CIT v. Kabul Chawla

380 ITR 573High Court2016#3 most cited

What is CIT v. Kabul Chawla authority for?

In a search assessment under Section 153A, additions can only be made for completed or non-abated assessment years if incriminating material relevant to those years is found during the search, although notice under Section 153A(1) is mandatorily issued for six assessment years preceding the search.

3,235

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,842 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Kabul Chawla · Kabul Chawla · section 153A · section 132 · incriminating material · search assessment · non-abated years · scope of assessment · additions · undisclosed income

Also reported as

61 Taxmann.com 412234 Taxmann 300281 CTR 45

Sections most often in play

Section 153ASection 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 132ASection 143(2)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 158bcstatement under section 132(4)section 132asection 158bblock periodsection 132(1)section 153a(1)section 158section 153bsearch assessmentpanchnamaincriminating material

Judgments citing CIT v. Kabul Chawla

Mr. Yunus Zia, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 126/BANG/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Mar 2020AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri A. K. Garodia

For Appellant: Shri. S. Ramasubramanian, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Dilip, Junior Standing Counsel
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 154

…k Pvt Ltd., 385 ITR 346 (Kar.) copy available on pages 369 to 392 of the Paper Book and in the case of CIT vs. Lancy Constructions, 295 CTR 454. He also placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawala, 380 ITR 573, of Hon’ble Gujrat High Court rendered in the case of PCIT vs. Saumya Construction (P) Ltd., 387 ITR 529, of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of PCIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia, 395 ITR 526 against which SLP was filed by the revenue before Hon’ble Apex court which is dismissed as per judgment reported in 257 Taxman 441 (SC) and of Hon’ble Bo…

DCIT, Central Circle - 2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Bhavya Merchandise Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeals by the revenue are dismissed and cross-objections by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2148/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Mar 2020AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Mr. R.P. Agarwal, Advocate &For Respondent: Mr. Imokaba Jamir, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…IT vs Anil Kumar Bhatia (352 ITR 493) and submit that both the decisions as relied by the Ld. DR are completely on different facts and have been considered and distinguished by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi while passing the decision of CIT vs Kabul Chawla (380 ITR 573). Therefore, the decision in Kabul Chawla (supra), negates the contention of the Ld. DR. b. Regarding the decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in case of Raj Kumar Arora ( in 367 ITR 517) and submitted that the above mentioned decision of Raj Kumar Arora has been given by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court by relying on the decision of Hon'ble…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ramji Lal Investments Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6685/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143ASection 153ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘F’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.6685/Del./2016 Assessment Year: 2008-09 ACIT, Vs. M/s. Ramji Lal Investments Central Circle-19, Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi D-14/8, Model Town-II, New Delhi. PAN :AAACR0605B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT(DR) Respondent by Shri Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. Date of hearing 05.03.2020 Date of pronouncement 17.03.2020 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, AM: This appeal by the revenue has been preferred against order dated 25/10/2016 pas…

M/S Lakshya Consultants P. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee dismissed

ITA 6357/DEL/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Mar 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 153A

…ation. The assessment have been framed without reference to any incriminating document or material. The assessee has relied upon several decisions in support of the contention including Judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs., Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 (Del.). Therefore, no addition could be made in the assessment. The Ld. CIT(A) accepted the contention of assessee and allowed this ground of appeal of assessee that no addition could be made in the absence of any incriminating material. The Ld. CIT(A), thereafter, decided the appeal of assessee on merits and confirmed the substantive addition. A…

ACIT Central Circle 2(1), Chennai vs. Arvinda Nandagopal, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1470/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Mar 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1468, 1469 & 1470/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2013-14) Vs Shri Arvinda Nandagopal, The Asst. Commissioner Of No.6, 6Th Street, Rutland Gate, Income Tax, Corporate Circle – 21), Chennai – 600 006. Chennai. Pan: Aafpa6259G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Srinivasa Rao, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri K.M. Mohandass, Ca सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 23.01.2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.03.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Inturi Rama Rao:

For Appellant: Shri Srinivasa Rao, CITFor Respondent: Shri K.M. Mohandass, CA
Section 132Section 132(4)

…m 292 (Guj); iii) Pr. CIT v. Devangi [2017] 88 taxmann.com 610/394 ITR 184 (Guj.) iv) Pr. CIT v. Jay Infrastructure and Properties (P.) Ltd. [Tax Appeal No. 740 of 2016, dated 10-10-2016] and CIT v. Kabul Chawla [2015] 61 taxmann.com 412/234 Taxman 300/[2016] 380 ITR 573 (Delhi), CIT vs. Murali Agro Products, 49 taxmann.com 172. The cash credits or 18 I.T.A. Nos. 1468 to 1470/Chny/2018 investments disclosed cannot be subject matter of addition as held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in PCIT vs. Ankush Saluja 419 ITR 431. Thus, the very addition made towards unexplained investment cannot be sustained in the eye…

ACIT Central Circle 2(1), Chennai vs. Arvinda Nandagopal, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1469/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Mar 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1468, 1469 & 1470/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2013-14) Vs Shri Arvinda Nandagopal, The Asst. Commissioner Of No.6, 6Th Street, Rutland Gate, Income Tax, Corporate Circle – 21), Chennai – 600 006. Chennai. Pan: Aafpa6259G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Srinivasa Rao, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri K.M. Mohandass, Ca सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 23.01.2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.03.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Inturi Rama Rao:

For Appellant: Shri Srinivasa Rao, CITFor Respondent: Shri K.M. Mohandass, CA
Section 132Section 132(4)

…m 292 (Guj); iii) Pr. CIT v. Devangi [2017] 88 taxmann.com 610/394 ITR 184 (Guj.) iv) Pr. CIT v. Jay Infrastructure and Properties (P.) Ltd. [Tax Appeal No. 740 of 2016, dated 10-10-2016] and CIT v. Kabul Chawla [2015] 61 taxmann.com 412/234 Taxman 300/[2016] 380 ITR 573 (Delhi), CIT vs. Murali Agro Products, 49 taxmann.com 172. The cash credits or 18 I.T.A. Nos. 1468 to 1470/Chny/2018 investments disclosed cannot be subject matter of addition as held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in PCIT vs. Ankush Saluja 419 ITR 431. Thus, the very addition made towards unexplained investment cannot be sustained in the eye…

ACIT Central Circle 2(1), Chennai vs. Arvinda Nandagopal, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1468/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Mar 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1468, 1469 & 1470/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 To 2013-14) Vs Shri Arvinda Nandagopal, The Asst. Commissioner Of No.6, 6Th Street, Rutland Gate, Income Tax, Corporate Circle – 21), Chennai – 600 006. Chennai. Pan: Aafpa6259G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Srinivasa Rao, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri K.M. Mohandass, Ca सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 23.01.2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.03.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Inturi Rama Rao:

For Appellant: Shri Srinivasa Rao, CITFor Respondent: Shri K.M. Mohandass, CA
Section 132Section 132(4)

…m 292 (Guj); iii) Pr. CIT v. Devangi [2017] 88 taxmann.com 610/394 ITR 184 (Guj.) iv) Pr. CIT v. Jay Infrastructure and Properties (P.) Ltd. [Tax Appeal No. 740 of 2016, dated 10-10-2016] and CIT v. Kabul Chawla [2015] 61 taxmann.com 412/234 Taxman 300/[2016] 380 ITR 573 (Delhi), CIT vs. Murali Agro Products, 49 taxmann.com 172. The cash credits or 18 I.T.A. Nos. 1468 to 1470/Chny/2018 investments disclosed cannot be subject matter of addition as held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in PCIT vs. Ankush Saluja 419 ITR 431. Thus, the very addition made towards unexplained investment cannot be sustained in the eye…

Shri Harshvardhan Johari, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, ground no. 2 of assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 654/JPR/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Mar 2020AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Dileep Shivpuri (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT) a
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 37Section 37(1)

…port, reliance was placed on the following decisions namely, CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corporation [2015] 93 CCH 0048 (Bom), PCIT v. Dipak Panchal [2017] 98CCH 0074 (Guj), PCIT v. Devangi Alias Rupa [2017] 98 CCH 0051 (Guj) and CIT v. Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573 (Del). 8. It was submitted that the ld CIT(A) pointed out that in the case of Kabul Chawla, the earlier assessment was completed u/s 143(3) while in the present case, it was only processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. He drew support from the following decisions namely, CIT v Chetan Das Lachman Das [2012] 254 CTR 392 (Delhi), CIT v. Anil Kumar Bhatia…

Kusumlata Sonthalia, Kolkata vs. Principal CIT, Central - 1, Kolkata

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1112/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap, V.P & Shri S. S. Godara, Jm आयकर अपीलसं/I.T.A No.1112/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Kusumlata Sonthalia Vs. Pcit, Central-1, Kolkata. 34, Pankaj Mallick Sarani, Jayantika Apartment, 1St Floor, Ballygunge, Kolkata – 700019. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abbpa8446Q (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Nirav Shesth, Aca Respondent By : Shri Ram Bilash Meena, Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 13/02/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/02/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2011-12 Arises Against The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central-1, Kolkata’S Order Dated 28.02.2019 Involving Proceedings U/S 153A/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’). Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. Coming To The Basic Relevant Facts, We Notice That The Pcit’S Action Under Challenge Has Assumed Revision Jurisdiction Vested U/S 263 Of The Act To Hold The Regular Assessment In Question Framed In Assessee’S Case On 30.12.2016 As An Erroneous One Causing Prejudice To Interest Of The Revenue On The Ground That The Assessing Officer Had Failed To Carry Out Factual Verification/Necessary Enquires/Investigation Regarding The Tax-Payer’S Long Term Capital Losses Of Rs.156075/- & Gains Of Rs.13010/- As Per Stamp Duty Valuation(S) Of Rs.1465454/-And Rs.1353454/-; Respectively. He Thus Sought To Invoke Section

For Appellant: Shri Nirav Shesth, ACAFor Respondent: Shri Ram Bilash Meena, CIT
Section 14ASection 153ASection 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI P. M. JAGTAP, V.P & SHRI S. S. GODARA, JM आयकर अपीलसं/I.T.A No.1112/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Kusumlata Sonthalia Vs. PCIT, Central-1, Kolkata. 34, Pankaj Mallick Sarani, Jayantika Apartment, 1st Floor, Ballygunge, Kolkata – 700019. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ABBPA8446Q (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Nirav Shesth, ACA Respondent by : Shri Ram Bilash Meena, CIT सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date of Hearing : 13/02/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 28/02/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: T…

Pradeep Kumar Sonthalia, Kolkata vs. Principal CIT, Central - 1, Kolkata

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1150/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं/I.T.A No.1150/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Pradeep Kumar Sonthalia Vs. Pcit, Central-1, Kolkata. 34, Pankaj Mallick Sarani, Jayantika Apartment, 1St Floor, Ballygunge, Kolkata – 700019. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ahfps8270A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Nirav Shesth, Aca Respondent By : Shri Ram Bilash Meena, Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 30/12/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/02/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2010-11 Arises Against The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central-1, Kolkata’S Order Dated 15.01.2018 Involving Proceedings U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’). Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. Coming To The Basic Relevant Facts, We Notice That The Pcit’S Revision Directions/Order Under Challenge Dated 15.01.2018 Have Assumed Jurisdiction Vested U/S 263 Of The Act To Hold The Regular Assessment In Question Dated 30.12.2016 As An Erroneous One Causing Prejudice To Interest Of The Revenue On The Ground That The Assessing Officer Had Failed To Carry Out Necessary Factual Enquires/Investigation Regarding The Tax-Payer’S Deduction Claim Raised U/S 54 R.W.

For Appellant: Shri Nirav Shesth, ACAFor Respondent: Shri Ram Bilash Meena, CIT
Section 14ASection 153ASection 263Section 54Section 54F

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JM & Dr. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकर अपीलसं/I.T.A No.1150/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Pradeep Kumar Sonthalia Vs. PCIT, Central-1, Kolkata. 34, Pankaj Mallick Sarani, Jayantika Apartment, 1st Floor, Ballygunge, Kolkata – 700019. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AHFPS8270A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Nirav Shesth, ACA Respondent by : Shri Ram Bilash Meena, CIT सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date of Hearing : 30/12/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 28/02/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara:…

Sh. Bishan Bansal, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1187/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1187/Del/2017 :Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Bishan Bansal, Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Rra Taxindia, Central Circle-Ii D-28, South Extension, Part-I, Faridabad New Delhi-110049 (Appellant (Respondent) Pan No. Aezps1452H Assessee By : Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Sanjay Goel, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing:18.02.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.02.2020

For Appellant: Sh. Somil Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goel, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…posits in the bank account for the FY 2006-07. 4. Thus, from the above it can be observed that no proceedings are pending as on the date of search. 5. Keeping in view the proposition laid down by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT Vs Kabul Chawla (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) that no addition to be made in assessment framed u/s 153A of the Act in the absence of any incriminating material, where assessments were not abated. The Hon’ble High Court held that in the absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search action, when there was no pending assessment which could be said to have abate…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Sharuk Passi, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 4291/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kambleita Nos. 4286 To 4291/Del/2016 [Assessment Year: 2006-07 To 2011-12] The A.C.I.T. Vs. Shri Sharuk Passi Central Circle – 08 15, Sunder Nagar New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aagpp 7030 F [Appellant] [Respondent]

For Appellant: Shri Salil AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT- DR
Section 132Section 14ASection 153A

…before the ld. CIT(A) and contended that none of the additions/disallowances is based upon any incriminating material found during the course of search proceedings. Therefore, the ratio laiddown by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 squarely applies on the facts of the case in hand and hence the assessment deserves to be set aside. 5. After considering the facts and submissions, the ld. CIT(A) was convinced that none of the additions were based upon any incriminating material and drawing support from the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Kabul Chawl…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Sharuk Passi, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 4290/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kambleita Nos. 4286 To 4291/Del/2016 [Assessment Year: 2006-07 To 2011-12] The A.C.I.T. Vs. Shri Sharuk Passi Central Circle – 08 15, Sunder Nagar New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aagpp 7030 F [Appellant] [Respondent]

For Appellant: Shri Salil AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT- DR
Section 132Section 14ASection 153A

…before the ld. CIT(A) and contended that none of the additions/disallowances is based upon any incriminating material found during the course of search proceedings. Therefore, the ratio laiddown by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 squarely applies on the facts of the case in hand and hence the assessment deserves to be set aside. 5. After considering the facts and submissions, the ld. CIT(A) was convinced that none of the additions were based upon any incriminating material and drawing support from the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Kabul Chawl…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Sharuk Passi, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 4289/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kambleita Nos. 4286 To 4291/Del/2016 [Assessment Year: 2006-07 To 2011-12] The A.C.I.T. Vs. Shri Sharuk Passi Central Circle – 08 15, Sunder Nagar New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aagpp 7030 F [Appellant] [Respondent]

For Appellant: Shri Salil AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT- DR
Section 132Section 14ASection 153A

…before the ld. CIT(A) and contended that none of the additions/disallowances is based upon any incriminating material found during the course of search proceedings. Therefore, the ratio laiddown by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 squarely applies on the facts of the case in hand and hence the assessment deserves to be set aside. 5. After considering the facts and submissions, the ld. CIT(A) was convinced that none of the additions were based upon any incriminating material and drawing support from the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Kabul Chawl…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Sharuk Passi, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 4288/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kambleita Nos. 4286 To 4291/Del/2016 [Assessment Year: 2006-07 To 2011-12] The A.C.I.T. Vs. Shri Sharuk Passi Central Circle – 08 15, Sunder Nagar New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aagpp 7030 F [Appellant] [Respondent]

For Appellant: Shri Salil AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT- DR
Section 132Section 14ASection 153A

…before the ld. CIT(A) and contended that none of the additions/disallowances is based upon any incriminating material found during the course of search proceedings. Therefore, the ratio laiddown by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 squarely applies on the facts of the case in hand and hence the assessment deserves to be set aside. 5. After considering the facts and submissions, the ld. CIT(A) was convinced that none of the additions were based upon any incriminating material and drawing support from the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Kabul Chawl…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Sharuk Passi, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 4287/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kambleita Nos. 4286 To 4291/Del/2016 [Assessment Year: 2006-07 To 2011-12] The A.C.I.T. Vs. Shri Sharuk Passi Central Circle – 08 15, Sunder Nagar New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aagpp 7030 F [Appellant] [Respondent]

For Appellant: Shri Salil AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT- DR
Section 132Section 14ASection 153A

…before the ld. CIT(A) and contended that none of the additions/disallowances is based upon any incriminating material found during the course of search proceedings. Therefore, the ratio laiddown by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 squarely applies on the facts of the case in hand and hence the assessment deserves to be set aside. 5. After considering the facts and submissions, the ld. CIT(A) was convinced that none of the additions were based upon any incriminating material and drawing support from the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Kabul Chawl…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Sharuk Passi, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 4286/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kambleita Nos. 4286 To 4291/Del/2016 [Assessment Year: 2006-07 To 2011-12] The A.C.I.T. Vs. Shri Sharuk Passi Central Circle – 08 15, Sunder Nagar New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aagpp 7030 F [Appellant] [Respondent]

For Appellant: Shri Salil AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT- DR
Section 132Section 14ASection 153A

…before the ld. CIT(A) and contended that none of the additions/disallowances is based upon any incriminating material found during the course of search proceedings. Therefore, the ratio laiddown by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 squarely applies on the facts of the case in hand and hence the assessment deserves to be set aside. 5. After considering the facts and submissions, the ld. CIT(A) was convinced that none of the additions were based upon any incriminating material and drawing support from the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Kabul Chawl…

M/S. Frontier Commercial Co. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Faridabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2205/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Somil Agrawal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Jagdish Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 153A(1)(b)Section 153CSection 37(1)

…ontended that inasmuch as no incriminating document was found during the course of search proceedings, no addition could have been made by reopening the concluded assessment in view of the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla, 380 ITR 573. Ld. CIT(A), however, did not agree with the assessee and noted that unless the search would have carried out, the details of expenditure which was disallowed could not have come to light and therefore, placing reliance on the decision in the case of Kabul Chawla is not justified. Ld. CIT(A) further observed that a different opinion was taken by…

DCIT, Circle- 1(1), Gurgaon vs. Dlf Universal Ltd. (Formerly Known As Dlf Retail Developers Ltd.), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and consequently, the cross objections filed by the assessee becomes infructuous

ITA 5558/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. R.S. Singhvi, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT/DR
Section 14ASection 153A

…m and reached a factual conclusion that no document pertaining to the assessee qua the addition u/s. 14A read with Rule 8D was found during the search and therefore, in the light of the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla, 380 ITR 573 and PCIT vs. Kurele Paper Mills Ltd., 380 ITR 571, the ld. CIT(A) directed the deletion of the disallowance. 5. The Revenue filed this appeal challenging such deletion of the addition made by the Assessing Officer u/s. 14A read with Rule 8D, whereas the assessee preferred the cross objection stating that the CIT(A) should have adjudicated the ch…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Madhyam Housing Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the departmental appeal is dismissed

ITA 5113/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5113/Del/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 बनाम Dcit Madhyam Housing Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-8, Room No. 333 Vs. B-2/6, Plot No. 2, Ara Centre, Ashok Nagar, Jhandewalan Extn., Db Gupta Road, New Delhi. Near Faiz Chowk, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. Pan No. Aadcm7666G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…f the Act. 3. The assessee submitted before Ld. CIT(A) that during the course of search, no incriminating material was found for making the above addition. The assessee relied upon judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 and others. The Ld. CIT(A) found issue is covered in judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra). Following the same, Ld. CIT(A) held that since no incriminating material was unearthed during the course of search. Therefore, no addition could be made u/s 153A of the Act of this nature. The addition was, accordingly,…