JUDGEMENTopens in new window

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereafter referred to as "the Act"] and are directed against a common order dated 31.10.2019, passed by the 2022:DHC:234-DB ITA No.68/2021 & connected matters Page 4 of 53 Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short "the Tribunal"]. 1.1 The Tribunal, via the impugned order, rendered a decision in twelve appeals

JUDGEMENTopens in new window

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereafter referred to as "the Act"] and are directed against a common order dated 31.10.2019, passed by the 2022:DHC:234-DB ITA No.68/2021 & connected matters Page 4 of 53 Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short "the Tribunal"]. 1.1 The Tribunal, via the impugned order, rendered a decision in twelve appeals

JUDGEMENTopens in new window

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereafter referred to as "the Act"] and are directed against a common order dated 31.10.2019, passed by the 2022:DHC:234-DB ITA No.68/2021 & connected matters Page 4 of 53 Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short "the Tribunal"]. 1.1 The Tribunal, via the impugned order, rendered a decision in twelve appeals

JUDGEMENTopens in new window

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereafter referred to as "the Act"] and are directed against a common order dated 31.10.2019, passed by the 2022:DHC:234-DB ITA No.68/2021 & connected matters Page 4 of 53 Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short "the Tribunal"]. 1.1 The Tribunal, via the impugned order, rendered a decision in twelve appeals

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-13, NEW DELHI vs. DOUBLE PLUS SOFTWARE P.LTD, NEDW DELHI

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

sections": [ "68", "143(3)", "143(1)", "143(2)", "147", "255(4)", "260A" ], "issues": "Whether the addition made under Section

SURENDER KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-39(2), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuay: 2014-15 Surender Kumar, Vs. Ito, Ward 39(2), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Afxpm2941L (Appellant) (Respondent)

68 of the Act it was pleaded before me that for want of clarity of provision to be applied at all stages , addition must be deleted on this count also. Further it was argued by Ld AR that view of Ld CIT(A) on evidentiary value of investigation wing report like any other document and expert opinion is contrary

PARVEEN,VPO KHANDA KHERI vs. ITO, WARD-1, HISAR, HISAR

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

sections": [ "68", "143(3)", "143(1)", "143(2)", "147", "255(4)", "260A" ], "issues": "Whether the addition made in the hands