replies filed by -Revenue’s (SC) – 10 200/13, Sec-13A, Vaishali, appellant stands Appeal crores Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh – corroborated by replies 201010”, notices sent at this in response to notice

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section Regarding addition on account  That the address mentioned Resorts Pvt. 68: share capital received: Ltd. Share by assessee in letter dated  capital September 5, 2014 as “F-1- Replies filed by -Revenue’s (SC) – 10 200/13, Sec-13A, Vaishali, appellant stands Appeal crores Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh – corroborated by replies 201010”, notices sent at this in response to notice

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section Regarding addition on account  That the address mentioned Resorts Pvt. 68: share capital received: Ltd. Share by assessee in letter dated  capital September 5, 2014 as “F-1- Replies filed by -Revenue’s (SC) – 10 200/13, Sec-13A, Vaishali, appellant stands Appeal crores Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh – corroborated by replies 201010”, notices sent at this in response to notice

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section Regarding addition on account  That the address mentioned Resorts Pvt. 68: share capital received: Ltd. Share by assessee in letter dated  capital September 5, 2014 as “F-1- Replies filed by -Revenue’s (SC) – 10 200/13, Sec-13A, Vaishali, appellant stands Appeal crores Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh – corroborated by replies 201010”, notices sent at this in response to notice

EBRO INDIA PVT.LTD. ,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-7(1), DELHI

In the result, the ground no 4 raised by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Accountant Member)

section 144C(13) of the Act, it is mandatory for the assessing officer to pass the final order in conformity with the directions issued by the DRP. Not following the directions of the DRP renders the final assessment order as beyond jurisdiction, illegal and bad in law. 17 38. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions