HIMALAYAN DAIRIES PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 11(3), NEW DELHI

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishihimalayan Dairies Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Ito, Flat No. 10, C-1/2, Model Town, Ward-11(3), New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaach0252J (Appellant) (Respondent)

249 ITR 216.” 3. The assessee has raised the following additional grounds of appeal:- “1. That the learned AO and the CIT (A) erred on facts and on law wherein invoking the provisions of section 68

SHRI JANAK GOEL,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result all, the grounds of appeal raised in the appeal memo as well as the additional ground raised by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Chary

249 in DIT vs Society for worldwide interbank financial telecommunication. 11. The learned departmental representative vehemently submitted that there is no requirement of issue of notice under section 143 (2) of the income tax act in case of a search, assessment. He relied upon the decision of the honorable Delhi High Court in case of shri Ashok Chaddha wherein

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)

68 as unexplained credit in the hands of the assessee therefore we will deal with this issue as and when we deal with the addition made by the Ld. assessing officer which has been deleted by the Ld. CIT (A). In any case, this is a separate transaction which is required to be treated according to the provisions

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)

68 as unexplained credit in the hands of the assessee therefore we will deal with this issue as and when we deal with the addition made by the Ld. assessing officer which has been deleted by the Ld. CIT (A). In any case, this is a separate transaction which is required to be treated according to the provisions

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)

68 as unexplained credit in the hands of the assessee therefore we will deal with this issue as and when we deal with the addition made by the Ld. assessing officer which has been deleted by the Ld. CIT (A). In any case, this is a separate transaction which is required to be treated according to the provisions

S R FOILS & TISSUE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year : 2011-12

68 of the Act. Levy or otherwise of the penalty relating thereto would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. 9.4 There is not statutory bar on passing penalty order pending appeal against an assessment order as remedy in such cases is provided in section 275(1A) which permits revision of the penalty order in conformity with

NIDHI RANI,PANIPAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE, WARD-1, PANIPAT, PANIPAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] Smt. Nidhi Rani Vs Ito 1361, Sector-25, Part-Ii Ward-1, Panipat, Haryana-132103 Panipat Pan-Arrpr9400P Appellant Respondent Appellant By Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. & Shri Saksham Agarwal, Ca Respondent By Shri Shyam Manohar Singh, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 24.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19.12.2025 Order

section 68, onus is on the assessee to establish the three ingredients i.e. (i) identity of the creditors; (ii) genuineness of the transactions; and (iii) creditworthiness of the lender. 13. In the instant case, assessee had filed copy of Aadhar of Karta of lender HUF, its PAN and ITR thus, the identity has been established which was also

ITO WARD - 7(2), NEW DELHI vs. DKS SALES (P) LIMITED, NEW DELHI

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2014-15 Vs. M/S. Dks Sales (P) Ltd., Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2), A-24, A-Block, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaecd4730F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr

68 of paper book. The outstanding balance of OD account was Rs. 3,03,24,423/- as on 31-03-2014, which can be verified form the financial statement of the appellant company. (Placed at page no 1 to 21 of paper book). Such amount has been transferred to appellant's company current account no 409000074606 maintained also with

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NOIDA vs. AASHIKYANA CIVIL CONTRACTORS P.LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 only by relying upon credit entries and completely ignoring the debit entries appearing on the same bank statement. 1.26 Hence, the learned assessing officer has adopted pick and choose method by relying on certain entries of bank narrations / statement which is beneficial to revenue and detrimental to the appellant and ignored

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-16(3), DELHI ITO vs. MANSAROVER EXIM PVT. LTD. , DELHI

Bench: Ms.Madhumita Roy & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Ito, Vs Mansarover Exim Pvt.Ltd., Ward-16(3), 2, First Floor, Pocket-H-34, Delhi Plot No.35, Sector-3, Rohini, New Delhi-110085. Pan-Aaecm9328A Appellant Respondent Revenue By Ms. Amisha S.Gupta, Cit Dr Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Shri Shourya Jain, Ca & Shri Deepesh Jain, Adv. Date Of Hearing 06.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30.07.2025 Order

section 68 of the Act viz. identity, genuineness of transactions and creditworthiness of the lender, Ld.AR submits that all the evidences were filed to establish identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions by filing confirmation, ledger account of the lender, bank statement, ITR and Audit Report including financial statements of the lender. Ld.AR further submits that the lender

AP GOYAL CHARITABLE TRUST,EAST DELHI, DELHI INDIA vs. ITO, CIVIC CENTRE,NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

68 and provisions of section 115BBE of the Act also invoked. Further addition of Rs. 7,500/- was also made as Income from Other Sources. 3. Against this order, an appeal was filed before the Ld. CIT(A) who vide impugned order dt. 27.01.2025 dismissed the appeal of the assessee by not admitting the same in terms of section

ITO, WARD- 22(2), NEW DELHI vs. SAIVI FINANCE PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2015-16

249, 10-B, 1st Floor, C.R. Building, I.P. Estate, DDA SFS Pocket-A, New Delhi Mayur Vihar, Phase-III, PAN AAACS1226P Delhi – 110 096 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Kapil Goel, Advocate Department by : Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 07/12/2023 Date of 26/02/2024 pronouncement O R D E R PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM The appeal filed

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

249(4)(b). This is mandatory. This requirement has not been complied with. 24. However, we would not like to decide and dispose of the appeals on the present reasoning, in view of the questions of law that have been admitted above, which are on a different aspect. We have referred to the said Section as to clarify

ACIT, MEERUT vs. M/S. SHREE SHIV VANKESHAWAR EDUCATIONAL & SOCIAL WELFARE TRUST, MEERUT

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charyacit, Vs. Shree Shiv Vankeshawar Circle-2, Educational & Social Meerut Welfare Trust, A-217, Defence Colony, Meerut Pan: Aahts6246H (Appellant) (Respondent)

68 of IT Act, 1961. Reliance is placed on the following case laws:- I. CIT Vs. Ashok Timber Industries (Cal) 125 ITR 336 II. Basantipur Tea Co. (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (Cal) 180 ITR 261 III. CIT v/s Korlay Trading Co. Ltd. (Cal.) 232 ITR 820. IV. “Krishan Kumar Jhanb v/s ITO and Anr (Punjab & Haryana) 17 DTR 249

POONAM DUGGAL,FARIDABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 153A of the 89 ITA.No.1813/Del./2019 Shri Sanjay Duggal, Faridabad etc., & 51batch appeals Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessing officer also rightly passed the assessment order under section 153B(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Further, Section 153D of the Income Tax Act provides that “no order of assessment or reassessment shall

SANJAY DUGGAL,FARIDABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 4, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 153A of the 89 ITA.No.1813/Del./2019 Shri Sanjay Duggal, Faridabad etc., & 51batch appeals Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessing officer also rightly passed the assessment order under section 153B(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Further, Section 153D of the Income Tax Act provides that “no order of assessment or reassessment shall

ARUN DUGGAL,FARIDABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 4, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 153A of the 89 ITA.No.1813/Del./2019 Shri Sanjay Duggal, Faridabad etc., & 51batch appeals Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessing officer also rightly passed the assessment order under section 153B(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Further, Section 153D of the Income Tax Act provides that “no order of assessment or reassessment shall

SANJAY DUGGAL,FARIDABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 4, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 153A of the 89 ITA.No.1813/Del./2019 Shri Sanjay Duggal, Faridabad etc., & 51batch appeals Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessing officer also rightly passed the assessment order under section 153B(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Further, Section 153D of the Income Tax Act provides that “no order of assessment or reassessment shall