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 367,154 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.

Sheela Aggarwal, Faridabad vs. ITO Ward - 2(3), Faridabad

In the result, ITA.No.7376/Del

ITA 7373/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2020AY 2011-12

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

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

…total non-application of mind on the part of the A.O. to reopen the assessment. In support of his contention, he has relied upon Judgments of the Hon’ble Delhi High court in the cases of RNG Polyvinyle (I) Ltd., 396 ITR 5 (Del.), Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd., 395 ITR 677 (Del.) and GNG Pharma India 384 ITR 147 (Del.). He has submitted that since A.O. has admittedly did not confront any material supplied by the Investigation Wing to assessee, despite assessee made a specific request and also requested to allow cross-examination of statement of Shri Pramod Kumar Jindal and others, therefore, such material cannot be…

Meena Gupta, Faridabad vs. ITO Ward - 1(5), Faridabad

In the result, ITA.No.7376/Del

ITA 7372/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2020AY 2011-12

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

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

O.P.Yadav, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circ Le-15, New Delhi

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

ITA 5523/DEL/2018[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2020AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 158B

…reopening is invalid is supported by following High Court/Apex court decisions considered in decisions enlisted below. i) Delhi high court decision in case of RMG Polyvinyl 396 ITR 5; ii) High Court of Delhi in the case of PCIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas P. Ltd. 395 ITR 677 (Del); iii) High Court of Delhi in the case of PCIT vs. G&G Pharma India Ltd. reported in 384 ITR 147 (Del); On basis of above discussion we make a humble prayer for i) admission of our legal and jurisdictional additional ground and ii) allowing our appeal by accepting our additional ground in toto and iii) quash the orders passed by Ld AO and L…

Aero Dealcomm Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-4(3), Kolkata

ITA 2484/KOL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 May 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble) Assessment Years: 2009-10 Aereo Dealcomm Pvt. Ltd………….………...........................................................……………….…......Appellant C/O. S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Advocates 2, Garstin Place 2Nd Floor Suite No. 203 Off Hare Street Kolkata West Bengal – 700 001 [Pan : Aacca 5934 G] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(3), Kolkata…………………..……………….............….……....…....Respondent Appearances By: Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate & Shri M. Jhawar, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Jayanta Khanra, Jcit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 26Th, 2020 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 29Th, 2020 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…the following case-law for the propositions that under such circumstances, the reopening of assessment is bad in law circumstances, the reopening of assessment is bad in law :-  PCIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas P. Ltd. ( PCIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas P. Ltd. (2017) 395 ITR 677 (Del.) 2017) 395 ITR 677 (Del.)  PCIT vs. RMG P PCIT vs. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd. (2017) 396 ITR 5 (Del.)  PCIT vs. G & G Pharma India Ltd. (2016) 384 ITR 147 (Del.) PCIT vs. G & G Pharma India Ltd. (2016) 384 ITR 147 (Del.) PCIT vs. G & G Pharma India Ltd. (2016) 384 ITR 147 (Del.) 4.1. He further argued that He further argued that, the letter o…

Nirmala Devi, Hisar vs. ITO Ward-03, Hisar

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2731/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 May 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishinirmala Devi Vs Ito House No. 8, Green Park, Hisar Ward-03 Haryana Pin: 125001 Ayakar Bhawan, Hisar Pan: Aappd3170P Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…cided by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chhugamal Rajpal vs S.P. Chaliha 79 ITR 603 (SC). And In the light of ratio decided by Jurisdiction Delhi High Court Principal Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Meenakashi Overseas Private Limited Reported in [2017] 395 ITR 677 [DEL] 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, and the legal position the appellant has responded to all notices sent by Ld. A.O. and no reasonable opportunity was given by the Ld. A.O. to cross examine the broker or the person to whom diversion of income was alleged to be made by appellant when, particularly, no supporting document a…

Subodh Chandra Das, Hooghly vs. I.T.O., Ward-23(3), Hooghly

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2247/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Mar 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble) Ita No. 2246 & 2247/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…accommodation entries. Thus, the reassessment order was not valid.” 15. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas (P) Ltd. Pr. CIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas (P) Ltd. reported in [2017] 395 ITR 677 (Delhi) [2017] 395 ITR 677 (Delhi), held as follows:- “Section 68, read with section , read with section 147, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Cash credit Cash credit (Accommodation entries) (Accommodation entries) - Assessment year 2004-05 - Information was Information was received received received from from from Director Director Director (Invest…

Subodh Chandra Das, Hooghly vs. I.T.O., Ward-23(3), Hooghly

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2246/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Mar 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble) Ita No. 2246 & 2247/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

Akg Securities & Consulting Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 1(1), New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 4395/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri N.K. Billaiyaassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Mr. Rohit Tiwari, Adv. & Sh. VinjayFor Respondent: Sh. S.N. Pandey, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…rt of India in the case of ACIT vs. Dhariya Construction Co. (2011) 197 Taxman 202 (SC); Hon’ble Delhi High Court decisions in the case of Pr. CIT vs. RMG Polyvinyls (I) Ltd. (2017) 83 taxmann.com 348 (Delhi); Pr. CIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas P Ltd. vs. ITO 395 ITR 677 (Del.) and Pr. CIT vs. G&G Pharma India Ltd. 384 ITR 147 (Del.). 3.1 Ld. Counsel for the assessee placed the copy of reasons recorded by the AO and approval granted by the Pr. CIT, Delhi-1, New Delhi wherein, he has granted the approval by only mentioning that “I am satisfied”, which shows that Ld. Pr. CIT, Delhi-1, New Delhi has not recorded…

Arina Grover, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-45(1), New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 9316/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year : 2008-09 M/S Arina Grover, Vs. Acit, Circle 45(1), D-25, 2Nd Floor, New Delhi Ajay Enclave, New Delhi – 110 027 (Pan: Akepg0821F) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Tiwari, Advocate & Sh. VinayFor Respondent: Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr.DR

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

…Court of India in the case of ACIT vs. Dhariya Construction Co. (2011) 197 Taxman 202 (SC); Hon’ble Delhi High Court decisions in the case of Pr. CIT vs. RMG Polyvinyls (I) Ltd. (2017) 83 taxmann.com 348 (Delhi); Pr. CIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas P Ltd. vs. ITO 395 ITR 677 (Del.) and Pr. CIT vs. G&G Pharma India Ltd. 384 ITR 147 (Del.). 3.1 Secondly, he drew my attention towards Page No. 40-42 of Assessee’s Paper Book which is a copy of the reasons recorded by the AO and approval granted by the Addl. CIT, Range-45, New Delhi, wherein he has granted the approval by mentioning that “After perusing the reasons given…

M/S. Bull Riders Financial Services (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ghaziabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

ITA 1891/DEL/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri R.K. Panda

For Appellant: Shri Somil AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

…on-application of mind on the part of the A.O. for reopening of the assessment. We rely upon Judgment in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs., RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd., 396 ITR 5 (Del.), Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs., Meenakshi Overseas (P) Ltd., 395 ITR 677 (Del.) and Pr. 20 ITA.No.1891/Del./2017 M/s. Bull Riders Financial Services (P) Ltd., Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. CIT vs., G And G Pharma India Ltd., [2016] 384 ITR 147 (Del.) and Sarthak Securities Co. (P) Ltd., 329 ITR 110 (Del.). 5.7. The above discussion would make it clear that the A.O. herself has not recorded any reasons for reopening of t…

S.N. Arora/Sapra, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 23(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee for the A

ITA 4252/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2020AY 2007-08

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

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, C.A. And Shri Satyajeet Goel, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. D.R

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 68

…hi. "In the present case too, the information received from the Inv. Wing cannot be said to be tangible material per se without a further enquiry being undertaken by the learned assessing officer" 9.8. In the case of Pr. CIT vs., Meenakshi Overseas (P) Ltd., 395 ITR 677 (Del.), the Hon’ble Delhi High Court held as under : "Reassessment notice condition precedent recording of reasons to believe that income has escaped assessment mere reproduction of investigation report in reasons recorded absence of link between tangible material and formation of ceding illegal Income Tax Act, 1961, Sec.147, 148" 9.9. In the c…

S.N. Arora/Sapra, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 23(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee for the A

ITA 4251/DEL/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2020AY 2006-07

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

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, C.A. And Shri Satyajeet Goel, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. D.R

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 68

Shri Jasbir Singh, Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-I (2), Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 426/ASR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.426/Asr/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass, DR

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 50C

…f income. Without doing so, the jurisdictional fact necessary to usurp jurisdiction to reopen the regular assessment cannot be made by the AO. For the said proposition, the Ld. AR drew our attention to following case laws: i).PCIT Vs. Meenakshi Overseas Ltd. 395 ITR 677(Del.) (referred to para 19 till para 37). ii).DCIT Vs. Greal Wall Marketing Pvt. Ltd. ITA No.660/Kol/2011 (referred to page 10 para 11) iii).Shri Raj Kumar Goel Vs. ITO ITA No.1028/Kol/2017 (referred to page 5-8 para 11) (iv).Classic Flour & Food Processing Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT ITA Nos. 764 to 766/Kol/2014 (page 7 para 12 to 16) v).PCIT Vs. Shod…

Behat Holdings Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-4(3), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed

ITA 8066/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Deepesh Jain, C.A. And Shri Arpit Goel, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ved Prakash Mishra, Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

…r: "In the present case too, the information received from the Inv. Wing cannot be said to be tangible material per se without a further enquiry being undertaken by the learned assessing officer" 3.2. In the case of Pr. CIT vs., Meenakshi Overseas (P) Ltd., 395 ITR 677 (Del.), the Hon’ble Delhi High Court held as under : "Reassessment notice condition precedent recording of reasons to believe that income has escaped assessment mere reproduction of investigation report in reasons recorded absence of 26 ITA.No.8066/Del./2019 M/s. Behat Holdings Ltd., Daryaganj, Central Delhi. link between tangible material and f…

Budhiya Agencies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1231/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1231/Kol/2017 (िनधा"रणवष"S / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Budhiya Agencies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-2, Kolkata

For Appellant: Shri S. M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT, Sr. DR

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

…9 income. Without doing so, the jurisdictional fact necessary to usurp jurisdiction to reopen the regular assessment cannot be made by the AO. For the said proposition, the Ld. AR drew our attention to following case laws: i).PCIT Vs. Meenakshi Overseas Ltd. 395 ITR 677(Del.) (referred to para 19 till para 37). ii).DCIT Vs. Greal Wall Marketing Pvt. Ltd. ITA No.660/Kol/2011 (referred to page 10 para 11) iii).Shri Raj Kumar Goel Vs. ITO ITA No.1028/Kol/2017 (referred to page 5-8 para 11) (iv).Classic Flour & Food Processing Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT ITA Nos. 764 to 766/Kol/2014 (page 7 para 12 to 16) v).PCIT Vs. Shodiman…

Goel Wax (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-11(4), New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 2075/DEL/2018[2008-809]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2020AY 2008-809

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Raj Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar Chopra, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…O himself in his letter dated 10.12.2015. To support his aforesaid contention, he relied upon the case law of Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. RMG Polyvinyls (I) Ltd. (2017) 83 taxmann.com 348 (Delhi); Pr. CIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas () Ltd. vs. ITO 395 ITR 677 (Del.); Pr. CIT vs. G&G Pharma India Ltd. 384 ITR 147 (Del.) and Sarthak Securities Co. (P) Ltd. 329 ITR 110 (Del). In view of above, he requested to quash the re-assessment. 5. On the contrary, Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below and the case laws referred therein and stated that Assessing Officer issued the notice u/s. 148 a…

Giggle Infotech Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 10(1), New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 1284/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Ostwal, FCAFor Respondent: Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr.DR

Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…f Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of ACIT vs. Dhariya Construction Co. (2011) 197 Taxman 202 (SC); Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. RMG Polyvinyls (I) Ltd. (2017) 83 taxmann.com 348 (Delhi); Pr. CIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas () Ltd. vs. ITO 395 ITR 677 (Del.); Signature Hotels Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO (2012) 20 taxmann.com 797 (Del.); Pr. CIT vs. G&G Pharma India Ltd. 384 ITR 147 (Del.) and CIT vs. Sfil Stock Broking Ltd. 2010) 435 ITR 285 (Delhi). In view of above, he requested to quash the re- assessment. 5. On the contrary, Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below and the case laws r…

Charbuja Marmo (India) Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. Pr.CIT- 2, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed

ITA 4749/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 263

…Pvt. Ltd., Delhi. were initiated mechanically and on borrowed satisfaction and without application of mind, such reassessment proceedings are a nullity:- i. Pr. CIT vs. RMG Polyvinyl (I) ltd., 396 ITR 5 (Del); ii. Pr. CIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas (P) Ltd., 395 ITR 677 (Del); iii. Pr. CIT vs. G and G Pharma India Ltd., 384 ITR (2016) (Delhi) 147; and iv. Sarthak Securities Co. (P) Ltd., 329 ITR 110 (Del). 6. The ld. counsel for the assessee further submitted that the assessee filed objections against the reopening vide letter dated 16th August, 2017, copy of which is placed at page 6 to 7 of the paper book…

Integrated Global Solutions Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4993/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowlashri N.K. Billaiya[A.Y 2006-07]

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.N. Meena, Sr. DR

Section 127Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘C’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [A.Y 2006-07] Integrated Global Solutions Pvt Ltd Vs. The A.C.I.T [Formerly known as Spice Global Pvt Ltd Central Circle – 9 60–D-Street No. C-5, Sainik Farms New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AACCM 7292 F (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA Department By : Shri S.N. Meena, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 18.12.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 31.12.2019 ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, This appeal by the assessee is preferred agains…

Devki Nandan Bindal, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 46(3), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

ITA 4271/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT-DR

Section 131Section 144Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES “B” : DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.4271/Del./2019 Assessment Year 2010-2011 Shri Devki Nandan The Income Tax Officer, Bindal, Delhi – 110 006. PAN AHEPB8698Q Ward – 46 (3), C/o. Shri Kapil Goel, vs Advocate, F-26/124, New Delhi. Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi – 110 085. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Kapil Goel, Advocate. For Revenue : Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 05.12.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 18.12.2019 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. This appeal by Assessee…