ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SHRI ANKUSH SALUJA, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the department stands dismissed

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

9A, Jeewan Jyoti Farm, The Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. Gree Rajokri, New Delhi. PAN 110036. PANAQDPS8677G New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Revenue : Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT-D.R. For Assessee : -None- Date of Hearing : 04.12.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 07.12.2017 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. This appeal by the Revenue has been directed against the order

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SHRI ANKUSH SALUJA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the three Appeals filed by Revenue are dismissed for statistical

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

9A, Jeevan Jyoti Farm, Vs. E- 2. ARA Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. The Green Rajkori New Delhi Pin: New Delhi Pin: 110036 PAN No: AANPS2300L APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA No:- 2050/Del/2016 (Assessment Year: 2006-07) ACIT Saluja Construction Co. Ltd. Central Circle- 30 30, Commercial Community Centre, Vs. 1st Floor, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, E- 2. ARA Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT. ARCHANA SALUJA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the three Appeals filed by Revenue are dismissed for statistical

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

9A, Jeevan Jyoti Farm, Vs. E- 2. ARA Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. The Green Rajkori New Delhi Pin: New Delhi Pin: 110036 PAN No: AANPS2300L APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA No:- 2050/Del/2016 (Assessment Year: 2006-07) ACIT Saluja Construction Co. Ltd. Central Circle- 30 30, Commercial Community Centre, Vs. 1st Floor, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, E- 2. ARA Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SALUJA CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the three Appeals filed by Revenue are dismissed for statistical

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

9A, Jeevan Jyoti Farm, Vs. E- 2. ARA Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. The Green Rajkori New Delhi Pin: New Delhi Pin: 110036 PAN No: AANPS2300L APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA No:- 2050/Del/2016 (Assessment Year: 2006-07) ACIT Saluja Construction Co. Ltd. Central Circle- 30 30, Commercial Community Centre, Vs. 1st Floor, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, E- 2. ARA Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SALUJA CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals stand dismissed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year : 2007-08

9A, Jeevan Jyoti Farm, New Delhi. The Green Rajkori, New Delhi. PAN: BEIPS9920L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R.S. Ahuja, CA Department By : Ms Rachna Singh, CIT, DR ITA Nos.2051 to 2053/Del/2016 Date of Hearing : 04.07.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 05.07.2018 ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP: This batch of three appeals by the Revenue comprises of one appeal in the case

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. VINOD SALUJA, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals stand dismissed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year : 2007-08

9A, Jeevan Jyoti Farm, New Delhi. The Green Rajkori, New Delhi. PAN: BEIPS9920L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R.S. Ahuja, CA Department By : Ms Rachna Singh, CIT, DR ITA Nos.2051 to 2053/Del/2016 Date of Hearing : 04.07.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 05.07.2018 ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP: This batch of three appeals by the Revenue comprises of one appeal in the case

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. VINOD SALUJA, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals stand dismissed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year : 2007-08

9A, Jeevan Jyoti Farm, New Delhi. The Green Rajkori, New Delhi. PAN: BEIPS9920L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R.S. Ahuja, CA Department By : Ms Rachna Singh, CIT, DR ITA Nos.2051 to 2053/Del/2016 Date of Hearing : 04.07.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 05.07.2018 ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP: This batch of three appeals by the Revenue comprises of one appeal in the case

MAGPPIE EXPORTS,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Sh. C.M. Garg & Sh. O.P. Kant

9A) to section 80IA introduced by Finance Act (No. 2) of 1998 with effect from 1.4.1999 which later became sub-section (9) of Sec. 80IA reads as under: "(9) Where any amount of profit and gains of the industrial undertaking or of a hotel in the case of an assessee is claimed and allowed under this section

MAGPPIE EXPORTS,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Sh. C.M. Garg & Sh. O.P. Kant

9A) to section 80IA introduced by Finance Act (No. 2) of 1998 with effect from 1.4.1999 which later became sub-section (9) of Sec. 80IA reads as under: "(9) Where any amount of profit and gains of the industrial undertaking or of a hotel in the case of an assessee is claimed and allowed under this section

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs. UDAI SHANKER AWASTHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

68.\nh) CIT(A) did not properly appreciate the remand report and accepted\nassessee's contention without thorough review.\n6.\nWe have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials\navailable on record. The Id. CIT DR lead the arguments in all the above\nappeals filed by the Revenue and the learned AR followed. The Id. CIT DR\nsubmitted that

CYGNUS INFRABUILD PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumarcygnus Infrabuild Vs Ito, Ward 3(4), Private Limited, New Delhi Qu-9A, Lig Flats, Pitampura, Delhi – 110 034 (Pan: Aaecc1802B) (Appellant) (Respondent)

9A, LIG FLATS, PITAMPURA, DELHI – 110 034 (PAN: AAECC1802B) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. Tarandip Singh, Adv. Respondent by Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 12/1/2026 Date of Pronouncement: 21/1/2026 ORDER PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JM: This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the Commissioner of Income –Tax (Appeals)-2 New Delhi (in short

CONCENTRIX DAKSH SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Dey, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

68,941/- in respect of 519 invoices as mentioned hereinabove and there is no explanation given by the assessee for such a delay in receiving the amount. The very purpose of benchmarking the transaction is to ascertain whether assessee, who is similarly situated, would render the same kind of services at the same or similar price to a third party

AT KEARNEY LTD.- INDIA BRANCH OFFICE,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(1)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee’s in ITA Nos

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

68,51,453/ - to its AE i.e. M/s AT Kearney Inc. (ATK. US). 4.3 Further, the Ld. DR drew our attention to various evidences furnished by the assessee and commented in writing on it as below:- Examination and analysis of Assessee’s evidence. (i) Human Resources Services & IT Human Resource Information System ('HRIS'): With regard to these services, the assessee

DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(1)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI vs. A.T. KEARNEY LTD., GURGAON

In the result, appeals of the Assessee’s in ITA Nos

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

68,51,453/ - to its AE i.e. M/s AT Kearney Inc. (ATK. US). 4.3 Further, the Ld. DR drew our attention to various evidences furnished by the assessee and commented in writing on it as below:- Examination and analysis of Assessee’s evidence. (i) Human Resources Services & IT Human Resource Information System ('HRIS'): With regard to these services, the assessee

DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(1)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI vs. A.T. KEARNEY LTD., GURGAON

In the result, appeals of the Assessee’s in ITA Nos

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

68,51,453/ - to its AE i.e. M/s AT Kearney Inc. (ATK. US). 4.3 Further, the Ld. DR drew our attention to various evidences furnished by the assessee and commented in writing on it as below:- Examination and analysis of Assessee’s evidence. (i) Human Resources Services & IT Human Resource Information System ('HRIS'): With regard to these services, the assessee

AT KEARNEY LTD.- INDIA BRANCH OFFICE,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(1)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee’s in ITA Nos

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

68,51,453/ - to its AE i.e. M/s AT Kearney Inc. (ATK. US). 4.3 Further, the Ld. DR drew our attention to various evidences furnished by the assessee and commented in writing on it as below:- Examination and analysis of Assessee’s evidence. (i) Human Resources Services & IT Human Resource Information System ('HRIS'): With regard to these services, the assessee

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs. UDAI SHANKAR AWASTHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

68.\nh) CIT(A) did not properly appreciate the remand report and accepted\nassessee's contention without thorough review.\n6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials\navailable on record. The Id. CIT DR lead the arguments in all the above\nappeals filed by the Revenue and the same appear to be identical. We have\nalso perused

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs. UDAI SHANKER AWASTHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

68.\nh) CIT(A) did not properly appreciate the remand report and accepted\nassessee's contention without thorough review.\n6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials\navailable on record. The Id. CIT DR lead the arguments in all the above\nappeals filed by the Revenue and the identical issues are involved in all the\nabove appeals