431 ITR 361 (Del) PCIT v. Smt. Krishna Devi

200 Taxmann 186High Court2011#3656 most cited

What is 431 ITR 361 (Del) PCIT v. Smt. Krishna Devi authority for?

Additions to income cannot be made based on mere surmises, suspicions, or conjectures; there must be concrete material to support such conclusions.

32

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2024.

Also referred to as

PCIT v. Smt. Krishna Devi · 431 ITR 361 (Del) · 200 Taxmann 186 · additions on surmises · suspicion and conjectures · addition without material · onus of proof · assessment

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 69CSection 153DSection 132Section 132(4)Section 139

Issues it is cited on

section 132(5)section 100section 153(c)(1)section 106section 94abatement of assessmentanonymous donationsection 153(c)section 164third party informationshare capital and share premiumonus of proof

Judgments citing 431 ITR 361 (Del) PCIT v. Smt. Krishna Devi

Anil Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-17, New Delhi

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2938/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

…ermissible.” It has also held that there is a difference between question of law and a “substantial question of law”. Consequently, this Court finds that there is no perversity in the findings of the ITAT. iii) 431 ITR 361 (Del) PCIT vs. Smt. Krishna Devi iv) 200 Taxmann 186 (Del) (Mag)CIT v. Vishal Holding & Capital (P) Ltd. 15.1 THAT NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE ON THE BASIS OF SURMISES, SUSPICION AND CONJECTURES: It is also settled law that no addition can be made on the basis of surmises, suspicion and conjectures, as has been held by following cases: i) 37 ITR 271 (SC) Uma Charan Shaw & Bros. Co. v. CIT Taking i…

Anil Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-17, New Delhi

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2937/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

…ermissible.” It has also held that there is a difference between question of law and a “substantial question of law”. Consequently, this Court finds that there is no perversity in the findings of the ITAT. iii) 431 ITR 361 (Del) PCIT vs. Smt. Krishna Devi iv) 200 Taxmann 186 (Del) (Mag)CIT v. Vishal Holding & Capital (P) Ltd. 15.1 THAT NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE ON THE BASIS OF SURMISES, SUSPICION AND CONJECTURES: It is also settled law that no addition can be made on the basis of surmises, suspicion and conjectures, as has been held by following cases: i) 37 ITR 271 (SC) Uma Charan Shaw & Bros. Co. v. CIT Taking i…

Anil Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-17, New Delhi

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2936/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

…ermissible.” It has also held that there is a difference between question of law and a “substantial question of law”. Consequently, this Court finds that there is no perversity in the findings of the ITAT. iii) 431 ITR 361 (Del) PCIT vs. Smt. Krishna Devi iv) 200 Taxmann 186 (Del) (Mag)CIT v. Vishal Holding & Capital (P) Ltd. 15.1 THAT NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE ON THE BASIS OF SURMISES, SUSPICION AND CONJECTURES: It is also settled law that no addition can be made on the basis of surmises, suspicion and conjectures, as has been held by following cases: i) 37 ITR 271 (SC) Uma Charan Shaw & Bros. Co. v. CIT Taking i…

Anil Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-17, New Delhi

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2935/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

…ermissible.” It has also held that there is a difference between question of law and a “substantial question of law”. Consequently, this Court finds that there is no perversity in the findings of the ITAT. iii) 431 ITR 361 (Del) PCIT vs. Smt. Krishna Devi iv) 200 Taxmann 186 (Del) (Mag)CIT v. Vishal Holding & Capital (P) Ltd. 15.1 THAT NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE ON THE BASIS OF SURMISES, SUSPICION AND CONJECTURES: It is also settled law that no addition can be made on the basis of surmises, suspicion and conjectures, as has been held by following cases: i) 37 ITR 271 (SC) Uma Charan Shaw & Bros. Co. v. CIT Taking i…

Silkina Commodeal Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-3(3), Kolkata.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1161/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Years: 2011-12 Silkina Commodeal Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 6, Waterloo Street, Kolkata- Vs. 3(3), Kolkata. 700069. (Pan: Aaecs5627C) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Siddarth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. K. Singh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Years: 2011-12 Silkina Commodeal Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 6, Waterloo Street, Kolkata- Vs. 3(3), Kolkata. 700069. (PAN: AAECS5627C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Siddarth Agarwal, Advocate Respondent by : Shri B. K. Singh, JCIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 22.01.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 06.03.2024 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Ld.CIT(A), National Fa…

Silkina Commodeal Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 3(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1439/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Siddarth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arup Chatterjee, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1437 & 1438/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2010-11 & ITA Nos.1439/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2012-13 Silkina Commodeal Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 6, Waterloo Street, Kolkata- Vs. 3(3), Kolkata. 700069. (PAN: AAECS5627C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Siddarth Agarwal, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Arup Chatterjee, Addl. CIT Date of Hearing : 28.02.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 05.03.2024 O R D E R PER BENCH: All these appeals filed…

Silkina Commodeal Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-3(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1438/KOL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Siddarth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arup Chatterjee, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1437 & 1438/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2010-11 & ITA Nos.1439/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2012-13 Silkina Commodeal Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 6, Waterloo Street, Kolkata- Vs. 3(3), Kolkata. 700069. (PAN: AAECS5627C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Siddarth Agarwal, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Arup Chatterjee, Addl. CIT Date of Hearing : 28.02.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 05.03.2024 O R D E R PER BENCH: All these appeals filed…

Silkina Commodeal Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-3(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1437/KOL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Siddarth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arup Chatterjee, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1437 & 1438/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2010-11 & ITA Nos.1439/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2012-13 Silkina Commodeal Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 6, Waterloo Street, Kolkata- Vs. 3(3), Kolkata. 700069. (PAN: AAECS5627C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Siddarth Agarwal, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Arup Chatterjee, Addl. CIT Date of Hearing : 28.02.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 05.03.2024 O R D E R PER BENCH: All these appeals filed…

M/S. Delighted Holdings (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. Dcir, Cir-8(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 624/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “ए’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी संजय शमा" "या"यक सद"य के सम" [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member] I.T.A. No. 624/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s Delighted Holdings (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Circle-8(2), Kolkata (PAN: AABCE 0588 P) Appellant / (अपीलाथ") Respondent / ( !यथ") Date of Hearing / सुनवाई 13.12.2023 क$ "त&थ Date of Pronouncement/ 08.01.2024 आदेश उ)घोषणा क$ "त&थ For the Appellant/ Shri Abhishek Bansal, A.R "नधा"/रती क$ ओर से For the Respondent/ Shri B. K.…

ITO, Ward-1(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Gemini Commerce, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 14/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 14/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Ward - 11(1), M/S. Gemini Commerce Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata Vs 8A, Brown Field Row Kolkata - 700027 [Pan : Aadcg0842J] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01/02/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 15/03/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: This Is The Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Cit(A)”], Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Dated 21/09/2022 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That There Is A Delay Of Six (6) Days In Filing Of This Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons Of Delay. After Perusing The Same, We Find That The Assessee Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause From Filing The Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. Hence, The Delay Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted. 3. The Revenue Has Filed The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, Ld. Cit(A) Was Justified In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.5,61,00,000/- Made By The Assessing Officer On Account Of Sale Of Unquoted Shares In The Course Of

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT, D/R
Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68

…| आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "यायपीठ, कोलकाता | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT & DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 14/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Ward - 11(1), M/s. Gemini Commerce Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata Vs 8A, Brown Field Row Kolkata - 700027 [PAN : AADCG0842J] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 01/02/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 15/03/2023 आदेश/O R D E R…

Himalayan Dairies Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 11(3), New Delhi

ITA 3361/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishihimalayan Dairies Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Ito, Flat No. 10, C-1/2, Model Town, Ward-11(3), New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaach0252J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Jagdish Singh, Sr. DR
Section 68

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I-2 “SMC”: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Himalayan Dairies Pvt. Ltd, Vs. ITO, Flat No. 10, C-1/2, Model Town, Ward-11(3), New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AAACH0252J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by: Shri Jagdish Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 24/02/2019 Date of pronouncement 19/05/2020 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT (A)-4, New Delhi dated 27/02/2018 for the Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The assessee has raise…

Prity Gupta, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 32(5), New Delhi

In the result, all the 03 appeals of the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 8245/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Mar 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuay: 2014-15 Aashna Capital Services (P) Vs. Ito, Ward 1(2), Ltd., New Delhi C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aahca2030J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2015-16 Nishank Gupta, Vs. Ito, Ward 32(5), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aaepg2238E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2015-16 Prity Gupta, Vs. Ito, Ward 32(5), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Ahepg6510C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Kapil Goel, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. Dr.

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 10(38)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY: 2014-15 AASHNA CAPITAL SERVICES (P) vs. ITO, WARD 1(2), LTD., NEW DELHI C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AAHCA2030J) (Appellant) (Respondent) AY: 2015-16 NISHANK GUPTA, vs. ITO, WARD 32(5), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AAEPG2238E) (Appellant) (Respondent) AY: 2015-16 PRITY GUPTA, vs. ITO, WARD 32(5), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AHEPG6510C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assess…

Nishank Gupta, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 32(5), New Delhi

In the result, all the 03 appeals of the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 8244/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Mar 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuay: 2014-15 Aashna Capital Services (P) Vs. Ito, Ward 1(2), Ltd., New Delhi C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aahca2030J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2015-16 Nishank Gupta, Vs. Ito, Ward 32(5), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aaepg2238E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2015-16 Prity Gupta, Vs. Ito, Ward 32(5), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Ahepg6510C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Kapil Goel, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. Dr.

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 10(38)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY: 2014-15 AASHNA CAPITAL SERVICES (P) vs. ITO, WARD 1(2), LTD., NEW DELHI C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AAHCA2030J) (Appellant) (Respondent) AY: 2015-16 NISHANK GUPTA, vs. ITO, WARD 32(5), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AAEPG2238E) (Appellant) (Respondent) AY: 2015-16 PRITY GUPTA, vs. ITO, WARD 32(5), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AHEPG6510C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assess…

Prem Rattan Gupta, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-39(1), New Delhi

In the result, all the 03 appeals of the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 8223/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuay: 2014-15 Smt. Kamlesh Rani, Vs. Ito, Ward 39(1), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Alpr0483C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2014-15 Vishal Kashyap, Vs. Ito, Ward 39(1), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Bmypk9851L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2014-15 Prem Rattan Gupta, Vs. Ito, Ward 39(1), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aaepg5856G) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY: 2014-15 SMT. KAMLESH RANI, vs. ITO, WARD 39(1), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: ALPR0483C) (Appellant) (Respondent) AY: 2014-15 VISHAL KASHYAP, vs. ITO, WARD 39(1), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: BMYPK9851L) (Appellant) (Respondent) AY: 2014-15 PREM RATTAN GUPTA, vs. ITO, WARD 39(1), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AAEPG5856G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by :…

Vishal Kashyap, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-39(1), New Delhi

In the result, all the 03 appeals of the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 8221/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuay: 2014-15 Smt. Kamlesh Rani, Vs. Ito, Ward 39(1), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Alpr0483C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2014-15 Vishal Kashyap, Vs. Ito, Ward 39(1), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Bmypk9851L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2014-15 Prem Rattan Gupta, Vs. Ito, Ward 39(1), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aaepg5856G) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY: 2014-15 SMT. KAMLESH RANI, vs. ITO, WARD 39(1), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: ALPR0483C) (Appellant) (Respondent) AY: 2014-15 VISHAL KASHYAP, vs. ITO, WARD 39(1), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: BMYPK9851L) (Appellant) (Respondent) AY: 2014-15 PREM RATTAN GUPTA, vs. ITO, WARD 39(1), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AAEPG5856G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by :…

Kamlesh Rani, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-39(1), New Delhi

In the result, all the 03 appeals of the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 8218/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuay: 2014-15 Smt. Kamlesh Rani, Vs. Ito, Ward 39(1), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Alpr0483C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2014-15 Vishal Kashyap, Vs. Ito, Ward 39(1), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Bmypk9851L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2014-15 Prem Rattan Gupta, Vs. Ito, Ward 39(1), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aaepg5856G) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY: 2014-15 SMT. KAMLESH RANI, vs. ITO, WARD 39(1), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: ALPR0483C) (Appellant) (Respondent) AY: 2014-15 VISHAL KASHYAP, vs. ITO, WARD 39(1), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: BMYPK9851L) (Appellant) (Respondent) AY: 2014-15 PREM RATTAN GUPTA, vs. ITO, WARD 39(1), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AAEPG5856G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by :…

Aashna Capital Services (P) Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward- 1(2), New Delhi

In the result, all the 03 appeals of the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 7710/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuay: 2014-15 Aashna Capital Services (P) Vs. Ito, Ward 1(2), Ltd., New Delhi C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aahca2030J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2015-16 Nishank Gupta, Vs. Ito, Ward 32(5), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aaepg2238E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2015-16 Prity Gupta, Vs. Ito, Ward 32(5), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Ahepg6510C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Kapil Goel, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. Dr.

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 10(38)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY: 2014-15 AASHNA CAPITAL SERVICES (P) vs. ITO, WARD 1(2), LTD., NEW DELHI C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AAHCA2030J) (Appellant) (Respondent) AY: 2015-16 NISHANK GUPTA, vs. ITO, WARD 32(5), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AAEPG2238E) (Appellant) (Respondent) AY: 2015-16 PRITY GUPTA, vs. ITO, WARD 32(5), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AHEPG6510C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assess…

Rekha Maheshwari, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 55(1), New Delhi

In the result, the assessees’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 43/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Mar 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuay: 2015-16 Ms. Rekha Maheswari, Vs. Ito, Ward 55(1), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Afxpm2941L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 139Section 143(2)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY: 2015-16 MS. REKHA MAHESWARI, vs. ITO, WARD 55(1), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AFXPM2941L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. Kapil Goel, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR. ORDER This appeal is filed by the assessee challenges order passed by Ld CIT(Appeals) 19 New Delhi confirming Ld AO’s action disallowing long term capital gains exemption u/s 10(38) of the Act invoking deeming provisions of section 68 of the Act. 2. The brief fac…

Rima Maheshwari, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 61(2), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 7211/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Mar 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuay: 2015-16 Vinesh Maheswari, Vs. Ito, Ward 61(3), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Afxpm2940M) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ay: 2015-16 Rima Maheswari, Vs. Ito, Ward 61(2), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Afxpm6735L) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 139Section 143(2)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY: 2015-16 VINESH MAHESWARI, vs. ITO, WARD 61(3), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AFXPM2940M) (Appellant) (Respondent) AND AY: 2015-16 RIMA MAHESWARI, vs. ITO, WARD 61(2), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AFXPM6735L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. Kapil Goel, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR. ORDER These aforesaid appeals have been filed by the respective assessee’s challenging similar order…

Vinesh Maheshwari, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 61(3), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 7210/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Mar 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuay: 2015-16 Vinesh Maheswari, Vs. Ito, Ward 61(3), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Afxpm2940M) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ay: 2015-16 Rima Maheswari, Vs. Ito, Ward 61(2), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Afxpm6735L) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 139Section 143(2)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY: 2015-16 VINESH MAHESWARI, vs. ITO, WARD 61(3), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AFXPM2940M) (Appellant) (Respondent) AND AY: 2015-16 RIMA MAHESWARI, vs. ITO, WARD 61(2), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AFXPM6735L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. Kapil Goel, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR. ORDER These aforesaid appeals have been filed by the respective assessee’s challenging similar order…

431 ITR 361 (Del) PCIT v. Smt. Krishna Devi (200 Taxmann 186) — Cited in 32 Judgments | BharatTax