Dharmendra Kumar Bansal v. CIT

152 ITD 406Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2015#10445 most cited
10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 153ASection 153DSection 40A(3)Section 153CSection 10(38)Section 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

revision u/s 263section 40a(3)section 153dsection 40asection 263section 26erroneous and prejudicialsection 40section 153cincriminating materialsection 153section 153a

Judgments citing Dharmendra Kumar Bansal v. CIT

MANOHAR FILAMENTS PVT LTD,DELHI vs. PCIT,CENTRAL-3, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 2645/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh[Assessment Year: 2017-18 ] Manohar & Filaments Pvt. `Vs. Pcit, (Central)-3, Delhi Ltd, B-59, G. T. Karnal Road, Industrial, Area, New Delhi Pan No.Aaacm1116E Appellant Respondent

Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 263

…4-589 (Hyd.) of 2015, dated 4-12-2015); xi) S. Satyanarayana v. Syed Rasiuddin [IT Appeal No. 901 (Hyd.) of 2014]; xii) Mehtab Alam v. Dy. CIT [IT Appeal No. 288/Luck/2014, dated 18-11-2014); xiii) Dharmendra Kumar Bansal v. CIT (20141 48 taxmann.com 53/2015) 152 ITD 406 (p. -Tr) & xiv) CIT vs. Dr. Ashok Kumar, Proprietor, S.S. Nursing Home, ITA 192/2000, order dated 06.08.2012 6. This is countered by the id. DR by relying the order of Nagpur Bench of this Tribunal in ITA No. 162/Nag/2018, order dated 01.04.2022 in M/s Shrigopal Rameshkumar Sales Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT. 7. We have given thoughtful consideration to th…

VENEZIA GOLF CITY PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 26(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1962/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Sh.Vikash Jain, Sh.SumitFor Respondent: Ms.Rajinder Kaur, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 250Section 263

…589 (Hyd.) of 2015, dated 4-12-2015]; xi) S. Satyanarayana v. Syed Rasiuddin [IT Appeal No. 901 (Hyd.) of 2014]; xii) Mehtab Alam v. Dy. CIT [IT Appeal No. 288/Luck/2014, dated 18-11- 2014]; xiii) Dharmendra Kumar Bansal v. CIT [20141 48 taxmann.com 53/[2015] 152 ITD 406 (Ip. - Trib.); & xiv) CIT vs. Dr. Ashok Kumar, Proprietor, S.S. Nursing Home, ITA 192/2000, order dated 06.08.2012 6. This is countered by the ld. DR by relying the order of Nagpur Bench of this Tribunal in ITA No.162/Nag/2018, order dated 01.04.2022 in M/s Shrigopal Rameshkumar Sales Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT. 7. We have given thoughtful consideration…

M/S. VENEZIA GOLF CITY PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL)-1, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3377/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Sh.Vikash Jain, Sh.SumitFor Respondent: Ms.Rajinder Kaur, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 250Section 263

…589 (Hyd.) of 2015, dated 4-12-2015]; xi) S. Satyanarayana v. Syed Rasiuddin [IT Appeal No. 901 (Hyd.) of 2014]; xii) Mehtab Alam v. Dy. CIT [IT Appeal No. 288/Luck/2014, dated 18-11- 2014]; xiii) Dharmendra Kumar Bansal v. CIT [20141 48 taxmann.com 53/[2015] 152 ITD 406 (Ip. - Trib.); & xiv) CIT vs. Dr. Ashok Kumar, Proprietor, S.S. Nursing Home, ITA 192/2000, order dated 06.08.2012 6. This is countered by the ld. DR by relying the order of Nagpur Bench of this Tribunal in ITA No.162/Nag/2018, order dated 01.04.2022 in M/s Shrigopal Rameshkumar Sales Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT. 7. We have given thoughtful consideration…

ADITYA GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. PCIT (CENTRAL) - 1, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1503/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1503/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 बनाम Aditya Gupta Pcit (Central)-1, 8/48, West Punjabi Bagh, Vs. Room No.338, Jhandewalan Extn., New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Amzpg2185M अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 153DSection 263Section 54F

…9 (Hyd.) of 2015, dated 4-12-2015]; (xi) S. Satyanarayana v. Syed Rasiuddin [IT Appeal No. 901 (Hyd.) of 2014]; (xii) Mehtab Alam v. Dy. CIT [IT Appeal No. 288 (Luck.) of 2014, dated 18-11- 2014]; (xiii) Dharmendra Kumar Bansal v. CIT [2014] 48 taxmann.com 53/152 ITD 406 (Jaipur – Trib.); & 10 (xiv) CIT v. Dr. Ashok Kumar, Proprietor, S.S. Nursing Home [IT Appeal No. 192 of 2000, dated 6- 8-2012] 6. This is countered by the Ld. DR by relying the order of Nagpur Bench of this Tribunal in Shrigopal Rameshkumar Sales (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [2022] 140 taxmann.com 628/196 ITD 107 (Nagpur -…

PRATAP SINGH RATHI,GHAZIABAD vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL), KANPUR

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 502/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 Sh. Pratap Singh Rathi, Vs. Principal Commissioner Of C-143, Surya Nagar, Income Tax , Ghaziabad Knp At Meerut Pin 201 001 Pan No. Ahkpr0582M (Appellant)M (Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Shrey Jain &For Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…view of the following judicial decisions: I) CIT vs. Sohana Woollen Mills, (2008) 296 ITR 0238, High Court of Punjab & Haryana. 2) Sh. Ajay Grover vs. ITO., ITA No. 532/2018 dated 23.11.2022 (Del) 3) Dharmendra Kumar Bansal vs. CIT, (2014) 101 DTR 377/(2015) 152 ITD 406. ITAT Jaipur Bench. 4) Shantai Exim Ltd. vs. CIT, (2016) 136 ITD 0313, ITAT Ahmadabad Bench. 6 5) Rajiv Arora vs. CIT, (2011) 131 ITD 0058, ITAT Jaipur Bench. 6) Paramjit Singh vs. PCIT, (2016) 48 CCH 0199, ITAT Chandigarh Bench. 7) M/s Refex Industries Ltd. vs. DCIT, ITA No. 972/Mds/2014, date of order 09.09.2014, ΙΤΑT Chennai Bench. 8) Sartaj…

DEVENDER KUMAR GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. PCIT, CENTRAL, GURGAON

The appeals are allowed and the impugned orders in respective years are quashed

ITA 1891/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.1890 To 1893/Del/2024 Assessment Years: 2015-16 To 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CA &For Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 153DSection 263Section 263ASection 40A(3)

…]; xi) S. Satyanarayana v. Syed Rasiuddin [IT Appeal No. 901 (Hyd.) of 2014]; xii) Mehtab Alam v. Dy. CIT [IT Appeal No. 288/Luck/2014, dated 18-11- 2014]; 4 ITAs No.1890 to 1893//Del/2024 xiii) Dharmendra Kumar Bansal v. CIT [20141 48 taxmann.com 53/[2015] 152 ITD 406 (Ip. - Trib.); & xiv) CIT vs. Dr. Ashok Kumar, Proprietor, S.S. Nursing Home, ITA 192/2000, order dated 06.08.2012 6. This is countered by the ld. DR by relying the order of Nagpur Bench of this Tribunal in ITA No.162/Nag/2018, order dated 01.04.2022 in M/s Shrigopal Rameshkumar Sales Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT. 7. We have given thoughtful consideratio…

DEVENDER KUMAR GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. PCIT CENTRAL, GURGAON

The appeals are allowed and the impugned orders in respective years are quashed

ITA 1890/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.1890 To 1893/Del/2024 Assessment Years: 2015-16 To 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CA &For Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 153DSection 263Section 263ASection 40A(3)

…]; xi) S. Satyanarayana v. Syed Rasiuddin [IT Appeal No. 901 (Hyd.) of 2014]; xii) Mehtab Alam v. Dy. CIT [IT Appeal No. 288/Luck/2014, dated 18-11- 2014]; 4 ITAs No.1890 to 1893//Del/2024 xiii) Dharmendra Kumar Bansal v. CIT [20141 48 taxmann.com 53/[2015] 152 ITD 406 (Ip. - Trib.); & xiv) CIT vs. Dr. Ashok Kumar, Proprietor, S.S. Nursing Home, ITA 192/2000, order dated 06.08.2012 6. This is countered by the ld. DR by relying the order of Nagpur Bench of this Tribunal in ITA No.162/Nag/2018, order dated 01.04.2022 in M/s Shrigopal Rameshkumar Sales Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT. 7. We have given thoughtful consideratio…

AJAY GROVER,FARIDABAD vs. ITO, WARD- I(1), FARIDABAD

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 532/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmaajay Grover, Vs. Ito, Prop. Of M/S. R.R. Enterprises, Ward-1(1), Rra Taxindia, D-28, South Faridabad Extension, Part-I, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Agxpg6032B Ajay Grover, Vs. Pr. Cit, Prop. Of M/S. R.R. Enterprises, Faridabad Rra Taxindia, D-28, South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Agxpg6032B

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri P. Praveeen Sidhrath, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 250(3)Section 263Section 263(1)

…judicial pronouncement to buttress the argument that 263 initiated on the basis of audit note is not sustainable:-  CIT vs. Shona Woollen Mills, (2008) 296 ITR 0238, High Court of Punjab & Haryana.  Dharmendra Kumar Bansal vs. CIT, (2014) 101 DTR 377/(2015) 152 ITD 406, ITAT Jaipur Bench.  Shantai Exim Ltd. vs. CIT, (2016) 136 ITD 0313, ITAT Ahmadabad Bench.  Rajiv Arora vs. CIT, (2011)131 ITD 0058, ITAT Jaipur Bench.  Paramjit Singh vs. PCIT, (2016) 48 CCH 0199, ITAT Chandigarh Bench.  M/s Refex Industries Ltd. vs. DCIT, ITA No. 972/Mds/2014, date of order 09.09.2014, ITAT Chennai Bench.  Sartaj Singh vs.…

SH. AJAY GROVER,NEW DELHI vs. PR. CIT, FARIDABAD

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4113/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmaajay Grover, Vs. Ito, Prop. Of M/S. R.R. Enterprises, Ward-1(1), Rra Taxindia, D-28, South Faridabad Extension, Part-I, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Agxpg6032B Ajay Grover, Vs. Pr. Cit, Prop. Of M/S. R.R. Enterprises, Faridabad Rra Taxindia, D-28, South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Agxpg6032B

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri P. Praveeen Sidhrath, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 250(3)Section 263Section 263(1)

…judicial pronouncement to buttress the argument that 263 initiated on the basis of audit note is not sustainable:-  CIT vs. Shona Woollen Mills, (2008) 296 ITR 0238, High Court of Punjab & Haryana.  Dharmendra Kumar Bansal vs. CIT, (2014) 101 DTR 377/(2015) 152 ITD 406, ITAT Jaipur Bench.  Shantai Exim Ltd. vs. CIT, (2016) 136 ITD 0313, ITAT Ahmadabad Bench.  Rajiv Arora vs. CIT, (2011)131 ITD 0058, ITAT Jaipur Bench.  Paramjit Singh vs. PCIT, (2016) 48 CCH 0199, ITAT Chandigarh Bench.  M/s Refex Industries Ltd. vs. DCIT, ITA No. 972/Mds/2014, date of order 09.09.2014, ITAT Chennai Bench.  Sartaj Singh vs.…

MOHD. MOMINEEN QURESHI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 46(1), NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of assessee dismissed

ITA 1987/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2019AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kakkar, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Parmita M. Biswas, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…ection 263 of Income Tax Act is not valid. In support of the contention, he has relied upon the Order of the ITAT, Jaipur Bench in ITA.No.508/Jaipur/ 2013, dated 31st January, 2014 and Order of ITAT, Jaipur Bench in the case of Dharmendra Kumar Bansal vs. CIT 152 ITD 406 (Jaipur-Tribu.). Learned Counsel for the Assessee referred to the Office Note of the Assessing Officer (PB-2, Page-1) in which the Assessing Officer has mentioned that assessment is framed strictly as per limited scrutiny. He has referred to PB 2, Page-6, 12, 75, which are replies filed before Assessing Officer and 10 ITA.No.1987/Del./2018 & S.A.…