Commissioner of Income Tax v. Harjeev Aggarwal

290 CTR 263High Court2016#102 most cited

What is Commissioner of Income Tax v. Harjeev Aggarwal authority for?

Assessment based solely on a statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act requires the statement to be relatable to incriminating material or evidence found during the search, especially when considering Section 158BB(1) which restricts computation of undisclosed income to evidence found during search.

583

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,518 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v Harjeev Aggarwal · section 132(4) · section 158BB(1) · incriminating material · undisclosed income · search and seizure · statement recorded · income tax assessment

Also reported as

70 Taxmann.com 95

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 132(4)Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 69A
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

undisclosed foreign income and assetssection 158b(b)section 158bb(1)section 149(1)(c)section 4(2)section 158bbsection 158basection 153(a)section 201(3)section 150unexplained jewellerystatement under section 132(4)

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income Tax v. Harjeev Aggarwal

Uma Singal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Centrl Circle-3, New Delhi

ITA 1484/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S S Rana CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 143Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…nstant case, no incriminating material whatsoever alleged exit was found in course of search in the case of the Assessee(s) herein operators, – reliance placed on the judgments of the Hon‘ble Jurisdictional alleged High Court in CIT Vs. Harjeev Agarwal (2016) 290 CTR 263 (Del) documentary and Pr CIT, Delhi 2 Vs. Best Infrastructure (India) Pvt. Ltd. & evidences Others in ITA Nos. 11/2017 to 22/2017 and plethora of other found from the cases cited in the written submissions. 4. That adverse statements of third parties recorded behind the back premises of of the Assessee cannot be used against the Assessee unless t…

Ritu Singal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 3, New Delhi

ITA 1481/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S S Rana CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 143Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…nstant case, no incriminating material whatsoever alleged exit was found in course of search in the case of the Assessee(s) herein operators, – reliance placed on the judgments of the Hon‘ble Jurisdictional alleged High Court in CIT Vs. Harjeev Agarwal (2016) 290 CTR 263 (Del) documentary and Pr CIT, Delhi 2 Vs. Best Infrastructure (India) Pvt. Ltd. & evidences Others in ITA Nos. 11/2017 to 22/2017 and plethora of other found from the cases cited in the written submissions. 4. That adverse statements of third parties recorded behind the back premises of of the Assessee cannot be used against the Assessee unless t…

Metbrass Plassim India Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi

ITA 7532/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.D. Agarwal & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year : 2014-15 M/S Versatile Datamatics (P) Ltd. Acit, Central Circle- 15, 25, Bazar Land, Bengali Market Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi 110001 Pan : Aabcv8793K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S Superior Calltech (P) Ltd., Acit, Central Circle- 15, 25, Bazar Lane, Bangali Market, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan : Aakcs2341F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2013-14 Metbrass Plassim India Ltd., Acit, Central Circle- 15, 25, Bazar Lane, Bangali Market, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan : Aadcm9501A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Adv. Shri Piyush Kumar Kamal, Ca Department By : Ms. Shefali Swaroop, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 30-07-2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.09.2018 Per Bench: These Appeals Are By The Respective Assessees Challenging The Separate Orders Of The Cit(A)- Xxvi, New Delhi ( For Short “Ld. Cit(A)”) Relating To Assessment Year 2013-14. Since Both The Assessees Are Group Companies & The Impugned Assessment Had Arisen Pursuant To The Search & Seizure Operations Dated 28.3.2015 & Facts & Grounds Raised In This Appeal Are Similar, We Deem It Just & Convenient To Dispose Them Of By Way Of This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Shefali Swaroop, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153A

…7 for assessment year 2007-08, the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd. reported in 397 ITR 82 and the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Harjeev Aggarwal reported in 290 CTR 263, he submitted that the statements recorded u/s 133(4) do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. 15. He placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla reported in 380 ITR 573, the decision in the case of Pr.CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia reported in 395 ITR 526 and various other decisions,…

Superior Calltech (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi

ITA 7531/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.D. Agarwal & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year : 2014-15 M/S Versatile Datamatics (P) Ltd. Acit, Central Circle- 15, 25, Bazar Land, Bengali Market Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi 110001 Pan : Aabcv8793K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S Superior Calltech (P) Ltd., Acit, Central Circle- 15, 25, Bazar Lane, Bangali Market, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan : Aakcs2341F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2013-14 Metbrass Plassim India Ltd., Acit, Central Circle- 15, 25, Bazar Lane, Bangali Market, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan : Aadcm9501A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Adv. Shri Piyush Kumar Kamal, Ca Department By : Ms. Shefali Swaroop, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 30-07-2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.09.2018 Per Bench: These Appeals Are By The Respective Assessees Challenging The Separate Orders Of The Cit(A)- Xxvi, New Delhi ( For Short “Ld. Cit(A)”) Relating To Assessment Year 2013-14. Since Both The Assessees Are Group Companies & The Impugned Assessment Had Arisen Pursuant To The Search & Seizure Operations Dated 28.3.2015 & Facts & Grounds Raised In This Appeal Are Similar, We Deem It Just & Convenient To Dispose Them Of By Way Of This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Shefali Swaroop, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153A

…7 for assessment year 2007-08, the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd. reported in 397 ITR 82 and the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Harjeev Aggarwal reported in 290 CTR 263, he submitted that the statements recorded u/s 133(4) do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. 15. He placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla reported in 380 ITR 573, the decision in the case of Pr.CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia reported in 395 ITR 526 and various other decisions,…

Versatile Datamicts (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi

ITA 7530/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.D. Agarwal & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year : 2014-15 M/S Versatile Datamatics (P) Ltd. Acit, Central Circle- 15, 25, Bazar Land, Bengali Market Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi 110001 Pan : Aabcv8793K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S Superior Calltech (P) Ltd., Acit, Central Circle- 15, 25, Bazar Lane, Bangali Market, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan : Aakcs2341F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2013-14 Metbrass Plassim India Ltd., Acit, Central Circle- 15, 25, Bazar Lane, Bangali Market, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan : Aadcm9501A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Adv. Shri Piyush Kumar Kamal, Ca Department By : Ms. Shefali Swaroop, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 30-07-2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.09.2018 Per Bench: These Appeals Are By The Respective Assessees Challenging The Separate Orders Of The Cit(A)- Xxvi, New Delhi ( For Short “Ld. Cit(A)”) Relating To Assessment Year 2013-14. Since Both The Assessees Are Group Companies & The Impugned Assessment Had Arisen Pursuant To The Search & Seizure Operations Dated 28.3.2015 & Facts & Grounds Raised In This Appeal Are Similar, We Deem It Just & Convenient To Dispose Them Of By Way Of This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Shefali Swaroop, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153A

…7 for assessment year 2007-08, the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd. reported in 397 ITR 82 and the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Harjeev Aggarwal reported in 290 CTR 263, he submitted that the statements recorded u/s 133(4) do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. 15. He placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla reported in 380 ITR 573, the decision in the case of Pr.CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia reported in 395 ITR 526 and various other decisions,…

Hindustan Aqua Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi

ITA 7567/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jun 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Smt. Beena A. Pillaiassessment Year : 2013-14 Moon Beverages Ltd., Acit, Central Circle- 15, 25, Bazar Lane, Bangali Market, New Delhi. Vs. New Delhi.

For Respondent: Ms. Shefali Swaroop, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 132Section 133(6)Section 153A

…for assessment year 2007-08, the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd. reported in 397 ITR 82 and the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Harjeev Aggarwal reported in 290 CTR 263, he submitted that the statements recorded u/s 133(4) do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. 10. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla reported in 380 ITR 573, the decision in the case of Pr.CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia reported in 395 ITR 526 and various other decisions, search…

Moon Beverages Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-15, New Delhi

ITA 7374/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jun 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Smt. Beena A. Pillaiassessment Year : 2013-14 Moon Beverages Ltd., Acit, Central Circle- 15, 25, Bazar Lane, Bangali Market, New Delhi. Vs. New Delhi.

For Respondent: Ms. Shefali Swaroop, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 132Section 133(6)Section 153A

…for assessment year 2007-08, the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd. reported in 397 ITR 82 and the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Harjeev Aggarwal reported in 290 CTR 263, he submitted that the statements recorded u/s 133(4) do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. 10. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla reported in 380 ITR 573, the decision in the case of Pr.CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia reported in 395 ITR 526 and various other decisions, search…

M/S. Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

ITA 5476/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain & Piyush K. KamalFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 253Section 5

…hatia 352 ITR 493 (Del.) & ITA Nos. 4256 to 4259/Del/2014 Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd. " CIT Vs Kurele Paper Mills P. Ltd. 380 ITR 571 (Del.) " CIT Vs MGF Automobiles Ltd. 241 Taxman 440 (Del.) " Pr. CIT Vs Ram Avtar Verma (2017) 395 ITR 252 " CIT Vs Harjeev Aggarwal 290 CTR 263 (Del.) " Suncity Projects (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT 46 CCH 320 (Del.) " CIT Vs All Cargo Gobal Logistics Ltd. in ITA No. 1969 of 2013 " CIT Vs Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645 " CIT Vs Gurinder Singh Bawa 386 ITR 483 " Pr. CIT Vs Saumya Construction (P) Ltd. 387 ITR 529 (Guj.) " Jai Steel India Vs ACIT 259 CTR 281 (Raj.)…

M/S. Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

ITA 5475/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain & Piyush K. KamalFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 253Section 5

…hatia 352 ITR 493 (Del.) & ITA Nos. 4256 to 4259/Del/2014 Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd. " CIT Vs Kurele Paper Mills P. Ltd. 380 ITR 571 (Del.) " CIT Vs MGF Automobiles Ltd. 241 Taxman 440 (Del.) " Pr. CIT Vs Ram Avtar Verma (2017) 395 ITR 252 " CIT Vs Harjeev Aggarwal 290 CTR 263 (Del.) " Suncity Projects (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT 46 CCH 320 (Del.) " CIT Vs All Cargo Gobal Logistics Ltd. in ITA No. 1969 of 2013 " CIT Vs Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645 " CIT Vs Gurinder Singh Bawa 386 ITR 483 " Pr. CIT Vs Saumya Construction (P) Ltd. 387 ITR 529 (Guj.) " Jai Steel India Vs ACIT 259 CTR 281 (Raj.)…

M/S. Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

ITA 5425/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain & Piyush K. KamalFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 253Section 5

…hatia 352 ITR 493 (Del.) & ITA Nos. 4256 to 4259/Del/2014 Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd. " CIT Vs Kurele Paper Mills P. Ltd. 380 ITR 571 (Del.) " CIT Vs MGF Automobiles Ltd. 241 Taxman 440 (Del.) " Pr. CIT Vs Ram Avtar Verma (2017) 395 ITR 252 " CIT Vs Harjeev Aggarwal 290 CTR 263 (Del.) " Suncity Projects (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT 46 CCH 320 (Del.) " CIT Vs All Cargo Gobal Logistics Ltd. in ITA No. 1969 of 2013 " CIT Vs Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645 " CIT Vs Gurinder Singh Bawa 386 ITR 483 " Pr. CIT Vs Saumya Construction (P) Ltd. 387 ITR 529 (Guj.) " Jai Steel India Vs ACIT 259 CTR 281 (Raj.)…

M/S. Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

ITA 5424/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain & Piyush K. KamalFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 253Section 5

…hatia 352 ITR 493 (Del.) & ITA Nos. 4256 to 4259/Del/2014 Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd. " CIT Vs Kurele Paper Mills P. Ltd. 380 ITR 571 (Del.) " CIT Vs MGF Automobiles Ltd. 241 Taxman 440 (Del.) " Pr. CIT Vs Ram Avtar Verma (2017) 395 ITR 252 " CIT Vs Harjeev Aggarwal 290 CTR 263 (Del.) " Suncity Projects (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT 46 CCH 320 (Del.) " CIT Vs All Cargo Gobal Logistics Ltd. in ITA No. 1969 of 2013 " CIT Vs Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645 " CIT Vs Gurinder Singh Bawa 386 ITR 483 " Pr. CIT Vs Saumya Construction (P) Ltd. 387 ITR 529 (Guj.) " Jai Steel India Vs ACIT 259 CTR 281 (Raj.)…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

ITA 4259/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain & Piyush K. KamalFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 253Section 5

…hatia 352 ITR 493 (Del.) & ITA Nos. 4256 to 4259/Del/2014 Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd. " CIT Vs Kurele Paper Mills P. Ltd. 380 ITR 571 (Del.) " CIT Vs MGF Automobiles Ltd. 241 Taxman 440 (Del.) " Pr. CIT Vs Ram Avtar Verma (2017) 395 ITR 252 " CIT Vs Harjeev Aggarwal 290 CTR 263 (Del.) " Suncity Projects (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT 46 CCH 320 (Del.) " CIT Vs All Cargo Gobal Logistics Ltd. in ITA No. 1969 of 2013 " CIT Vs Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645 " CIT Vs Gurinder Singh Bawa 386 ITR 483 " Pr. CIT Vs Saumya Construction (P) Ltd. 387 ITR 529 (Guj.) " Jai Steel India Vs ACIT 259 CTR 281 (Raj.)…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

ITA 4258/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain & Piyush K. KamalFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 253Section 5

…hatia 352 ITR 493 (Del.) & ITA Nos. 4256 to 4259/Del/2014 Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd. " CIT Vs Kurele Paper Mills P. Ltd. 380 ITR 571 (Del.) " CIT Vs MGF Automobiles Ltd. 241 Taxman 440 (Del.) " Pr. CIT Vs Ram Avtar Verma (2017) 395 ITR 252 " CIT Vs Harjeev Aggarwal 290 CTR 263 (Del.) " Suncity Projects (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT 46 CCH 320 (Del.) " CIT Vs All Cargo Gobal Logistics Ltd. in ITA No. 1969 of 2013 " CIT Vs Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645 " CIT Vs Gurinder Singh Bawa 386 ITR 483 " Pr. CIT Vs Saumya Construction (P) Ltd. 387 ITR 529 (Guj.) " Jai Steel India Vs ACIT 259 CTR 281 (Raj.)…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

ITA 4257/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain & Piyush K. KamalFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 253Section 5

…hatia 352 ITR 493 (Del.) & ITA Nos. 4256 to 4259/Del/2014 Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd. " CIT Vs Kurele Paper Mills P. Ltd. 380 ITR 571 (Del.) " CIT Vs MGF Automobiles Ltd. 241 Taxman 440 (Del.) " Pr. CIT Vs Ram Avtar Verma (2017) 395 ITR 252 " CIT Vs Harjeev Aggarwal 290 CTR 263 (Del.) " Suncity Projects (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT 46 CCH 320 (Del.) " CIT Vs All Cargo Gobal Logistics Ltd. in ITA No. 1969 of 2013 " CIT Vs Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645 " CIT Vs Gurinder Singh Bawa 386 ITR 483 " Pr. CIT Vs Saumya Construction (P) Ltd. 387 ITR 529 (Guj.) " Jai Steel India Vs ACIT 259 CTR 281 (Raj.)…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

ITA 4256/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain & Piyush K. KamalFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 253Section 5

…hatia 352 ITR 493 (Del.) & ITA Nos. 4256 to 4259/Del/2014 Gee Ispat Pvt. Ltd. " CIT Vs Kurele Paper Mills P. Ltd. 380 ITR 571 (Del.) " CIT Vs MGF Automobiles Ltd. 241 Taxman 440 (Del.) " Pr. CIT Vs Ram Avtar Verma (2017) 395 ITR 252 " CIT Vs Harjeev Aggarwal 290 CTR 263 (Del.) " Suncity Projects (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT 46 CCH 320 (Del.) " CIT Vs All Cargo Gobal Logistics Ltd. in ITA No. 1969 of 2013 " CIT Vs Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645 " CIT Vs Gurinder Singh Bawa 386 ITR 483 " Pr. CIT Vs Saumya Construction (P) Ltd. 387 ITR 529 (Guj.) " Jai Steel India Vs ACIT 259 CTR 281 (Raj.)…

Parag Dalmia, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-26, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 5499/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Feb 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year : 2006-07 Parag Dalmia, Dcit, Central Circle-26, A-238, Ground Floor, New Delhi. Vs. Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-1, New Delhi. Pan : Aaapd3725B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Hiren Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Verma, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2006-07 Parag Dalmia, DCIT, Central Circle-26, A-238, Ground Floor, New Delhi. Vs. Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-1, New Delhi. PAN : AAAPD3725B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Hiren Mehta, CA Department by : Shri Vijay Verma, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 04-12-2017 Date of pronouncement : 26-02-2018 O R D E R PER R. K. PANDA, AM : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 11.08.2017 of the CIT(A)-XXVI, New Delhi r…

M/S Brahmaputra Finlease (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, we hold that addition of share capital in the year under consideration has been made without relying on any incriminating material found during the course of search

ITA 3332/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. O.P. Kant & Sh. K.N. Charyassessment Year: 2007-08 Vs. Dcit, Central Circle -17, New M/S. Brahmaputra Finlease (P) Ltd., Brahmaputra House, A-7, Delhi Nh-8, Mahipalpur Crossing, Mahipalpur, New Delhi Pan : Aaack3691G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By S/Sh. Gautam Jain & Piyush Kumar Kamal, Advocates Respondent By Smt. Aparna Karan, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 21.12.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 29.12.2017 Order

Section 153ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘A’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. K.N. CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2007-08 Vs. DCIT, Central Circle -17, New M/s. Brahmaputra Finlease (P) Ltd., Brahmaputra House, A-7, Delhi NH-8, Mahipalpur Crossing, Mahipalpur, New Delhi PAN : AAACK3691G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by S/sh. Gautam Jain & Piyush Kumar Kamal, Advocates Respondent by Smt. Aparna Karan, CIT(DR) Date of hearing 21.12.2017 Date of pronouncement 29.12.2017 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, A.M.: This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 27/03/2017…

M/S. Galgotia Books & Departmental Store Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Noida

ITA 7017/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: : Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 142(1)Section 153A

…t the rate of 0.25 %. The Hon’ble High Court after examination of the facts held that the statement of Mr Tarun Goyal itself, without any further corroboration, can’t be a basis for making addition as has been explained in the case of CIT vs. Harjeev Aggarwal 290 CTR 263 (Delhi). The court also approved the deletion of the addition by the ITAT on merit by referring to the following observations of the ITAT: ITA Nos. 6579 to 6581, 6583 and 7016 to 7020/Del./2014 11 (i) “His statement was recorded behind the back of the assessee and the assesssee was not allowed any opportunity to cross-examine him. (ii) There is…

M/S. Galgotia Infotech Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Noida

ITA 6583/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: : Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 142(1)Section 153A

…t the rate of 0.25 %. The Hon’ble High Court after examination of the facts held that the statement of Mr Tarun Goyal itself, without any further corroboration, can’t be a basis for making addition as has been explained in the case of CIT vs. Harjeev Aggarwal 290 CTR 263 (Delhi). The court also approved the deletion of the addition by the ITAT on merit by referring to the following observations of the ITAT: ITA Nos. 6579 to 6581, 6583 and 7016 to 7020/Del./2014 11 (i) “His statement was recorded behind the back of the assessee and the assesssee was not allowed any opportunity to cross-examine him. (ii) There is…

M/S. Galgotia Software Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Noida

ITA 6579/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: : Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 142(1)Section 153A

…t the rate of 0.25 %. The Hon’ble High Court after examination of the facts held that the statement of Mr Tarun Goyal itself, without any further corroboration, can’t be a basis for making addition as has been explained in the case of CIT vs. Harjeev Aggarwal 290 CTR 263 (Delhi). The court also approved the deletion of the addition by the ITAT on merit by referring to the following observations of the ITAT: ITA Nos. 6579 to 6581, 6583 and 7016 to 7020/Del./2014 11 (i) “His statement was recorded behind the back of the assessee and the assesssee was not allowed any opportunity to cross-examine him. (ii) There is…