CIT v. Sinhgad Technical Education Society

397 ITR 344Supreme Court of India2017#22 most cited

What is CIT v. Sinhgad Technical Education Society authority for?

For assessments under Section 153C, a notice is legally unsustainable if there is no incriminating material correlated to the specific assessment years for which reassessment is sought.

1,589

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,368 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Sinhgad Technical Education Society · Section 153C · incriminating material · validity of notice 153C · search assessment · correlation of material to assessment year · assessment quashed · Section 153A · search and seizure · post-search assessment

Also reported as

96 Taxmann.com 468250 Taxmann 225297 CTR 441156 DTR 161

Sections most often in play

Section 153CSection 153ASection 143(3)Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 139

Issues it is cited on

abatement of assessmentcasus omissussection 153b(1)section 113section 158bdsection 153c(1)section 153a(1)(b)section 153(1)section 132(1)panchnamasection 153bstatement under section 132(4)

Judgments citing CIT v. Sinhgad Technical Education Society

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Htl Ltd., Chennai

Accordingly, appeal of the ld AO is dismissed

ITA 3956/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 153CSection 43B

…ng material found during the course of search. He therefore, submitted that in view of decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in PCIT Vs. Kabul Chawla as well as decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Singhadh Technical Educational Society 397 ITR 344 the addition deserves to be deleted. 9. The ld DR vehemently objected to the invocation of Rule 27 stating that assessee has not filed any appeal and therefore, same should not be admitted. Further, with respect to the merits of the case the assessee relied on the order of the ld AO. 10. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and peru…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Htl Ltd., Chennai

Accordingly, appeal of the ld AO is dismissed

ITA 3955/DEL/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 153CSection 43B

…ng material found during the course of search. He therefore, submitted that in view of decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in PCIT Vs. Kabul Chawla as well as decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Singhadh Technical Educational Society 397 ITR 344 the addition deserves to be deleted. 9. The ld DR vehemently objected to the invocation of Rule 27 stating that assessee has not filed any appeal and therefore, same should not be admitted. Further, with respect to the merits of the case the assessee relied on the order of the ld AO. 10. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and peru…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Htl Ltd., Chennai

Accordingly, appeal of the ld AO is dismissed

ITA 3954/DEL/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2021AY 2004-05

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 153CSection 43B

…ng material found during the course of search. He therefore, submitted that in view of decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in PCIT Vs. Kabul Chawla as well as decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Singhadh Technical Educational Society 397 ITR 344 the addition deserves to be deleted. 9. The ld DR vehemently objected to the invocation of Rule 27 stating that assessee has not filed any appeal and therefore, same should not be admitted. Further, with respect to the merits of the case the assessee relied on the order of the ld AO. 10. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and peru…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Htl Ltd., Chennai

Accordingly, appeal of the ld AO is dismissed

ITA 3953/DEL/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 153CSection 43B

…ng material found during the course of search. He therefore, submitted that in view of decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in PCIT Vs. Kabul Chawla as well as decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Singhadh Technical Educational Society 397 ITR 344 the addition deserves to be deleted. 9. The ld DR vehemently objected to the invocation of Rule 27 stating that assessee has not filed any appeal and therefore, same should not be admitted. Further, with respect to the merits of the case the assessee relied on the order of the ld AO. 10. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and peru…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Htl Ltd., Chennai

Accordingly, appeal of the ld AO is dismissed

ITA 3952/DEL/2016[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2021AY 2002-03

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 153CSection 43B

…ng material found during the course of search. He therefore, submitted that in view of decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in PCIT Vs. Kabul Chawla as well as decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Singhadh Technical Educational Society 397 ITR 344 the addition deserves to be deleted. 9. The ld DR vehemently objected to the invocation of Rule 27 stating that assessee has not filed any appeal and therefore, same should not be admitted. Further, with respect to the merits of the case the assessee relied on the order of the ld AO. 10. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and peru…

DCIT Central Circle-3, New Delhi vs. Modtech Industries, New Delhi

In the result, since the assessment order is set aside on legal issue, therefore, there is no need to decide the additions on merits which are left with academic discussion only

ITA 8783/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 50B

…le Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT Central-2 Vs. Index Securities Pvt. Ltd. 86 Taxmann.com 84 (Delhi), CIT Vs. RRJ Securities Ltd. reported in 380 ITR 612, and by the Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sinhgad Technical Education Society reported in 397 ITR 344, were cited before learned CIT (A) (kindly see page 8 to 9 of CIT (A)’s order). However, the learned CIT (A) vide order dated 21.08.2019 dismissed the said ground so raised by the assessee company (kindly see pages 89 to 93 of CIT (A) order). However, while dismissing the said appeal, the learned CIT (A) has recorded a finding that “Therefore, if…

Modtech Industries, New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle-2, New Delhi

In the result, since the assessment order is set aside on legal issue, therefore, there is no need to decide the additions on merits which are left with academic discussion only

ITA 8045/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 50B

…le Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT Central-2 Vs. Index Securities Pvt. Ltd. 86 Taxmann.com 84 (Delhi), CIT Vs. RRJ Securities Ltd. reported in 380 ITR 612, and by the Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sinhgad Technical Education Society reported in 397 ITR 344, were cited before learned CIT (A) (kindly see page 8 to 9 of CIT (A)’s order). However, the learned CIT (A) vide order dated 21.08.2019 dismissed the said ground so raised by the assessee company (kindly see pages 89 to 93 of CIT (A) order). However, while dismissing the said appeal, the learned CIT (A) has recorded a finding that “Therefore, if…

Smt. Vanita Vaswani, Ahmedabad vs. The Pr. CIT (Central), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 133/AHD/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Years : 2010-11 Smt. Vanita Vaswani, The Pcit (Central), 2, Samprat Co-Op. Housing Vs Ahmedabad Society Limited, Opp. Rivera, 11, Prahladnagar, Ahmedabad - 380015 Pan : Aakpv 7868 D अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "त् "त् यथ" "त् "त् यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate Shri Parimalsinh B Parmar, Ar & Shri Vijay Govani, Ar Revenue By : Shri Virendra Ojha, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/07/2021 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/09/2021 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Rajpal Yadav: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Ahmedabad Dated 28.03.2021, Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”), For Assessment Year 2010-2011. The Assessee Has Taken 7 Grounds Of Appeal Which Read As Under:- “1. The Ld. Pcit (Central), Ahmedabad ("The Pcit") Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Invoking Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act") & Has Further Erred In Directing The Ld. Ao To Pass Fresh Assessment Order Incorporating The Market Value Of The Property As Per Section 50C Of The Act. 2. The Ld. Pcit Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Passing Order U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 In The Case Of The Appellant In Failing To Take Smt. Vanita Vaswani Vs. Pr. Cit Ay : 2010-2011 2

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Virendra Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263Section 50C

…nita Vaswani Vs. Pr. CIT AY : 2010-2011 15 second set of notices. The appellant has also relied upon the case laws in the case of Pepsico India Holding Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, RRJ Securities Ltd. [62 Taxmann.com 391] (2015) & Sinhgad Technical Education Society [84 Taxmann.com 290]. The AO has dealt with the argument raised by the appellant in Para 4.9, 4.10 & Para 5 of assessment order. The provision of Section 153C has been amended with effect from 01/06/2015 where if the Assessing Officer is satisfied that any books of account or documents seized pertains to, or any information contained therein relates to any pe…

ACIT, CC- 30, New Delhi vs. Vanshi Farms Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4056/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Shushma Singh, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Adv
Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 153CSection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Dr. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.4056/DEL/2017 Assessment Year: 2011-2012 ACIT, Central Circle-30, vs. Vanshi Farms Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. 303, Himland House, Karampura Commercial Complex, New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AAACP0431H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Ms. Shushma Singh, CIT-DR Respondent by: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Adv. Date of hearing: 18 06 2021 Date of pronouncement: 15 09 2021 O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, JM: The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the impugned order…

ACIT, CC- 30, New Delhi vs. Ankit Nivesh & Management Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4054/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Shushma Singh, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Adv
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 153CSection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Dr. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.4054/DEL/2017 Assessment Year: 2011-2012 ACIT, Central Circle-30, vs. M/s. Ankit Nivesh & New Delhi. Management Pvt. Ltd., 203 Puja House, Karampura Commercial Complex, New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AACCA2546A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Ms. Shushma Singh, CIT-DR Respondent by: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Adv. Date of hearing: 18 06 2021 Date of pronouncement: 15 09 2021 O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, JM: The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the i…

Mesers Goyal Infraventures Private Limited, Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Raipur

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee vide ITA No

ITA 246/RPR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Akshay Ringasia &For Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 254(1)Section 68

…Goyal Energy & Steel Pvt. Ltd.& another ITA Nos.240-243 & 246/RPR/2019 incriminating evidence during the assessment. The assessee also relied on various case laws including the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Singhad Technical Education Society ( 2017) 397 ITR 344-(SC), Delhi High Court in Kabul Chawla (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Delhi). The reply of the assessee was not accepted by the AO. The AO held that the additions or disallowances under section 153A is valid and lawful and cannot be restricted or limited to incriminating seized material even though the case has been earlier assessee under section 143(3). Th…

Mesers Goyal Energy & Steel Private Limited, Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Raipur

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee vide ITA No

ITA 243/RPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Sept 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Akshay Ringasia &For Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 254(1)Section 68

…Goyal Energy & Steel Pvt. Ltd.& another ITA Nos.240-243 & 246/RPR/2019 incriminating evidence during the assessment. The assessee also relied on various case laws including the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Singhad Technical Education Society ( 2017) 397 ITR 344-(SC), Delhi High Court in Kabul Chawla (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Delhi). The reply of the assessee was not accepted by the AO. The AO held that the additions or disallowances under section 153A is valid and lawful and cannot be restricted or limited to incriminating seized material even though the case has been earlier assessee under section 143(3). Th…

Mesers Goyal Energy & Steel Private Limited, Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Raipur

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee vide ITA No

ITA 242/RPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Akshay Ringasia &For Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 254(1)Section 68

…Goyal Energy & Steel Pvt. Ltd.& another ITA Nos.240-243 & 246/RPR/2019 incriminating evidence during the assessment. The assessee also relied on various case laws including the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Singhad Technical Education Society ( 2017) 397 ITR 344-(SC), Delhi High Court in Kabul Chawla (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Delhi). The reply of the assessee was not accepted by the AO. The AO held that the additions or disallowances under section 153A is valid and lawful and cannot be restricted or limited to incriminating seized material even though the case has been earlier assessee under section 143(3). Th…

Mesers Goyal Energy & Steel Private Limited, Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Raipur

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee vide ITA No

ITA 241/RPR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Akshay Ringasia &For Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 254(1)Section 68

…Goyal Energy & Steel Pvt. Ltd.& another ITA Nos.240-243 & 246/RPR/2019 incriminating evidence during the assessment. The assessee also relied on various case laws including the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Singhad Technical Education Society ( 2017) 397 ITR 344-(SC), Delhi High Court in Kabul Chawla (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Delhi). The reply of the assessee was not accepted by the AO. The AO held that the additions or disallowances under section 153A is valid and lawful and cannot be restricted or limited to incriminating seized material even though the case has been earlier assessee under section 143(3). Th…

Mesers Goyal Energy & Steel Private Limited, Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Raipur

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee vide ITA No

ITA 240/RPR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Akshay Ringasia &For Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 254(1)Section 68

…Goyal Energy & Steel Pvt. Ltd.& another ITA Nos.240-243 & 246/RPR/2019 incriminating evidence during the assessment. The assessee also relied on various case laws including the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Singhad Technical Education Society ( 2017) 397 ITR 344-(SC), Delhi High Court in Kabul Chawla (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Delhi). The reply of the assessee was not accepted by the AO. The AO held that the additions or disallowances under section 153A is valid and lawful and cannot be restricted or limited to incriminating seized material even though the case has been earlier assessee under section 143(3). Th…

Kuber Products P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-30, New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1124/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Yadav, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DR
Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 68

…at there is no incriminating material found during the course of search based on which the return income for the respective year can be disturbed. Such is the mandate of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Shinghad Technical Education Society 397 ITR 344 and also of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT Vs Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in its recent decision in case of Anand Kumar Jain has categorically held in that case that (i) that the statement of PKJ recorded under section 132(4) alone could not justify the additions made by the Assessing Officer. Even if the D…

Kuber Products P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-30, New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1123/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Yadav, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DR
Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 68

…at there is no incriminating material found during the course of search based on which the return income for the respective year can be disturbed. Such is the mandate of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Shinghad Technical Education Society 397 ITR 344 and also of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT Vs Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in its recent decision in case of Anand Kumar Jain has categorically held in that case that (i) that the statement of PKJ recorded under section 132(4) alone could not justify the additions made by the Assessing Officer. Even if the D…

DCIT, Central Circle, Noida vs. Sundaram It Parks P. Ltd, New Delhi

ITA 5168/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Sh. H.K. Choudhary, CIT/DRFor Respondent: None
Section 132Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’ NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 5166, 5167 & 5168/Del/2018 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2014-15 DCIT, Central Circle, vs. Sundaram IT Parks Pvt. Ltd., Noida. 5D, Plaza, M-6, District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi PAN : AAKCS 1961P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. H.K. Choudhary, CIT/DR Respondent by: None Date of hearing: 26.08.2021 Date of order : 09.09.2021 ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M. Aggrieved by a common order dated 17.05.2018 passed by the Commi…

DCIT, Central Circle, Noida vs. Sundaram It Parks Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5167/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Sh. H.K. Choudhary, CIT/DRFor Respondent: None
Section 132Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’ NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 5166, 5167 & 5168/Del/2018 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2014-15 DCIT, Central Circle, vs. Sundaram IT Parks Pvt. Ltd., Noida. 5D, Plaza, M-6, District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi PAN : AAKCS 1961P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. H.K. Choudhary, CIT/DR Respondent by: None Date of hearing: 26.08.2021 Date of order : 09.09.2021 ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M. Aggrieved by a common order dated 17.05.2018 passed by the Commi…

DCIT, Central Circle, Noida vs. Sundaram It Parks Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5166/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Sh. H.K. Choudhary, CIT/DRFor Respondent: None
Section 132Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’ NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 5166, 5167 & 5168/Del/2018 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2014-15 DCIT, Central Circle, vs. Sundaram IT Parks Pvt. Ltd., Noida. 5D, Plaza, M-6, District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi PAN : AAKCS 1961P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. H.K. Choudhary, CIT/DR Respondent by: None Date of hearing: 26.08.2021 Date of order : 09.09.2021 ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M. Aggrieved by a common order dated 17.05.2018 passed by the Commi…