366 (Del.) 3. Gurpal Singh v. ITO

159 ITD 329Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2016#1828 most cited

What is 366 (Del.) 3. Gurpal Singh v. ITO authority for?

Reassessment proceedings are invalid if initiated solely due to cash deposits in a bank account, or if the Assessing Officer's satisfaction for reopening is merely borrowed without independent application of mind. The validity of such reassessment can also be challenged in collateral proceedings under Section 263.

62

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Gurpal Singh v. ITO · Section 147 · Section 148 · Section 263 · reassessment validity · reopening of assessment · borrowed satisfaction · independent application of mind · cash deposit in bank · escapement of income

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

Issues it is cited on

undisclosed foreign income and assetssection 149(1)(c)section 4(2)section 201(3)section 158basection 150unexplained jewellerysection 70beyond four yearssection 18section 149(1)(b)statement under section 132(4)

Judgments citing 366 (Del.) 3. Gurpal Singh v. ITO

Manjulaben Bipinbhai Patel Legal Heir of Late Bipinbhai P.Patel, Baroda vs. The Dy.CIT. Central Circle-1, Baroda

ITA 1897/AHD/2019[2003-04]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132

…reopening. In this regard, reliance was placed on the following decisions: 1. Mariyam Ismail Rajwani in ITA No. 676/Ahd/2016 2. Bir Bahadur Singh vs. ITO, [2015] 53 taxmann.com 366 (Del.) 3. Gurpal Singh vs. ITO, 159 ITD 797 (Amritsar) 4. Amrik Singh vs. ITO, 159 ITD 329 (Amritsar) (B) Reopening was based on borrowed satisfaction: – The Ld. Sr. Counsel submitted that the cases were reopened merely on the basis of the details received from the FT&TR Division of CBDT and there was no independent application of mind by the AO. He submitted that the reopening 25 I.T.A No. 1894/Ahd/2019 A.Y. 2000-01 Page No Manjulab…

Manjulaben Bipinbhai Patel Legal Heir of Late Bipinbhai P.Patel, Baroda vs. The Dy.CIT. Central Circle-1, Baroda

ITA 1896/AHD/2019[2002-03]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132

…reopening. In this regard, reliance was placed on the following decisions: 1. Mariyam Ismail Rajwani in ITA No. 676/Ahd/2016 2. Bir Bahadur Singh vs. ITO, [2015] 53 taxmann.com 366 (Del.) 3. Gurpal Singh vs. ITO, 159 ITD 797 (Amritsar) 4. Amrik Singh vs. ITO, 159 ITD 329 (Amritsar) (B) Reopening was based on borrowed satisfaction: – The Ld. Sr. Counsel submitted that the cases were reopened merely on the basis of the details received from the FT&TR Division of CBDT and there was no independent application of mind by the AO. He submitted that the reopening 25 I.T.A No. 1894/Ahd/2019 A.Y. 2000-01 Page No Manjulab…

Manjulaben Bipinbhai Patel Legal Heir of Late Bipinbhai P.Patel, Baroda vs. The Dy.CIT. Central Circle-1, Baroda

ITA 1895/AHD/2019[2001-02]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2024AY 2001-02

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132

…reopening. In this regard, reliance was placed on the following decisions: 1. Mariyam Ismail Rajwani in ITA No. 676/Ahd/2016 2. Bir Bahadur Singh vs. ITO, [2015] 53 taxmann.com 366 (Del.) 3. Gurpal Singh vs. ITO, 159 ITD 797 (Amritsar) 4. Amrik Singh vs. ITO, 159 ITD 329 (Amritsar) (B) Reopening was based on borrowed satisfaction: – The Ld. Sr. Counsel submitted that the cases were reopened merely on the basis of the details received from the FT&TR Division of CBDT and there was no independent application of mind by the AO. He submitted that the reopening 25 I.T.A No. 1894/Ahd/2019 A.Y. 2000-01 Page No Manjulab…

Manjulaben Bipinbhai Patel Legal Heir of Late Bipinbhai P.Patel, Baroda vs. The Dy.CIT. Central Circle-1, Baroda

ITA 1894/AHD/2019[2000-01]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2024AY 2000-01

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132

…reopening. In this regard, reliance was placed on the following decisions: 1. Mariyam Ismail Rajwani in ITA No. 676/Ahd/2016 2. Bir Bahadur Singh vs. ITO, [2015] 53 taxmann.com 366 (Del.) 3. Gurpal Singh vs. ITO, 159 ITD 797 (Amritsar) 4. Amrik Singh vs. ITO, 159 ITD 329 (Amritsar) (B) Reopening was based on borrowed satisfaction: – The Ld. Sr. Counsel submitted that the cases were reopened merely on the basis of the details received from the FT&TR Division of CBDT and there was no independent application of mind by the AO. He submitted that the reopening 25 I.T.A No. 1894/Ahd/2019 A.Y. 2000-01 Page No Manjulab…

Ballu Singh, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward -65(5), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 800/DEL/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 44ASection 69A

…the law as set out in the case of Bir Bahadur Singh Sijwali Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward (1), Haidwani (supra) has not been disputed by the department and has been followed in number of cases, a few is mentioned hereunder: (i) Amrik Singh Vs. ITO, [reported in 159 ITD 329 (Asr)] (ii) Vinod Maheshwari Vs. ITO, order dated 9.9.2016.[reported inITA No. 1498/Del/2015(Delhi ITAT, SMC Bench)] (Paper book page no. 142-145) (iii) Rahul Bhandari Vs.ITO,order dated 8.9.2016. [reported in ITA No.2637/Del/2015 (Delhi ITAT, SMC Bench)] (Paper book page no. 155-158) (iv) Mariyam Ismail Rajwani order dated 09.08.2016 [reported i…

Ballu Singh, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward -65(5), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 799/DEL/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 44ASection 69A

…the law as set out in the case of Bir Bahadur Singh Sijwali Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward (1), Haidwani (supra) has not been disputed by the department and has been followed in number of cases, a few is mentioned hereunder: (i) Amrik Singh Vs. ITO, [reported in 159 ITD 329 (Asr)] (ii) Vinod Maheshwari Vs. ITO, order dated 9.9.2016.[reported inITA No. 1498/Del/2015(Delhi ITAT, SMC Bench)] (Paper book page no. 142-145) (iii) Rahul Bhandari Vs.ITO,order dated 8.9.2016. [reported in ITA No.2637/Del/2015 (Delhi ITAT, SMC Bench)] (Paper book page no. 155-158) (iv) Mariyam Ismail Rajwani order dated 09.08.2016 [reported i…

Nadeem Hasan, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 46(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 445/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.445/Del/2020 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 बनाम Nadeem Hasan Ito, 159, Meena Bazar, Vs. Ward 46(4) Jama Masjid, Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No. Accph8788G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 139(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69Section 69A

…t proceedings are void ab initio and are liable to be quashed. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the following decisions in support of the above contention: 1. PCIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. 395 ITR 677 (Del.); 2. Amrik Singh vs. ITO 159 ITD 329 (Asr.); 3. Bahadur Singh Sizwati vs. ITO 68 SOT 197 (Del.); 4. Raj Kumar Duggar (HUF) vs. ITO 12 DTR 16 (Del.). 7. The Ld. Counsel further submits that the Ld. PCIT who has accorded his approval u/s 151 of the Act acted in a mechanical manner without due application of mind. Ld. Counsel submits that the Ld. AO has acted in casual and mechanical…

Gurdish Kaur Khular, Jalandhar vs. ACIT( International Taxation), Circle, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 121/CHANDI/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Jul 2021AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Ashray Sarna, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Meenakshi Vohra, Addl. CIT
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271Section 69

…has not to be based on mere suspicion but it must be based on information as was held &y Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. Vs.IT0 41 1TR191. Reliance is placed on the decision of Amritsar Bench in the case of Amrik Singh v/s ITO, 159 ITD 329 (Amritsar) in which it was held as under: “When the assessment proceedings u/s 147 are initiated on the fallacious assumption that the bank deposits constituted undisclosed income, over-looking the fact that the source of the deposits need not necessarily be the income of the assessee, the proceedings is neither countenanced, nor sustainable in…

Shri Shrinivas Gupta, Bareilly vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Bareilly

ITA 482/LKW/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow25 Sept 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69

…the I.T.A.T. Delhi Bench in the case of Bir Bahadur Singh Sijwali vs. Income Tax Officer [2015] 53 Taxmann.com 366 (Delhi-Trib). Further reliance was placed on an order of Amritsar Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Amrik Singh vs. Income Tax Officer [2016] 159 ITD 329 (Amritsar-Trib). Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that in this case it has been held that the Assessing Officer cannot arrive at a reason to believe merely on the basis of deposits in the bank and he has to specifically record the reason that income has escaped the assessment. Therefore, it was argued that the reason recorded having no…

Divya, Hisar vs. ITO, Ward- 1, Hisar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6097/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Shri Suchitra Kamble, [Assessment Year: 2009-10] Divya, Ito, D/O-Shri Kailash Chand, 151, Kala Ward-1, Mandir Saree, Palika Bazar, Hisar, Hisar, Haryana Haryana

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 69

…for the Assessing Officer to form an opinion that merely because the assessee had invested/investment, therefore, they represent the income of the assessee which has escaped. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the ITAT in the case of Amrik Singh vs. ITO (159 ITD 329). The Ld. AR further submitted that the ITO do not obtain any approval before sending the said communication to the assessee and therefore such communication is not 4 valid communication u/s 133(6) of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that the proceedings u/s 148 was initiated on the basis of no material much less any tangible on relevant material an…

Abdul Samad, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward- 1(5), Ghaziabad

In the result appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 7404/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainiita No. 7403/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Hameeda Begum, Vs Income Tax Officer, W/O Shri Bundhu Khan, Ward-1(3), A-393-394, Sector-11, New Vijay Ghaziabad-201001 Nagar, Ghaziabad-201009 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ahepb8139L Ita No. 7404/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Abdul Samad, Vs Income Tax Officer, S/O Shri Aas Mohammad, Ward-1(5), A-262, Nahal-2, Ghaziabad-201002 Ghaziabad-201302 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Issps5169A Assessee By : Sh. Anup Sharma, Adv. & Sh. Sanjay Prashar, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S. L. Anuragi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.08.2019 Order Both The Appeals By Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Orders Of Ld. Cit(A), Ghaziabad Dated 28.09.2018 For Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. I Have Heard Ld. Representatives Of Both The Parties & Perused The Materials Available On Record. Both The Parties Mainly Argued In The Case Of Assessee Abdul Samad & Have Stated That Issue Is Same In Both The Appeals, Therefore, Order In This Case Could Not Followed In The Case Of Assessee Smt. Hameeda Begum.

For Appellant: Sh. Anup Sharma, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. S. L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Bhavnesh Saini, Judicial Member ITA No. 7403/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Hameeda Begum, Vs Income Tax Officer, W/o Shri Bundhu Khan, Ward-1(3), A-393-394, Sector-11, New Vijay Ghaziabad-201001 Nagar, Ghaziabad-201009 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AHEPB8139L ITA No. 7404/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Abdul Samad, Vs Income Tax Officer, S/o Shri Aas Mohammad, Ward-1(5), A-262, Nahal-2, Ghaziabad-201002 Ghaziabad-201302 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ISSPS5169A Assessee by : Sh. Anup Sharma, Adv. & Sh. Sanjay Prashar, Adv. R…

Hameeda Begum, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward- 1(3), Ghaziabad

In the result appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 7403/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainiita No. 7403/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Hameeda Begum, Vs Income Tax Officer, W/O Shri Bundhu Khan, Ward-1(3), A-393-394, Sector-11, New Vijay Ghaziabad-201001 Nagar, Ghaziabad-201009 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ahepb8139L Ita No. 7404/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Abdul Samad, Vs Income Tax Officer, S/O Shri Aas Mohammad, Ward-1(5), A-262, Nahal-2, Ghaziabad-201002 Ghaziabad-201302 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Issps5169A Assessee By : Sh. Anup Sharma, Adv. & Sh. Sanjay Prashar, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S. L. Anuragi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.08.2019 Order Both The Appeals By Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Orders Of Ld. Cit(A), Ghaziabad Dated 28.09.2018 For Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. I Have Heard Ld. Representatives Of Both The Parties & Perused The Materials Available On Record. Both The Parties Mainly Argued In The Case Of Assessee Abdul Samad & Have Stated That Issue Is Same In Both The Appeals, Therefore, Order In This Case Could Not Followed In The Case Of Assessee Smt. Hameeda Begum.

For Appellant: Sh. Anup Sharma, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. S. L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Bhavnesh Saini, Judicial Member ITA No. 7403/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Hameeda Begum, Vs Income Tax Officer, W/o Shri Bundhu Khan, Ward-1(3), A-393-394, Sector-11, New Vijay Ghaziabad-201001 Nagar, Ghaziabad-201009 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AHEPB8139L ITA No. 7404/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Abdul Samad, Vs Income Tax Officer, S/o Shri Aas Mohammad, Ward-1(5), A-262, Nahal-2, Ghaziabad-201002 Ghaziabad-201302 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ISSPS5169A Assessee by : Sh. Anup Sharma, Adv. & Sh. Sanjay Prashar, Adv. R…

M/S. Dayanand Contractor, Rohtak vs. Pr.CIT, Rohtak

In the result, original

ITA 2807/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Kumar Kamal & Lalit MohanFor Respondent: Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT-D.R
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 263

…65 ITR 143 (All) Rakes Kumar Gupta v. UOI vii) ITANo. 1331/D/2015 Praveen Kumar Jain v ITO dated viii) 22.1.2015 ITA No. 3534/D/2014(Del Tri) Munni Devi vs ITO68 STO 197 (Del) ix) Bir Bahadur Singh Sijawali 57 ITR 532 (SC) Parimisetti Setharamamma vs. CIT x) 159 ITD 329 (Asr) Sh. Amrik Singh vs ITO xi) 108 ITD 115(Agra) Saraf Gramodyog Sansthan vs ITO xii) ITANo. 3873/D/2016 xiii) Assessment Year 2009-10 dated 23.01.2017 Zahid Hassan xiv) 15 In view of the above, the additional ground that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred both in law and on facts in not directing the learned Assessing…

M/S. Dayanand Contractor, Rohtak vs. Pr.CIT, Rohtak

In the result, original

ITA 2806/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Kumar Kamal & Lalit MohanFor Respondent: Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT-D.R
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 263

…65 ITR 143 (All) Rakes Kumar Gupta v. UOI vii) ITANo. 1331/D/2015 Praveen Kumar Jain v ITO dated viii) 22.1.2015 ITA No. 3534/D/2014(Del Tri) Munni Devi vs ITO68 STO 197 (Del) ix) Bir Bahadur Singh Sijawali 57 ITR 532 (SC) Parimisetti Setharamamma vs. CIT x) 159 ITD 329 (Asr) Sh. Amrik Singh vs ITO xi) 108 ITD 115(Agra) Saraf Gramodyog Sansthan vs ITO xii) ITANo. 3873/D/2016 xiii) Assessment Year 2009-10 dated 23.01.2017 Zahid Hassan xiv) 15 In view of the above, the additional ground that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred both in law and on facts in not directing the learned Assessing…

M/S. Dayanand Contractor, Rohtak vs. ITO, Rohtak

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2027/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, & Sh. Lalit Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Shri T. Vasanthan Sr. DR
Section 144A

…65 ITR 143 (All) Rakes Kumar Gupta v. UOI vii) ITANo. 1331/D/2015 Praveen Kumar Jain v ITO dated viii) 22.1.2015 ITA No. 3534/D/2014(Del Tri) Munni Devi vs ITO68 STO ix) 197 (Del) Bir Bahadur Singh Sijawali 57 ITR 532 (SC) Parimisetti Setharamamma vs. CIT x) 159 ITD 329 (Asr) Sh. Amrik Singh vs ITO xi) 108 ITD 115(Agra) Saraf Gramodyog Sansthan vs ITO xii) ITANo. 3873/D/2016 xiii) Assessment Year 2009-10 dated 23.01.2017 Zahid xiv) Hassan 15 In view of the above, the additional ground that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred both in law and on facts in not directing the learned Assessing…

Sanjeev Jain, Haridwar vs. ITO, Roorkee

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed on ground No

ITA 3812/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishisanjeev Jain, Vs. Ito, M/S. Arihant Ayurvedic Centre, Ward-2, Town Mangalpur, Tehsil Roorkee, Roorkee, Haridwar Pan:Arepj2566R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kaushlendra Tiwari, Sr. DR
Section 14Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2Section 50CSection 68

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S.SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sanjeev Jain, Vs. ITO, M/s. Arihant Ayurvedic Centre, Ward-2, Town Mangalpur, Tehsil Roorkee, Roorkee, Haridwar PAN:AREPJ2566R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CA Revenue by: Shri Kaushlendra Tiwari, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 21/09/2017 Date of pronouncement 16/10/2017 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against order of the ld CIT(A)-I, Dehradun dated 04.03.2013 for the Assessment Year 2007-08 raisi…

Shri Sunil Kumar Saraswat, Mathura vs. ITO 1(3)(4), Mathura

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 109/AGR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

Section 131(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…he binding precedents in following cases a) Praveen Kumar Jain vs. ITO (Order dated 17.12.2015 in ITA no. 1331/Del/2015 (ITAT, Delhi) b) Bir Bahadur Singh Sijwali vs. ITO reported as (2015) 68 SOT 197 (Delhi -Trib) c) Amrik Singh vs. ITO reported as (2016) 159 ITD 329 (Amritsar -Trib) referred and relied upon before him on the issue. 4. Because, learned 'CIT (Appeals)' has erred in not appreciating that no addition was made by the 'AO' under section 68/69 towards deposits in saving bank account, which was the sole reason for initiating proceedings under section 148, no other addition (as made by the 'AO') cou…

Sh. Tajendra Kumar Ghai, New Delhi vs. ITO- 1(5), Rudrapur

In the result appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 971/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jun 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh GuptaFor Respondent: Ms. Bedobani, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 44A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH -‘SMC’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 970,971/Del/2017 ASSESSMENT YEARs: 2011-12,2012-13 Tajendra Kumar Ghai ITO – 1(5) Vs. C/o M/s. RRA Taxindia, Rudrapur D-28, South Extension Part-1 New Delhi – 110 049 PAN ALUPG5605N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Dr. Rakesh Gupta Shri Somil Aggarwal, Advocate Department by: Ms. Bedobani, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 23/05/2017 Date of pronouncement 07/06/2017 Per BHAVNESH SAINI, Judicial Member ORDER Both the appeals by the same assessee are directed against different orders of Ld. CIT…

Sh. Tajendra Kumar Ghai, New Delhi vs. ITO- 1(5), Rudrapur

In the result appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 970/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jun 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh GuptaFor Respondent: Ms. Bedobani, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 44A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH -‘SMC’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 970,971/Del/2017 ASSESSMENT YEARs: 2011-12,2012-13 Tajendra Kumar Ghai ITO – 1(5) Vs. C/o M/s. RRA Taxindia, Rudrapur D-28, South Extension Part-1 New Delhi – 110 049 PAN ALUPG5605N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Dr. Rakesh Gupta Shri Somil Aggarwal, Advocate Department by: Ms. Bedobani, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 23/05/2017 Date of pronouncement 07/06/2017 Per BHAVNESH SAINI, Judicial Member ORDER Both the appeals by the same assessee are directed against different orders of Ld. CIT…

Harmeet Singh, Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the Assessee’s Appeal stands allowed

ITA 1939/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2008-09 Harmeet Singh Vs. Ito, Ward-36(1), C/O Kapil Goel, Adv. New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi – 110 085 (Pan: Bhrpa6630P) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

…med an opinion based on any material that such deposits represented income. To support his aforesaid contention, he relied upon the following case laws and attached the copies of the said decisions with his Paper Book. - Sh. Amrik Singh vs. ITO reported in 159 ITD 329 (Asr) - Delhi ITAT, SMC Bench decision in the case of Vinod Maheshwari order dated 9.9.2016. - Delhi ITAT – SMC Bench decision in case of Rahul Bhandari order dated 8.9.2016. - Delhi ITAT, SMC Bench decision in the case of Mariyam Ismail Rajwani Praveen Kumar Jain vs. ITO in ITA No. - 1331/D/2015 for the AY 2006-07 dated 22.1.2016. - Ahmedaba…