DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MAHESH WOOD PRODUCTS (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the ITA No

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 68 of IT Act, 1961?. We find no merit in this Special Leave Petition for the simple reason that if the share application money is received by the assessee company from alleged bogus shareholders, whose names are given to the AO, then the Department is free to proceed to reopen their individual assessments in accordance with law. Hence

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MAHESH WOOD PRODUCTS (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the ITA No

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 68 of IT Act, 1961?. We find no merit in this Special Leave Petition for the simple reason that if the share application money is received by the assessee company from alleged bogus shareholders, whose names are given to the AO, then the Department is free to proceed to reopen their individual assessments in accordance with law. Hence

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MAHESH WOOD PRODUCTS (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the ITA No

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

section 68 of IT Act, 1961?. We find no merit in this Special Leave Petition for the simple reason that if the share application money is received by the assessee company from alleged bogus shareholders, whose names are given to the AO, then the Department is free to proceed to reopen their individual assessments in accordance with law. Hence

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE , GHAZIABAD vs. YOGENDER SINGH , GHAZIABAD

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. Sushil Tyagi, Central Circle, A-2, Ganpati Ghaziabad Apartments, Civil Lines, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aejpt6739A Dcit, Vs. Yogender Singh, Central Circle, J-6A, Sector-23, Ghaziabad Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Yogender Singh, Vs. Dcit, J-6A, Sector-23, Central Circle, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Naveen Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, G-302, Vvip Central Circle, Addresses, Raj Nagar Ghaziabad Extention, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Admpt6420A Sarika Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, H-100, Patel Nagar,- Central Circle, 3, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Afapt5986P Assessee By : Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, Ca Shri Gagan Khandelwal, Adv Shri Jaind Jaiswal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /10/2024

section 68 of IT Act in which genuineness of cash credit has been analyzed in detail and taking into consideration the fact that nothing adverse could be found even after detailed search proceedings conducted under 132 of IT Act in various premises of the appellant, in the matter of unsecured loan amounting

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD vs. SUSHIL TYAGI, DELHI

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. Sushil Tyagi, Central Circle, A-2, Ganpati Ghaziabad Apartments, Civil Lines, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aejpt6739A Dcit, Vs. Yogender Singh, Central Circle, J-6A, Sector-23, Ghaziabad Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Yogender Singh, Vs. Dcit, J-6A, Sector-23, Central Circle, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Naveen Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, G-302, Vvip Central Circle, Addresses, Raj Nagar Ghaziabad Extention, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Admpt6420A Sarika Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, H-100, Patel Nagar,- Central Circle, 3, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Afapt5986P Assessee By : Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, Ca Shri Gagan Khandelwal, Adv Shri Jaind Jaiswal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /10/2024

section 68 of IT Act in which genuineness of cash credit has been analyzed in detail and taking into consideration the fact that nothing adverse could be found even after detailed search proceedings conducted under 132 of IT Act in various premises of the appellant, in the matter of unsecured loan amounting

SARIKA TYAGI,GHAZIBAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZAIBAD

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. Sushil Tyagi, Central Circle, A-2, Ganpati Ghaziabad Apartments, Civil Lines, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aejpt6739A Dcit, Vs. Yogender Singh, Central Circle, J-6A, Sector-23, Ghaziabad Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Yogender Singh, Vs. Dcit, J-6A, Sector-23, Central Circle, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Naveen Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, G-302, Vvip Central Circle, Addresses, Raj Nagar Ghaziabad Extention, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Admpt6420A Sarika Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, H-100, Patel Nagar,- Central Circle, 3, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Afapt5986P Assessee By : Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, Ca Shri Gagan Khandelwal, Adv Shri Jaind Jaiswal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /10/2024

section 68 of IT Act in which genuineness of cash credit has been analyzed in detail and taking into consideration the fact that nothing adverse could be found even after detailed search proceedings conducted under 132 of IT Act in various premises of the appellant, in the matter of unsecured loan amounting

NAVEEN TYAGI,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE , GHAZIABAD

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. Sushil Tyagi, Central Circle, A-2, Ganpati Ghaziabad Apartments, Civil Lines, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aejpt6739A Dcit, Vs. Yogender Singh, Central Circle, J-6A, Sector-23, Ghaziabad Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Yogender Singh, Vs. Dcit, J-6A, Sector-23, Central Circle, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Naveen Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, G-302, Vvip Central Circle, Addresses, Raj Nagar Ghaziabad Extention, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Admpt6420A Sarika Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, H-100, Patel Nagar,- Central Circle, 3, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Afapt5986P Assessee By : Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, Ca Shri Gagan Khandelwal, Adv Shri Jaind Jaiswal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /10/2024

section 68 of IT Act in which genuineness of cash credit has been analyzed in detail and taking into consideration the fact that nothing adverse could be found even after detailed search proceedings conducted under 132 of IT Act in various premises of the appellant, in the matter of unsecured loan amounting

YOGENDER SINGH,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. Sushil Tyagi, Central Circle, A-2, Ganpati Ghaziabad Apartments, Civil Lines, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aejpt6739A Dcit, Vs. Yogender Singh, Central Circle, J-6A, Sector-23, Ghaziabad Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Yogender Singh, Vs. Dcit, J-6A, Sector-23, Central Circle, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Naveen Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, G-302, Vvip Central Circle, Addresses, Raj Nagar Ghaziabad Extention, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Admpt6420A Sarika Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, H-100, Patel Nagar,- Central Circle, 3, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Afapt5986P Assessee By : Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, Ca Shri Gagan Khandelwal, Adv Shri Jaind Jaiswal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /10/2024

section 68 of IT Act in which genuineness of cash credit has been analyzed in detail and taking into consideration the fact that nothing adverse could be found even after detailed search proceedings conducted under 132 of IT Act in various premises of the appellant, in the matter of unsecured loan amounting

SH. LOK NATH NARANG, PROP,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, GURGAON

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamblelok Nath Narang, Prop. Vs Ito C/O. M/S. Rra Tax India, Ward-2(1) D-28, South Extension, Part-I Gurgaon New Delhi Pan : Adrpn8014H

928/- fully as made by Ld. AO on account of sundry creditors and has further erred in sustaining the addition to the extent of Rs. 22,73,232/- by applying the provisions of section 41(1) whereas Ld. AO made the impugned addition u/s 68

AMADEUS INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Sh. Vijay Pal Rao & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2010-11 Vs. Addl. Cit, Range-2, New Delhi M/S. Amadeus India Pvt. Ltd., E- 9, Connaught House, Connaught Place, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca0364L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Tarandeep Singh, Adv. Respondent By Sh. H.S. Choudhary, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 03.08.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 23.10.2017 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.:

68 and 69 of the said order has noted that the assessee has not carried on any distribution functions though the agreement provided for same. The Tribunal further noted that DRP in the present case was motivated by the distribution part of the agreement which was not actually carried on by the assessee. The Tribunal also noted that the assessee

SUBHARTI MEDIA LTD.,MEERUT vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MEERUT

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.2693/Del/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 बनाम Acit Subharti Media Ltd., Central Circle, Vs. Subhartipuram, Nh-58, Meerut. Delhi Haridwar Byepass Road, Meerut.

928/-. In the course of assessment proceedings u/s 153C of the Act the AO on perusal of the balance sheet noticed that the assessee received share I.T.A.Nos.2693/Del/2016 & 1715/Del/2018 application money of Rs.4,39,77,980/-. The AO further based on the documents seized from Subarti KKB Charitable Trust, wherein certain filled up unsigned share application forms for issue

ACIT, MEERUT vs. M/S SUBHARTI MEDIA LTD., MEERUT

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.2693/Del/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 बनाम Acit Subharti Media Ltd., Central Circle, Vs. Subhartipuram, Nh-58, Meerut. Delhi Haridwar Byepass Road, Meerut.

928/-. In the course of assessment proceedings u/s 153C of the Act the AO on perusal of the balance sheet noticed that the assessee received share I.T.A.Nos.2693/Del/2016 & 1715/Del/2018 application money of Rs.4,39,77,980/-. The AO further based on the documents seized from Subarti KKB Charitable Trust, wherein certain filled up unsigned share application forms for issue

RAVISH VOHRA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-20(2), NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

928/-. The increase in sales is Rs.l 7,13,486/-. vii. While revising the VAT return, the appellant had increased the sales by 151% and this cannot be considered as normal deviation. Appellant has also not provided any genuine reason for not declaring such a large sale of Rs. 17,13,486/- in his original VAT return. viii. Now another

NAWAL KISHORE,DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 47(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri K.N. Charyassessment Year: 2015-16 Shri Satish Kishore, Vs. Ito, 1397, Tilak Bazar, Ward-47(2), Delhi New Delhi Pan :Awupk3580F (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shri Nawal Kishore, Vs. Acit, 1397, Tilak Bazar, Circle-47(4), Delhi New Delhi Pan :Aagpk1458C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri R.K. Gaur, Ca Department By Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr.Dr

928 merely on the basis of suspicion, conjecture surmises and modus operandi without correlating the same in the Context of the appellant. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Learned AO has made subject addition without bringing incriminating material on record solely on hearsay borrowed satisfaction of investigating wing on a hypotheses of modus operandi

SATISH KISHORE,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 47(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of assessees are dismissed

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri K.N. Charyassessment Year: 2015-16 Shri Satish Kishore, Vs. Ito, 1397, Tilak Bazar, Ward-47(2), Delhi New Delhi Pan :Awupk3580F (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shri Nawal Kishore, Vs. Acit, 1397, Tilak Bazar, Circle-47(4), Delhi New Delhi Pan :Aagpk1458C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri R.K. Gaur, Ca Department By Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr.Dr

928 merely on the basis of suspicion, conjecture surmises and modus operandi without correlating the same in the Context of the appellant. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Learned AO has made subject addition without bringing incriminating material on record solely on hearsay borrowed satisfaction of investigating wing on a hypotheses of modus operandi

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

Section 68 of the Act and their applicability The word ' identity" as defined, it was observed meant the condition or fact of a person or thing being that specified unique person or thing. The identification of the person would include the place of work the staff, the fact that it was actually carrying on business and recognition

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S ESCORTS CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT LTD., NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri A.T. Varkey

928/- on account of unpaid sales tax amount. 8. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any ground of appeal raised above at the time of hearing.” 6. Ground 1, apropos deletion of addition of Rs.24,88,741/- on account of development expenses claimed by the assessee. The AO asked the assessee to give details of development expenses

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S G4S SECURITIES SERVICES (INDIA) PVT. LTD, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri R. S. Syal & Shri Kuldip Singhi.T.A. Nos.321, 3979 & 5351/Del/2009 (Assessment Years 2004-05, 2005-06 & 2006-07) Dcit, Circle 12(1), Vs. M/S. G4S Security Services New Delhi (India) Pvt. Ltd., Formerly Group 4 Securities Guarding Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.1 & 2, Lsc Vasant Kunj, New Delhi 110 070 Gir / Pan :Aaacg1625Q

section 928(2) of the Income Tax Act 1961. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.4,19,499/- made by the AO on account of depreciation on temporary structure. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case