ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA,FARIDABAD vs. PR. CIT, FARIDABAD
In the result, the grounds raised are sustained and the appeal of the assessee is allowed
ITA 369/DEL/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Dec 2023AY 2010-11
Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2010-11 Ashok Kumar Gupta, Vs Pr. Cit, 200, Sec.-7A, Faridabad. Faridabad, Haryana. 121 001 Pan: Aalpg5795M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rakesh Jain, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Zafarul Haque Tanweer, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.12.2023 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: This Is Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 09.03.2020 Of The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Faridabad (Hereinafter Referred As Ld. Pcit) Arising Out Of The Order Dated 28.11.2017 Passed U/S. 147/148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As ‘The Act’) By The Ito, Ward 1(1), Faridabad (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao). 2. At The Outset, It Was Pointed Out By Ld. Ar That An Application For Condonation Of Delay Of 324 Days Has Been Filed Supported With An Affidavit. On Hearing Upon The Same, It Comes Up That The Limitation For Filing The Appeal Was Upto 11.05.2020 & Due To Covid-19 Restrictions, In View Of The Directions Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court In Suo Moto Writ Petition (Civil) No.03/2020, The Period Between 15.03.2020 & 28.02.2022 Has To Be Excluded For The Purpose Of Calculation Of Limitation & In The Light Of The Aforesaid, The Delay Is Condoned.
For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Zafarul Haque Tanweer, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(1)
…assessment order and its review only from a different aspect and on different opinion is not permissible under law for which he relied on the following judgements/orders of ITAT:- (i) DIT Vs. Jyoti Foundation 357 ITR 0388 (Delhi); (ii) CIT Vs. Deepak Mittal 324 ITR 411 (P & H); (iii) Arun Kumar Garg HUF, ITA No. 3391/D/2018, Order dt. 08.01.2019; (iv) Delhivery Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 1036/D/2021, order dt. 16.03.2023; and (v) M/s Amira Enterprises Ltd. ITA No. 3206/D/2017, order dt. 29.11.2017 8. On the other hand, the ld. DR submitted that there is no error in the findings of the ld. PCIT and the ld. AO had commit…