DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. DCM SHRIRAM LTD, NEW DELHI

price of steam at cost.\nThis order has been accepted by the revenue and no further appeal has\nbeen filed. Therefore this issue becomes final with respect to the\ndetermination of ALP of transfer of steam at cost by the eligible unit to non\neligible unit.\n\n44. Further Honourable Gujarat High court in Principal Commissioner of\nIncome

K.R.PULP AND PAPERS LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-19, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

price of steam at cost. This order has\nbeen accepted by the revenue and no further appeal has been\n\nfiled. Therefore this issue becomes final with respect to the\ndetermination of ALP of transfer of steam at cost by the eligible\nunit to non eligible unit.\n\n44. Further Honourable Gujarat High court in Principal Commissioner\nof Income

DEV PRIYA PRODUCTS PRIVATE LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MEERUT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2020-21] Dev Priya Products Pvt.Ltd., Vs Dcit/Acit, 4, Shankar Vihar, 1St Floor, Central Circle, Vikas Marg, Delhi-110092. Meerut Pan-Aaacd4276C Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ved Jain, Adv. & Shri Ayush Garg, Ca Respondent By Shri S.K.Jhadav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 02.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27.06.2025 Order

price of steam at cost. This order has been accepted by the revenue and no further appeal has been filed. Therefore this issue becomes final with respect to the determination of ALP of transfer of steam at cost by the eligible unit to non eligible unit. 44. Further Honourable Gujarat High court in Principal Commissioner of Income

K R PULP AND PAPERS LTD. ,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-19 , DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

price of steam at cost. This order has\nbeen accepted by the revenue and no further appeal has been\nfiled. Therefore this issue becomes final with respect to the\ndetermination of ALP of transfer of steam at cost by the eligible\nunit to non eligible unit.\n44. Further Honourable Gujarat High court in Principal Commissioner\nof Income

PHI SEEDS PVT. LTD.,HYDERABAD vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-7, NEW DELHI

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Transfer Pricing Adjustment u/s 92CA of the Act amounting to Rs.67,17,965/- was also made on account of receivables received from its Associate Enterprises (in short ‘AEs’) beyond the period of more than 30 days being not received. Further additions on account of disallowance u/s 37(1) of the Act (Rs.54,91,340/-) being capital in nature and disallowance

LOKESH KUMAR AGGARWAL,DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-45(5), DELHI

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Transfer Pricing Adjustment u/s 92CA of the Act amounting to Rs.67,17,965/- was also made on account of receivables received from its Associate Enterprises (in short ‘AEs’) beyond the period of more than 30 days being not received. Further additions on account of disallowance u/s 37(1) of the Act (Rs.54,91,340/-) being capital in nature and disallowance

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL-III vs. UNIPATCH RUBBER LTD

Appeal is dismissed

80I were admissible on gross income. Following the order of the ITAT we dismiss the revenue’s ground.” 5. The relevant provisions are as follows:- “Section 80-HH(1) – Where the gross total income of an assessee includes any profits and gains derived from an industrial undertaking, or the business of a hotel, to which this section applies, there shall

PHI SEEDS PVT. LTD.,HYDERABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 7 , NEW DELHI

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Transfer Pricing Adjustment u/s 92CA of the\n5\nITA Nos.1575, 7375/Del/2018\nITA No.9205/Del/2019\nAct amounting to Rs.67,17,965/- was also made on account of\nreceivables received from its Associate Enterprises (in short\n'AEs') beyond the period of more than 30 days being not\nreceived. Further additions on account of disallowance u/s 37(1)\nof the Act (Rs.54

PHI SEEDS PVT. LTD.,HYDERABAD vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-7, NEW DELHI

Transfer Pricing Adjustment u/s 92CA of the\nAct amounting to Rs.67,17,965/- was also made on account of\nreceivables received from its Associate Enterprises (in short\n'AEs') beyond the period of more than 30 days being not\nreceived. Further additions on account of disallowance u/s 37(1)\nof the Act (Rs.54,91,340/-) being capital in nature

MAHESH KUMAR,DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-68(6), DELHI

In the result, Ground no. 3 as raised by the assessee deserves to be allowed and the impugned addition cannot be sustained

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang(), Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2012-13] Mahesh Kumar, Vs Ito, 6/305/1A, Doonger Ward-68(6), Mohalla, Delhi-110032. Delhi. Pan-Aoopk6335A Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Neeraj Mangla, Ca Respondent By Shri Krishna K. Ramawat, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06.08.2025

prices of various scrips by rigging them and laundering money in the garb of LTCG. The AO further noted that on examination of the return of income filed by the assessee, it was found that the assessee had not shown the amount of LTCG of Rs.9,60,000/- at all and thus the AO concluded that the assessee had concealed

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(1), DELHI, DELHI vs. ARTISTIC FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, Ground no. 3 as raised by the assessee deserves to be allowed and the impugned addition cannot be sustained

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang(), Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2012-13] Mahesh Kumar, Vs Ito, 6/305/1A, Doonger Ward-68(6), Mohalla, Delhi-110032. Delhi. Pan-Aoopk6335A Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Neeraj Mangla, Ca Respondent By Shri Krishna K. Ramawat, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06.08.2025

prices of various scrips by rigging them and laundering money in the garb of LTCG. The AO further noted that on examination of the return of income filed by the assessee, it was found that the assessee had not shown the amount of LTCG of Rs.9,60,000/- at all and thus the AO concluded that the assessee had concealed