How many judgments cite PCIT v. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd.?

471 judgments on BharatTax cite PCIT v. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. (395 ITR 677), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does PCIT v. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 148, Section 147, Section 143(3), Section 68, Section 151, Section 142(1).

PCIT v. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd.

395 ITR 677High Court2017#149 most cited

What is PCIT v. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

Reassessment proceedings initiated solely based on an investigation wing/appraisal report, without the Assessing Officer's independent application of mind to form a 'reason to believe' that income has escaped assessment, are beyond jurisdiction, bad in law, and void ab initio.

471

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

PCIT v. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. · Section 148 · Section 147 · reopening of assessment · reason to believe · independent application of mind · borrowed satisfaction · investigation report · reassessment proceedings invalid · non application of mind · escapement of income

Also reported as

82 Taxmann.com 300

Sections most often in play

Section 148 Section 147 Section 143(3)Section 68 Section 151 Section 142(1)Section 132 Section 143(1)

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

borrowed satisfaction live link section 151(1)tangible material material facts necessary for assessment section 148(2)kelvinator non application of mind reason to believe reopening of assessment escapement of income mere change of opinion

Judgments citing PCIT v. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd.

Alankar Commodeal (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 4(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1257/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.1257/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Alankar Commodeal (P) Ltd..........................................…………………….……Appellant C/O Ca Bal Kishan Kedia, Bansal Complex, 1St Floor, Ram Nivas Talkies Chowk, Raigarh, Chhattisgarh-496001. [Pan: Aahca1771G] Vs. Ito, Ward-4(3), Kolkata…………….…..…...............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sunil Kr. Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 16, 2021 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 01, 2022 Hearing Through Video Conferencing Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 04.04.2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act(Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. That Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Passing Order Ex-Parte. 2. That Under The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Notice Issued U/S 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Is Bad In Law & Hence The Consequential Reassessment Order Is Also Illegal & Needs To Be Annulled. 3. That Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of A Sum Of Rs.2,50,50,000/- For The Share Capital Raised By The Assessee, Holding The Same To Be Unexplained Cash-Credit In Terms Of Sec.68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Addition Is Unjustified & Need To Be Deleted. 4. That The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Alter, Amend Or Withdraw Any Ground Or Grounds Of Appeal Before Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 250Section 68

…AT -Jaipur] (vi) Future Tech IT Systems Pvt Ltd. vs. CIT (ITA 1031/CHANDI/2019) [ITAT- Chandigarh]dated 27-04-2021 (vii) Indo Global Techno Trade Ltd. vs. ITO (ITA No.1616/CHD/2018) [ITAT- Chandigarh] dated 15.06.2020 (viii) PCIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas (2017) 395 ITR 677 [Del-HC] (ix) PCIT vs. G&G Pharma India Ltd. 384 ITR 147 (Del.) dated 08.10.2015 5. The Ld. counsel for the assessee has further submitted that the approval granted by Addl. CIT u/s 151(2) dated 13.03.2015 was given in a mechanical manner without application of mind. He has submitted that the Ld. Addl. CIT has given the approval under a wrong se…

Raghav Softech Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 20(4), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 7127/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Raghav Softech Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ito Vardhman Grand Plaza, Manglam Ward-20(4) Place, Sector-3, Rohini, New Delhi New Delhi Aaecr2527G Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 18.01.2022

Section 147Section 148Section 69

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “SMC” BENCH: NEW DELHI (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Raghav Softech Pvt. Ltd. vs ITO Vardhman Grand Plaza, Manglam Ward-20(4) Place, Sector-3, Rohini, New Delhi New Delhi AAECR2527G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by None Respondent by Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 03.01.2022 Date of Pronouncement 18.01.2022 ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)—7, New Delhi dated 17th June, 2019, pertaining to the Assessment Year 2011-12. The…

Sastvijay Investment & Consultancy Services P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-22(4), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 901/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri Amol Sinha &For Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…which is reproduced as under does not give such details giving the names of the entities giving the amount of accommodation entries during the year. 30. We find that Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. reported in 395 ITR 677 (Del.) has quashed the reassessment proceedings on the ground that the reasons recorded by the AO failed to demonstrate link between tangible material and formation of reason to believe that income had escaped assessment. The relevant observations of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court from paras 19 to 38 read as under:- “19. A perusal of the reasons as…

Yash Ventures Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 13 (3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed

ITA 6864/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Vishnu Agarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri T. S. Khalsa, D.R

Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 250Section 68Section 6A

…ITA No.6864/M/2019 Yash Ventures Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2011-12 Yash Ventures Pvt. Ltd. ITO-13(3)(1), 8, Abhishek Premises CHS Aayakar Bhavan, Ltd., C-5, Dalia Industrial Mumbai - 400020 Vs. Estate, Off. Link Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400 053 PAN: AAACY 3306 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Vishnu Agarwal, A.R. Revenue by : Shri T. S. Khalsa, D.R. Date of Hearing : 09.08.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 29.10.2021 O R D E R…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Maharaji Education Trust, Ghaziabad

The appeal are dismissed

ITA 5138/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, C. AFor Respondent: Ms. Paramita M. Biswas[CIT]–

Section 11Section 12ASection 132Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “E”: NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) ITA. No. 5138/Del/2016 (Assessment Year: 2007-08) ACIT, M/s. Maharaji Education Vs. Trust, Central Circle : 6, No. 1 – Santosh Nagar, Pratap Vihar, New Delhi. Ghaziabad – 201 009. PAN: AAATM5225F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Suresh Gupta, C. A. Department by: Ms. Paramita M. Biswas[CIT]– DR Date of Hearing : 21/09/2021 Date of pronouncement : 13/10/2021 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This appeal is fi…

DCIT, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. Shri Prakash Chand Kothari, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1298/JPR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Sh. Rajeev Sogani (CA) &For Respondent: Sh. B. K. Gupta (PCIT)

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153C

…Ltd [2010] 325 ITR 285 (Del), CIT vs. Insecticides (India) Ltd. [2013] 357 ITR 330 (Del), Krown Agro Foods (P.) Ltd vs. ACIT [2015] 375 ITR 460 (Del), Pr. CIT vs. RMG Polyvinyl (I) B Ltd [2017] 396 ITR 5 (Del), Pr. CIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. [2017] 395 ITR 677 (Del) and Pr. CIT vs. G & G Pharma Ltd. (2016) 384 ITR 147 (Del). Further, reliance was placed on the Co-ordinate Benches decisions in case of Deepraj Hospital (P) Ltd. vs. ITO (2018) 65 ITR (Trib.) 663 (Agra), Unique Metal Inds. Vs. ITO (ITA No. 1372/Del/2015 dt. 28/10/2015), and ACIT vs. Devesh Kumar (ITA No. 2068/Del/2010). 20. It was further…

Shri Prakash Chand Kothari, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1190/JPR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Sh. Rajeev Sogani (CA) &For Respondent: Sh. B. K. Gupta (PCIT)

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153C

Sunita Madhok, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 555/BANG/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Oct 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri H.N. Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Smt. H. Kabila, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 234BSection 69

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.554 & 555/Bang/2018 Assessment years : 2006-07 & 2007-08 Sunita Madhok, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner L/R of late Sri Romesh Madhok, of Income Tax, # 327, 5th Main Road, 1st Block, Circle 1(2)(1), Koramangala, Bengaluru. Bangalore – 560 004. PAN: ABJPM 9641D APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri H.N. Khincha, CA Respondent by : Smt. H. Kabila, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 23.08.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 11.10.2021 O R D E R Per Ch…

Sunita Madhok, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 554/BANG/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Oct 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri H.N. Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Smt. H. Kabila, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 234BSection 69

Apoorva Sharma, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-6(4), Jaipur

ITA 219/JPR/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. Vinod Kumar Gupta (CA) &For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT)

Section 11Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 64

…Bank or from the father of assessee, but nothing of this sort was done. This shows that the AO has merely gone by the report of ITS. In this regard reliance is placed on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi HC in the case of Meenakshi Overseas Pvt Ltd Vs ITO (2017) 395 ITR 677 (Delhi HC) wherein the Hon’ble Court returned the finding that “ The reopening of assessment under Section 147 is a potent power not to be lightly exercised. It certainly cannot be invoked casually or mechanically. The heart of the provision is the formation of belief by the AO that income has escaped assessment. The reasons so recorded have to b…

M/S Shivalika Realities P Ltd, Indore vs. ITO 5(1), Indore

In the result of appeals of the assessee for AY 2008-09 and AY 2009-10 vide ITA no

ITA 95/IND/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Oct 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10

…i) CIT v. Multiplex Trading & Industrial Co Ltd (2015) 128 DTR 217 (Delhi)(HC) iii) Pr. CIT v G. Pharma India Ltd.[2017] 384 ITR 147 (Delhi) (HC) iv) CIT vs. Insecticides (India) Ltd. (2013) 357 ITR 300 (Del.)(HC) v) CIT v/s Meenakshi Oversea’s Pvt Ltd (2017) 395 ITR 677(Del) (HC) vi) CIT vs. Fair Invest Ltd. (2013) 357 ITR 146 (Del.)(HC) vii) Sarthak Securities Co. (P.) Ltd. vs. ITO (2010) 329 ITR 110 viii) PCIT v. Manzil Dineshkumar Shah[2018] 95 Taxmann.com 46 (Guj) HC) ix) Amar Jewellers Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2018) 254 Taxman 384 (Guj. )(HC) x) Deepraj Hospital (P) Ltd. v. ITO, 41/AGRA/2017, AY: 2010-11 Dtd:01/06/…

M/S Shivalika Realities P Ltd, Indore vs. ITO 5(1), Indore

In the result of appeals of the assessee for AY 2008-09 and AY 2009-10 vide ITA no

ITA 94/IND/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Oct 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10

M/S Everfine Constructions Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-7(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3129/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyap

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.NO. 3129/MUM/2019 (A.Y: 2011-12) M/s. Everfine Constructions Pvt. Ltd., v. Dy. CIT – Central Circle -7(3) Shop No. 8, Botawala Building Aayakar Bhavan 82/86 Raghavji Road, Gowalia Tank Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai -400036 PAN: AACCE3674P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Rushabh Mehta Department by : Shri Sanjeev Kashyap Date of Hearing : 18.06.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 16.09.2021 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. This appeal is f…

M/S. Bansiwala Iron & Steel Rolling Mills, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1388/JPR/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1388/Jp/2019 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2008-09 Cuke M/S Bansiwala Iron & Steel Rolling Mills, D.C.I.T., 2Nd Floor, Somani Building, S.C. Link Vs. Circle-3, Road, Loha Mandi, Jaipur. Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aadfb 2375 A Appellant Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Mahendra Gargieya & Shri Dewang Gargieya (Advs) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By: Shri Rajendra Singh (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 06/09/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 15/09/2021 Vkns'K@ Order

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya &For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Singh (CIT-DR)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 69

…by a third party, the AO could not form an honest belief even Prima Facie. 3.4 supporting case laws in addition to w.r.f para 3.4 supporting case laws, the following further cases are also relied upon: 3.4.5 I n PCIT v/s Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. (2017) 395 ITR 677 (Delhi), it was held that (DPB 20-32) “Where reassessment was resorted to on basis of information from DIT (Investigation) that assessee had received accommodation entry but and there was no independent application of mind by Assessing Officer to tangible material and reasons failed to demonstrate link between tangible material and formation of…

J.D. Sons Steel Pvt. Ltd., Faridabad vs. ACIT, Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1061/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2021AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Takiyar, Sr.D.R

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)Section 148(2)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & Dr. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.1060 & 1061/DEL/2015 Assessment Year 2007-08 & 2009-10 J.D. Sons Steel Pvt. Ltd., v. ACIT, B-17, First Floor, Circle-II, Nehru Ground, NIT, Faridabad. Faridabad. TAN/PAN: AAACJ9814A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Rajesh Jain, CA Respondent by: Shri Umesh Takiyar, Sr.D.R. Date of hearing: 05 07 2021 Date of pronouncement: 31 08 2021 O R D E R PER, AMIT SHUKLA, J.M. The aforesaid appeals have been filed by the assessee against separate impugned ord…

R.N. Khemka Enterprises (P) Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO Ward- 20(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is

ITA 7244/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2011-12]

Section 131Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…cision of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Integrated Global Solutions Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.4993/Del/2012, dated 31.12.2019, he submitted that the Tribunal relying on the decision in the case of Pr. CIT vs Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. 395 ITR 677(Del.), has held that reproduction of information without showing how the material income has escaped assessment. 14. Referring the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sabh Infrastructure vs ACIT reported in 398 ITR 198 (Del.) , he submitted that it is settled position of law that the reason for reopening must be complete and…

Pv Corporate Advisory Services Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 19(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 8027/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2011-12 Pv Corporate Advisory Services Vs. Ito, Pvt. Ltd., Ward-19(3), C/O Rohit Tiwari, New Delhi. 8024, Ats Greens Paradiso, Chi Iv, Noida. Pan: Aadcp7328L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rohit Tiwari, Advocate Revenue By : Shri R.K. Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 22.06.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.07.2021 Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30Th May, 2019 Of The Cit(A)-7, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Tiwari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : SMC-1 : NEW DELHI (Through Virtual Hearing) BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2011-12 PV Corporate Advisory Services Vs. ITO, Pvt. Ltd., Ward-19(3), C/o Rohit Tiwari, New Delhi. 8024, ATS Greens Paradiso, CHI IV, Noida. PAN: AADCP7328L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Rohit Tiwari, Advocate Revenue by : Shri R.K. Gupta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 22.06.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 07.07.2021 ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 30th May, 2019 of the CIT(A)-7, New Delhi relating to assessme…

M/S Suraj Pulses Processors Pvt.Ltd., Delhi vs. Pr. CIT-8, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

ITA 3012/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: S/Shri Shantanu Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-D.R

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 263

…ion 133(6) of the I.T. Act. In this view of the matter, we allow the appeal of assessee.” 13.1 Further reliance was placed upon the following judgments: - G & G Pharma 384 ITR 0147 (High Court of Delhi) 16 ITA. No.3009 to 3012/DEL/2017 - Meenakshi Overseas 395 ITR 677 (High Court of Delhi) - Sabh Infrastructure reported in 398 ITR 198 (High Court of Delhi) - DCIT vs KLA Foods (India) Ltd. in ITA No. 2846/D/2015 dated 08.04.2019 (ITAT, Delhi) - ITO vs Smt. Aarti Khattar in ITA No. 2395/D/2012 dated 22.08.2014 (ITAT, Delhi) - CIT vs. Shree Rajasthan Syntex Ltd reported in 313 ITR 231 (High Court of Rajasthan) 1…

M/S Suraj Buildmart India Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. Pr. CIT-8, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

ITA 3011/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jul 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: S/Shri Shantanu Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-D.R

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 263

M/S Suraj Pulses Pvt.Ltd., Delhi vs. Pr. CIT-8, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

ITA 3010/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jul 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: S/Shri Shantanu Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-D.R

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 263