11 October 2017; (vii) Naresh Sunderlal Chug v. ITO

SARASWATI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY REGD.,NEW DELHI vs. CIT EXEMPTION , DELHI

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

…1 Saraswati Educational Society Vs. CIT(E) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1889/Del/2024, (A.Y.2018-19) Saraswati CIT Exemption Educational Society Delhi Regd. Vs C/o M/s Raj Kumar & Associates L-7A LGF, South Extension part-2, Delhi PAN No: AABAS8736R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Raj Kumar Gupta, CA and Sh. J. P. Sharma, CA Respondent by Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing 19/11/2024 Date of Pronouncement 28/11/2024 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., J…

BIMLA,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-38(5), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareekbimla, Vs. Ito, Ward 38 (5), H.No.143, Village Hamidpur, New Delhi. Delhi – 110 036. (Pan : Bpdpb9344B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate Shri Ankit Kumar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.09.2024 Date Of Order : 26.11.2024 Order Per S.Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Appeals-13, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To ‘Ld. Cit (A)’) Dated 23.07.2019 For Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee Filed Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of Rs.2,23,030/- On 14.08.2014. The Return Of Income Was Processed Under Section 143 (1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’). The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Through Cass & Notices

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK, JUDICIAL MEMBER Bimla, vs. ITO, Ward 38 (5), H.No.143, Village Hamidpur, New Delhi. Delhi – 110 036. (PAN : BPDPB9344B) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate Shri Ankit Kumar, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 18.09.2024 Date of Order : 26.11.2024 ORDER PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN,AM: 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax Appeals-13, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to ‘Ld. CIT (…

SH. ANIL KUMAR SINGHAL,NEW DELHI vs. PR. CIT, GHAZIABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishianita Rani, Vs. Pr. Cit, C/O. M/S. Rra Taxindia, Ghaziabad C-28, South Extension Part-I, New Delhi Pan: Azapr3313C (Appellant) (Respondent) Ankush Singhal, Vs. Pr. Cit, C/O. M/S. Rra Taxindia, Ghaziabad C-28, South Extension Part-I, New Delhi Pan: Azapr3313C (Appellant) (Respondent) Anil Kumar Singhal, Vs. Pr. Cit, C/O. M/S. Rra Taxindia, Ghaziabad C-28, South Extension Part-I, New Delhi Pan: Azapr3313C (Appellant) (Respondent)

…opportunity of being heard given to the assessee. In view of this there is no doubt that this does not constitute any opportunity in respect of notice under section 263 of the income tax act. The facts in the order of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in 86 Taxmann.com 35 and the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in 147 ITR 379 squarely covered the issue in favour of the assessee. In view of this, we are unable to sustain the order passed by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax under section 263 of the income tax Act. Hence, same is quashed. Accordingly, Ground No. 1 of the appeal of the assessee is a…

SH. ANKUSH SINGHAL,NEW DELHI vs. PR. CIT, GHAZIABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishianita Rani, Vs. Pr. Cit, C/O. M/S. Rra Taxindia, Ghaziabad C-28, South Extension Part-I, New Delhi Pan: Azapr3313C (Appellant) (Respondent) Ankush Singhal, Vs. Pr. Cit, C/O. M/S. Rra Taxindia, Ghaziabad C-28, South Extension Part-I, New Delhi Pan: Azapr3313C (Appellant) (Respondent) Anil Kumar Singhal, Vs. Pr. Cit, C/O. M/S. Rra Taxindia, Ghaziabad C-28, South Extension Part-I, New Delhi Pan: Azapr3313C (Appellant) (Respondent)

…opportunity of being heard given to the assessee. In view of this there is no doubt that this does not constitute any opportunity in respect of notice under section 263 of the income tax act. The facts in the order of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in 86 Taxmann.com 35 and the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in 147 ITR 379 squarely covered the issue in favour of the assessee. In view of this, we are unable to sustain the order passed by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax under section 263 of the income tax Act. Hence, same is quashed. Accordingly, Ground No. 1 of the appeal of the assessee is a…

SMT. ANITA RANI,NEW DELHI vs. PR. CIT, GHAZIABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishianita Rani, Vs. Pr. Cit, C/O. M/S. Rra Taxindia, Ghaziabad C-28, South Extension Part-I, New Delhi Pan: Azapr3313C (Appellant) (Respondent) Ankush Singhal, Vs. Pr. Cit, C/O. M/S. Rra Taxindia, Ghaziabad C-28, South Extension Part-I, New Delhi Pan: Azapr3313C (Appellant) (Respondent) Anil Kumar Singhal, Vs. Pr. Cit, C/O. M/S. Rra Taxindia, Ghaziabad C-28, South Extension Part-I, New Delhi Pan: Azapr3313C (Appellant) (Respondent)

…opportunity of being heard given to the assessee. In view of this there is no doubt that this does not constitute any opportunity in respect of notice under section 263 of the income tax act. The facts in the order of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in 86 Taxmann.com 35 and the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in 147 ITR 379 squarely covered the issue in favour of the assessee. In view of this, we are unable to sustain the order passed by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax under section 263 of the income tax Act. Hence, same is quashed. Accordingly, Ground No. 1 of the appeal of the assessee is a…