GENERAL ELECTORAL TRUST v. INCOME TAX OFFICER & ORS. (289 CTR 284)

Hitender Pal Singh, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-31(5), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2498/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Hitender Pal Singh, Vs Ito, C-1481, Jj Colony, Block-C, Ward-31(5), Tigri Colony, New Delhi-110062. New Delhi. Pan-Cicps4015B Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 11.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 17.08.2022

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 44ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “SMC” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2010-11] Hitender Pal Singh, vs ITO, C-1481, JJ Colony, Block-C, Ward-31(5), Tigri Colony, New Delhi-110062. New Delhi. PAN-CICPS4015B APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by None Respondent by Shri Om Parkash, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 11.08.2022 Date of Pronouncement 17.08.2022 ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : The present appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2010- 11 is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-11, New Delhi dated 15.01.2018. 2. The assessee has raised following ground o…

Income Tax Officer 8(3)(3), Mumbai vs. M/S.Vibgyor Texotech Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, whereas appeal of the Revenue is allowed

ITA 1484/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer-8(3)(3), M/S Vibgyor Texotech Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 616, 6Th Floor, Aayakar 309, Navyug, T.J. Road, Sewree, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400015. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaccv 0752 D Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Vibgyor Texotech Pvt. Ltd., The Asst. Commissioner Of 309, Navyug, T.J. Road, Sewree, Income Tax-8(3)(2), Mumbai-400015. Vs. Mumbai. Pan No. Aaccv 0752 D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Pavan Ved, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Achal Sharma, CIT-DR/

Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 264ASection 40

…s filed and therefore satisfaction was to be recorded under Explanation 2(a) below section 147 of the Act. The Ld. counsel relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of General Electoral trust Vs Income-tax Officer, Mumbai reported in 289 CTR 284 (Bom). The relevant funding of the Hon’ble High Court is reproduced as under: “7. Mere non filing of return of income does not give jurisdiction to the Assessing Officer to re-open the assessment unless the person concerned has total income which is assessable under the Act exceeding maximum amount which is not chargeable to Income Tax. This is…

M/S.Vibgyor Texotech Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT-8(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, whereas appeal of the Revenue is allowed

ITA 487/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer-8(3)(3), M/S Vibgyor Texotech Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 616, 6Th Floor, Aayakar 309, Navyug, T.J. Road, Sewree, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400015. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaccv 0752 D Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Vibgyor Texotech Pvt. Ltd., The Asst. Commissioner Of 309, Navyug, T.J. Road, Sewree, Income Tax-8(3)(2), Mumbai-400015. Vs. Mumbai. Pan No. Aaccv 0752 D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Pavan Ved, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Achal Sharma, CIT-DR/

Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 264ASection 40

…s filed and therefore satisfaction was to be recorded under Explanation 2(a) below section 147 of the Act. The Ld. counsel relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of General Electoral trust Vs Income-tax Officer, Mumbai reported in 289 CTR 284 (Bom). The relevant funding of the Hon’ble High Court is reproduced as under: “7. Mere non filing of return of income does not give jurisdiction to the Assessing Officer to re-open the assessment unless the person concerned has total income which is assessable under the Act exceeding maximum amount which is not chargeable to Income Tax. This is…

Sultan Singh, Panipat vs. ITO, Ward- 4, Panipat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 8212/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 May 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Surat Singh, The Income Tax Officer, Vpo Bhapra, Vs. Ward : 4, Samhalka, Panipat. Panipat – 132 103 [Haryana] Pan : Cqlps9692H Assessment Years : 2010-11 Shri Sultan Singh, The Income Tax Officer, Vpo Bhapra, Vs. Ward : 4, Samhalka, Panipat. Panipat – 132 101 [Haryana] Pan : Cpsps0826K (Appellants) (Respondent)

Section 147Section 148Section 54B

…atic under the provisions of section 147 to assume jurisdiction in each and every case where return of income has not been filed. He referred to the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in case of GENERAL ELECTORAL TRUST vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER & ORS.[ 289 CTR 284]. c. He further referred to the sanction given by the joint Commissioner on the reasons recorded by the AO stating that yes he is satisfied and it is a fit case of issue of notice under section 148 of the income tax act. He submitted that such satisfaction is not a valid satisfaction as there is no application of mind by the sanctioning authority…

Surat Singh, Panipat vs. ITO, Ward- 4, Panipat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 8211/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 May 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Surat Singh, The Income Tax Officer, Vpo Bhapra, Vs. Ward : 4, Samhalka, Panipat. Panipat – 132 103 [Haryana] Pan : Cqlps9692H Assessment Years : 2010-11 Shri Sultan Singh, The Income Tax Officer, Vpo Bhapra, Vs. Ward : 4, Samhalka, Panipat. Panipat – 132 101 [Haryana] Pan : Cpsps0826K (Appellants) (Respondent)

Section 147Section 148Section 54B

…atic under the provisions of section 147 to assume jurisdiction in each and every case where return of income has not been filed. He referred to the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in case of GENERAL ELECTORAL TRUST vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER & ORS.[ 289 CTR 284]. c. He further referred to the sanction given by the joint Commissioner on the reasons recorded by the AO stating that yes he is satisfied and it is a fit case of issue of notice under section 148 of the income tax act. He submitted that such satisfaction is not a valid satisfaction as there is no application of mind by the sanctioning authority…

M/S. Key Components (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 366/DEL/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri L.P. Sahu, A.M.

For Appellant: Smt. Rano Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. D.R

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…ase of Pr. CIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd., 26 ITA.No.366/Del./2016 M/s. Key Components (P) Ltd., Delhi. reported in 395 ITR 677 (Del.). He has also relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of General Electoral Trust vs. ITO 289 CTR 284 (Bom.) on the proposition that non-filing of the return of income does not ipso-facto give jurisdiction to reopen the assessment. He has also relied upon the decision of ITAT, Delhi ‘G’ Bench, in the case of Mrs. Sonia Choudhary vs. ITO, Ward-47(1), New Delhi dated 07th October, 2016, ITA.Nos.2036 & 2037/Del./2010, in which on the identical reaso…

GENERAL ELECTORAL TRUST v. INCOME TAX OFFICER & ORS.