COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. VIJAY FOILS P.LTD.

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

68 and 69 of the Act. During the arguments, we had posed these queries' Learned counsel appearing for the Revenue understood the limitation of their case, For this reason, a fervent plea was made that this case be remitted back to the AOs to enable him to make further investigation' However, in the facts and circumstances of these cases

CIT vs. LAXMAN INDUSTRIAL RESOURCES LTD

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

68 and 69 of the Act. During the arguments, we had posed these queries' Learned counsel appearing for the Revenue understood the limitation of their case, For this reason, a fervent plea was made that this case be remitted back to the AOs to enable him to make further investigation' However, in the facts and circumstances of these cases

INFOMEDIARY INDIA PVT LTD vs. COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

68 and 69 of the Act. During the arguments, we had posed these queries' Learned counsel appearing for the Revenue understood the limitation of their case, For this reason, a fervent plea was made that this case be remitted back to the AOs to enable him to make further investigation' However, in the facts and circumstances of these cases

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. VIJAY FOILS P.LTD.

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

68 and 69 of the Act. During the arguments, we had posed these queries' Learned counsel appearing for the Revenue understood the limitation of their case, For this reason, a fervent plea was made that this case be remitted back to the AOs to enable him to make further investigation' However, in the facts and circumstances of these cases

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III vs. SHAM MOHAN PVT LTD

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

68 and 69 of the Act. During the arguments, we had posed these queries' Learned counsel appearing for the Revenue understood the limitation of their case, For this reason, a fervent plea was made that this case be remitted back to the AOs to enable him to make further investigation' However, in the facts and circumstances of these cases

INFOMEDIARY INDIA PVT LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

68 and 69 of the Act. During the arguments, we had posed these queries' Learned counsel appearing for the Revenue understood the limitation of their case, For this reason, a fervent plea was made that this case be remitted back to the AOs to enable him to make further investigation' However, in the facts and circumstances of these cases

CIT vs. JH FINVEST PVT LTD

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

68 and 69 of the Act. During the arguments, we had posed these queries' Learned counsel appearing for the Revenue understood the limitation of their case, For this reason, a fervent plea was made that this case be remitted back to the AOs to enable him to make further investigation' However, in the facts and circumstances of these cases

DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), NEW DELHI vs. BAWA JEWELLERS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.352/Del/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2017-18 बनाम Dcit Bawa Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. Circle 4(2) Vs. A-24, Tagore Market, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi. West, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaacb4823D अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

482 3,04,83,358 2,71,43,369 GP ratio 8.44 7.68 6.78 6.74 Net Profit 45,11,764 39,42,612 18,06,067 18,53,211 NP Ratio 1.00 0.68 0.40 0.46 Stock in Trade 24,25,37,182 19,33,74,529 19,42,54,866 14,64,12,576 9 I.T.A. No. 352/Del/2021 Stock

VIJAY AGGARWAL,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 48(5), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of different assessees are partly allowed

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2010-11

482 of 2010 dated 5-5-2010) vi. 226 ITR 344 Smt. Amar Kumari Surana vs. CIT vii. CIT vs. Smt. Vindhavasini Devi Case ITA No. 265 of 2008, HC (All) 7.1 It is submitted that merely on the basis of the difference between the book value and actual consideration no addition can be made under section

AJAY KUMAR,KARNAL vs. ITO,WARD-1, KARNAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2013-14] Ajay Kumar, Vs Ito, 399, M/S. Ajay Enterprises, Ward-1, Karnal G.T.Road, New Anaj Mandi, Karnal, Haryana-132001. Pan-Agipk1566F Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Rajiv Sachdeva, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 15.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10.10.2025 Order

482/- UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. SECTION 69C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 3. ON FACTS

SHRI BIKRAM SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

section 68 of the Act stands discharged by proving the identity of the creditors by giving complete address and permanent account number, submitted that in the case in hand entire money originated from the bank account of the creditor parties, who are fully identifiable and have also confirmed advancing loan to the assessee as such the addition made

ZIA RATHI,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-44(3), DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalmrs. Zia Rathi, Income Tax Officer, 274, Dda Flats, Sector-1A, Ward-44(3), Dwarka Nasirpur, Vs. Delhi. New Delhi-110045. Pan-Bsvpr9218M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. Shri Saksham Agarwal, Ca & Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv. Department By Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 04/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16/01/2026 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ In Short) Dated 27.02.2024 In Appeal No. Cit(A), Delhi- 15/11146/2019-20 Arising Out Of The Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ For Short) For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Is Sole Proprietor Of M/S Veezee Traders Engaged In The Business Of Trading Of Pvc Coated Imported Fabric. The Zia Rathi Vs. Ito

68 on protective basis of Rs. 2,23,46,000/- on account of alleged unexplained cash deposit made by the assessee in his bank account. Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition on substantive basis in the hands of assessee, Hence the present appeal. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is an individual and was doing retail trading business

PARISH AGARWAL ,NOIDA vs. ITO,WARD-5(2)(4), NOIDA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarasstt. Year: 2017-18 Parish Agarwal, Vs. Ito, Ward-5(2)(4) (Prop. Of M/S Balsons Noida Jewellers) J-51, Sector-18, Gautam Budh Nagar, Noida, Uttar Pradesh 201 301 Pan Aeipa1187Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year 2017-18 Dcit, Central Vs. Parish Agarwal, Circle-1, Noida (Prop. Of M/S. Balsons Jewellers) J-51, Sector-18, Gautam Budh Nagar, Noida, Uttar Pradesh 201 301 Pan Aeipa1187Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

482/- on account of unexplained cash deposit during demonetisation under section 69A of the Act, addition of Rs. 78,35,366/- under section 68

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NOIDA vs. PARISH AGARWAL (PROP.OF M/S BALSONS JEWELLERS), NOIDA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarasstt. Year: 2017-18 Parish Agarwal, Vs. Ito, Ward-5(2)(4) (Prop. Of M/S Balsons Noida Jewellers) J-51, Sector-18, Gautam Budh Nagar, Noida, Uttar Pradesh 201 301 Pan Aeipa1187Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year 2017-18 Dcit, Central Vs. Parish Agarwal, Circle-1, Noida (Prop. Of M/S. Balsons Jewellers) J-51, Sector-18, Gautam Budh Nagar, Noida, Uttar Pradesh 201 301 Pan Aeipa1187Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

482/- on account of unexplained cash deposit during demonetisation under section 69A of the Act, addition of Rs. 78,35,366/- under section 68

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-I

482 (SC) the Supreme Court held as follows:- “Lastly, there is a concept in accounts which is called the concept of contract accounts. Under that concept, two methods exist for ascertaining profit for contracts, namely, “completed contract method” and “percentage of completion method”. To know the results of his operations, the contractor prepares what is called a contract account which

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. GOLD MOHUR PROFILES LTD., NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Sh. Aby T. Varkey & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2004-05 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Gold Mohur Profiles Ltd., Ward-12(2), Room No. 337, 31, Gujaranwala Town-Ii, C.R. Building, New Delhi G.T. Karnal Road, New Delhi (Pan: Aaacg2316G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sh. Amit Jain, Sr. Dr Respondent By : S/Sh. K. Sampath & V. Raja Kumar, Adv. Date Of Hearing: 27.11.2015 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.12.2015 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: The Present Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 02.04.2013 Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-Xv, New Delhi, For The Assessment Year 2004-05, Raising The Following Grounds Of Appeal: I. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 10,55,000/- U/S 68 Of The I.T. Act, 1961. Ii. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 10,55,000/- U/S 68 Of The Act Despite The Settled Position Of Law That The Onus Was On The Assessee To Establish The Identity, Creditworthiness & Genuineness Of The Transaction Which Assessee Had Failed To Do. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) Has Deleted The Addition Of Rs. 10,55,000/- U/S 68 Of The Act, Disregarding The Finding Of The Department That The Assessee Has Introduced Its Own Unaccounted Money In Its Bank As Accommodation Entries.

Section 68 cannot be sustained. Accordingly, addition made is deleted.” 3. At the outset, the learned Authorized Representative submitted that the tax effect in the Revenue appeals was below Rs. 4 lacs and therefore relying on the decision of Income Tax Officer Vs. Sh. Om Prakash, ITA No. 6338/Del/2013, dated 16.06.2015, the appeal of the Revenue may be dismissed

ITO, WARD- 28(3), NEW DELHI vs. SHIVANI GUPTA, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Department

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R Kumar

68 of the Act. As mentioned elsewhere, the discharge of onus is purely a question of fact, the judicial decisions relied upon by the ld. DR would do no 34 ITA.Nos.5204 & 8571/Del./2019 Smt. Shivani Gupta & Shri Dinesh Gupta, New Delhi. good on the peculiar plethora of evidences in respect of facts in hand and hence the judicial decisions

ACIT, CC-15, NEW DELHI vs. DINESH GUPTA, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Department

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R Kumar

68 of the Act. As mentioned elsewhere, the discharge of onus is purely a question of fact, the judicial decisions relied upon by the ld. DR would do no 34 ITA.Nos.5204 & 8571/Del./2019 Smt. Shivani Gupta & Shri Dinesh Gupta, New Delhi. good on the peculiar plethora of evidences in respect of facts in hand and hence the judicial decisions