ATUL KUMAR ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for AYs 2011-12 in the cases of

price in various investments as under :- “a) Investment in the shares of M/s Orion Packwell Pvt. Ltd: AAAC08029Q: The company has received, share premium of Rs.4.9 Crs from various entities and the same has been invested in properties located at A- 20SB, Sushant Lok, Part-1, Gurgaon and farm House No. 789/949 Village- Kadar pur , Rakba Bhondasi, The. Sohria , Gurgaon

ATUL KUMAR GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for AYs 2011-12 in the cases of

price in various investments as under :- “a) Investment in the shares of M/s Orion Packwell Pvt. Ltd: AAAC08029Q: The company has received, share premium of Rs.4.9 Crs from various entities and the same has been invested in properties located at A- 20SB, Sushant Lok, Part-1, Gurgaon and farm House No. 789/949 Village- Kadar pur , Rakba Bhondasi, The. Sohria , Gurgaon

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -28, NEW DELHI vs. ATUL KUMAR GUPTA, NEW DELHI

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for AYs 2011-12 in the cases of

price in various investments as under :- “a) Investment in the shares of M/s Orion Packwell Pvt. Ltd: AAAC08029Q: The company has received, share premium of Rs.4.9 Crs from various entities and the same has been invested in properties located at A- 20SB, Sushant Lok, Part-1, Gurgaon and farm House No. 789/949 Village- Kadar pur , Rakba Bhondasi, The. Sohria , Gurgaon

ATUL KUMAR GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for AYs 2011-12 in the cases of

price in various investments as under :- “a) Investment in the shares of M/s Orion Packwell Pvt. Ltd: AAAC08029Q: The company has received, share premium of Rs.4.9 Crs from various entities and the same has been invested in properties located at A- 20SB, Sushant Lok, Part-1, Gurgaon and farm House No. 789/949 Village- Kadar pur , Rakba Bhondasi, The. Sohria , Gurgaon

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI vs. RAJIV GUPTA, NEW DELHI

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for AYs 2011-12 in the cases of

price in various investments as under :- “a) Investment in the shares of M/s Orion Packwell Pvt. Ltd: AAAC08029Q: The company has received, share premium of Rs.4.9 Crs from various entities and the same has been invested in properties located at A- 20SB, Sushant Lok, Part-1, Gurgaon and farm House No. 789/949 Village- Kadar pur , Rakba Bhondasi, The. Sohria , Gurgaon

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, NEW DELHI vs. RAJAN SHARMA, DELHI

price of the made by the\nDVO is based on scientific method and is acceptable as the provisions of the\nIT Act.\n3.\nWhether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in the laws,\nthe Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.5,00,000/- relying on the\narguments of the assessee, wherein the assessee

DCIT, CC-30, NEW DELHI vs. RAJAN SHARMA, NEW DELHI

price of the made by the\nDVO is based on scientific method and is acceptable as the provisions of the\nIT Act.\n3.\nWhether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in the laws,\nthe Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.5,00,000/- relying on the\narguments of the assessee, wherein the assessee

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

transfer did not take place. Therefore, there is no question of any undisclosed capital gains. In this view of the matter the addition of `19,35,769/- was deleted. 21. The addition of `2,30,000/- on account of unexplained commission paid to the broker in connection with the sale of KG Farm was also deleted by the CIT (Appeals

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, NEW DELHI vs. RAJAN SHARMA, DELHI

price of the made by the\nDVO is based on scientific method and is acceptable as the provisions of the\nIT Act.\n3.\nWhether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in the laws,\nthe Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.5,00,000/- relying on the\narguments of the assessee, wherein the assessee

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, NEW DELHI vs. RAJAN SHARMA , DELHI

price of the made by the\nDVO is based on scientific method and is acceptable as the provisions of the\nIT Act.\n3.\nWhether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in the laws,\nthe Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.5,00,000/- relying on the\narguments of the assessee, wherein the assessee

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-30 , NEW DELHI vs. RAJAN SHARMA, DELHI

price of the made by the\nDVO is based on scientific method and is acceptable as the provisions of the\nIT Act.\n3.\nWhether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in the laws,\nthe Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.5,00,000/- relying on the\narguments of the assessee, wherein the assessee

NILESH PURSHOTTAM GHODASARA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE INT TAX 1(3)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2015-16]

transfer pricing officer u/s. 92CA(3) of the Act, the assessee is not an "eligible assessee" u/s. 144C(15) of the Act. The assessee is not an "eligible assessee" as he was a non resident in the relevant assessment year and did not fall within the ambit of clause b ii) of the section 144C(15) since the amendment

MANNU BHATIA,UAE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1)(2), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmash. Mannu Bhatia Vs. Acit, 1704, Mesk Tower, International Tax Al Marsa Road, Dubai Circle 1(1)(2) Marina, Dubai, Uae Pan : Afnpb4279A (Appellant) (Respondent)

unexplained without considering the source of investment being Home Loan. The mutual funds were purchased out of the bank account of the assessee and source being the redemption of mutual funds, capital gains and foreign remittances. Further, the assessee has also contested that Rs. 1,60,315/- has already been offered under the head income from other sources

CHAWLA JEWELLERS,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 19, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

price at a sum of Rs. 2,37,18 being assessable as turnover on which gross profit has been worked out at Rs. 16.82% thereby making an addition of Rs. 39,89,429/- [being part of addition of Rs. 1,47,26,510/-) is totally in contradiction of the findings recorded on the issue of difference between 22kt gold jewellery

ENORMOUS NIVESH P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-13, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Enormous Nivesh Pvt. Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd., 1, Zamrudpur Community Income Tax, Central Circle Centre, Kailash Colony, 13, Ara Centre, New Delhi – 1100 48 Jhandewalan Extension, Pan No. Aabcd1454F Delhi -1100 55 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Fragment Nivesh P. Ltd., Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of 1, Zamrudpur Community Income Tax, Central Circle Centre, Kailash Colony, 13, Ara Centre, New Delhi – 1100 48 Jhandewalan Extension, Pan No. Aaecs5314G Delhi -1100 55 (Appellant) (Respondent)

price which are allotted for the first time by way of right shares. The amendment is therefore never meant to aim the "fresh issue" or "fresh allotment" of shares by a company. 7.1 Learned Authorized Representative for the appellant/assessee submitted that ground of appeal nos. 4 and 5 were in respect of additions by Ld. AO for unexplained investment

FRAGMENT NIVESH P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-13, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Enormous Nivesh Pvt. Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd., 1, Zamrudpur Community Income Tax, Central Circle Centre, Kailash Colony, 13, Ara Centre, New Delhi – 1100 48 Jhandewalan Extension, Pan No. Aabcd1454F Delhi -1100 55 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Fragment Nivesh P. Ltd., Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of 1, Zamrudpur Community Income Tax, Central Circle Centre, Kailash Colony, 13, Ara Centre, New Delhi – 1100 48 Jhandewalan Extension, Pan No. Aaecs5314G Delhi -1100 55 (Appellant) (Respondent)

price which are allotted for the first time by way of right shares. The amendment is therefore never meant to aim the "fresh issue" or "fresh allotment" of shares by a company. 7.1 Learned Authorized Representative for the appellant/assessee submitted that ground of appeal nos. 4 and 5 were in respect of additions by Ld. AO for unexplained investment

DCIT CIRCLE 1(1), NEW DELHI vs. ACME TELE POWER LTD. (NOW KNOWN AS ACME CLEANTECH SOLUTION LTD.), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhir Pareek & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] M/S. Acme Cleantech Solutions Vs Dcit, Ltd., C/O-M/S. Rra Taxindia, Circle-1(2) D-28, South Extension, Part-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110049 Pan-Aaeca0914A Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2010-11] M/S. Acme Cleantech Solutions Vs Addl.Cit, Ltd., C/O-M/S. Rra Taxindia, Range-1 D-28, South Extension, Part-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110049 Pan-Aaeca0914A Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2010-11] Dcit, Vs M/S. Acme Tele Power Ltd. Circle-1(1) [Now, Known As M/S. Acme New Delhi Cleantech Solutions Ltd.] C/O-M/S. Rra Taxindia, D-28, South Extension, Part-1, New Delhi-110049 Pan-Aaeca0914A Appellant Respondent

unexplained cash credit. 32. Heard the contentions of both parties and perused the material available on record. From the facts of the case, it is seen that the M/s. Jackson Heights Investment Ltd., Mauritius has made investment in the shares of M/s. Acme Telly Energy Solutions P. Ltd. who was got merged with the assessee company during the year under

M/S. ACME CLEANTECH SOLUTIONS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhir Pareek & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] M/S. Acme Cleantech Solutions Vs Dcit, Ltd., C/O-M/S. Rra Taxindia, Circle-1(2) D-28, South Extension, Part-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110049 Pan-Aaeca0914A Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2010-11] M/S. Acme Cleantech Solutions Vs Addl.Cit, Ltd., C/O-M/S. Rra Taxindia, Range-1 D-28, South Extension, Part-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110049 Pan-Aaeca0914A Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2010-11] Dcit, Vs M/S. Acme Tele Power Ltd. Circle-1(1) [Now, Known As M/S. Acme New Delhi Cleantech Solutions Ltd.] C/O-M/S. Rra Taxindia, D-28, South Extension, Part-1, New Delhi-110049 Pan-Aaeca0914A Appellant Respondent

unexplained cash credit. 32. Heard the contentions of both parties and perused the material available on record. From the facts of the case, it is seen that the M/s. Jackson Heights Investment Ltd., Mauritius has made investment in the shares of M/s. Acme Telly Energy Solutions P. Ltd. who was got merged with the assessee company during the year under