46/273 Taxman 148/426 ITR 502 (Delhi); Vipin Walia v. ITO

382 ITR 19High Court2016#24766 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 331,145 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 159(2)Section 159(3)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 159(2)(a)

Judgments citing 46/273 Taxman 148/426 ITR 502 (Delhi); Vipin Walia v. ITO

Ishwar Chand Aggarwal, Faridabad vs. Income Tax Officer- Ward 1(3), New Cgo Complex

ITA 2844/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraishwar Chand Aggarwal Vs. Ito, Ward 1(3) 3D-29, Nit Faridabad Nh-4, Nit, Haryana – 121001 Faridabad, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aalpa5364Q Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Jitender Wadhwa, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…the judgments passed by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Braham Prakash v. ITO [2005] 275 ITR 242 (Delhi); Savita Kapila v. ACIT [2020] 118 taxmann.com 46/273 Taxman 148/426 ITR 502 (Delhi); Vipin Walia v. ITO [2016] 67 taxmann.com 56/238 Taxman 1/382 ITR 19 (Delhi); judgment passed by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Alamelu Veerappan v. Income Tax Officer [2018] 95 taxmann.com 155/257 Taxman 72 (Madras)/2018 (6) TMI 760. He has further relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Pr. CIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd [2019] 107 taxmann.com 375/265 Taxman 515/41…

DCIT Circle-52(1), Income Tax vs. Pranav Gupta, Legal Heir of Late Sh. Vijay Kumar Gupta, New Delhi

ITA 2192/DEL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Roydcit, Cir-52(1) Vs. Sh. Pranav Gupta, 1405, 14Th Floor, E-2, Legal Heir Of Late Sh. Vijay Block, Civic Centre, Kumar Gupta, 11, Darya Delhi- 110002 Ganj, New Delhi- 110002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaipg0797N Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. S. Krishnan, Adv. &For Respondent: Dr. Maninder Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…1 DCIT v. Pranav Gupta A.Y. 2009-10 THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”, DELHI BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER DCIT, Cir-52(1) Vs. Sh. Pranav Gupta, 1405, 14th Floor, E-2, Legal heir of Late Sh. Vijay Block, Civic Centre, Kumar Gupta, 11, Darya Delhi- 110002 Ganj, New Delhi- 110002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AAIPG0797N Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Sh. S. Krishnan, Adv. & Sh. Harshit Chauhan, Adv, Respondent by : Dr. Maninder Kaur, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 07.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement 20.06.2025 O R D E R PER MADHUMITA…

Smt. Rampyari, Saraddhana vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Ajmer

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1249/JPR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Jain (CA)For Respondent: Ms Chanchal Meena (Addl. CIT)
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…period of limitation which expired on 31st March, 2018, the proceedings initiated by the AO under section 147/148 are not valid and a nullity in the eyes of law. In support of his contention he has relied upon the following decisions :- Vipin Walia vs. ITO 382 ITR 19 (Delhi) Rajender Kumar Sehgal vs. ITO 414 ITR 286 (Delhi) Tribunal’s Order dated 26th November, 2019 in 4. On the other hand, the ld. D/R has submitted that the AO has conducted an enquiry to verify the source of cash deposit in the bank account of the assessee prior to issuing the notice under section 148. However, there was no response from th…