Smt. Rukmani Gupta, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi
In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed
ITA 4385/DEL/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2019AY 2003-04
Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2003-04 Mahesh Kumar Gupta, Vs Acit, 47, Shardhanand Marg, Central Circle-25, Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aagpg8365G Assessment Year : 2003-04 Rukmani Gupta, Vs. Acit, 47, Shardhanand Marg, Central Circle-25, Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaopg0280E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Niren Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Ms Rinku Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.03.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.04.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: The Above Two Appeals Filed By The Respective Assessees Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 3Rd July, 2014 Of The Cit(A)-1, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2003-04. Since Identical Grounds Have Been Raised By The Assessees In
For Appellant: Shri Niren Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms Rinku Singh, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 2(22)(e)
…e ld. counsel for the assessee, referring to the affidavit filed before the ld.CIT(A), copy of which is placed at pages 14 and 15 of the paper book, submitted that the Hon'ble High Court while deciding the case in case of Ankitech Private Limited reported in 340 ITR 14(Del), has not given any notice to the assessee nor any opportunity of being heard to the assessee was granted before deciding the case. Therefore, no addition could have been made in the hands of the assessee. So far as the merit of the case is concerned, he submitted that nothing has flown to the assessee directly or indirectly and, therefore,…
