Pr.CIT v. Lata Jain

384 ITR 543High Court2016#555 most cited

What is Pr.CIT v. Lata Jain authority for?

In a search assessment under Section 153A, no additions can be made for assessment years where assessments have already been concluded, unless incriminating material related to undisclosed income for those years is found during the search operation.

174

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Pr.CIT v. Lata Jain · Section 153A · Section 132 · search assessment · incriminating material · concluded assessment · undisclosed income · addition under section 68 · bogus long term capital gain · no incriminating material found

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 143(3)Section 131Section 139(1)Section 142(1)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

annual letting valueannual valuepermanent account numberbogus long term capital gainsection 22section 127section 132aentry operatorregular assessmentaddition under section 68search assessmentaddition u/s 68

Judgments citing Pr.CIT v. Lata Jain

Wilfred D'Souza, Mangaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangaluru

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 324/BANG/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, D.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 246A

…required to be declared by the assessee nor any additions could have been made by the learned assessing officer. 4.9 Further, Ld. A.R. placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Principal CIT Vs. Ms. Lata Jain, reported in 384 ITR 543. The Hon’ble Court has approved the view taken by the Tribunal that there had to be incriminating material recovered during the course of search qua the assessee in each of the years for the purposes of framing an assessment under section 153 A of the Act. 4.10 It was submitted that the order of assessment passed under section 143[3] r.w.s. 153…

Wilfred D'Souza, Mangaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangaluru

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 323/BANG/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, D.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 246A

…required to be declared by the assessee nor any additions could have been made by the learned assessing officer. 4.9 Further, Ld. A.R. placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Principal CIT Vs. Ms. Lata Jain, reported in 384 ITR 543. The Hon’ble Court has approved the view taken by the Tribunal that there had to be incriminating material recovered during the course of search qua the assessee in each of the years for the purposes of framing an assessment under section 153 A of the Act. 4.10 It was submitted that the order of assessment passed under section 143[3] r.w.s. 153…

Dy. C.I.T. Central Cir.-2(2), Nagpur vs. Smt. Anju A. Saraf, Nagpur

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 512/NAG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

…on can be made. 3.3 No incriminating evidence was found during the course of search and hence the AD had no jurisdiction to assess u/s 153A 37 Smt. AanjuSaraf and hence the order passed is bad in law. The Hon'ble Delhi HC in Pr. CIT v. Lata .lain reported in 384 ITR 543 & Pr.CIT V. Meeta Gutgutia Prop. Ferns N Petals-395 ITR 526 held that in absence of any incriminating material found as a result of search, assumption of jurisdiction was also not in accordance with law. The SLP- 18121/2018 filed by the department in the case of Smt Meeta Gutgutia has been dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court. Further, it is a well…

Dy. C.I.T. Central Cir.-2(2), Nagpur vs. Smt. Anju A. Saraf, Nagpur

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 511/NAG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

…on can be made. 3.3 No incriminating evidence was found during the course of search and hence the AD had no jurisdiction to assess u/s 153A 37 Smt. AanjuSaraf and hence the order passed is bad in law. The Hon'ble Delhi HC in Pr. CIT v. Lata .lain reported in 384 ITR 543 & Pr.CIT V. Meeta Gutgutia Prop. Ferns N Petals-395 ITR 526 held that in absence of any incriminating material found as a result of search, assumption of jurisdiction was also not in accordance with law. The SLP- 18121/2018 filed by the department in the case of Smt Meeta Gutgutia has been dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court. Further, it is a well…

Smt. Anju Saraf, Nagpur vs. A, C.I.T Cent Cir. 2(2), Nagpur

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 499/NAG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

…on can be made. 3.3 No incriminating evidence was found during the course of search and hence the AD had no jurisdiction to assess u/s 153A 37 Smt. AanjuSaraf and hence the order passed is bad in law. The Hon'ble Delhi HC in Pr. CIT v. Lata .lain reported in 384 ITR 543 & Pr.CIT V. Meeta Gutgutia Prop. Ferns N Petals-395 ITR 526 held that in absence of any incriminating material found as a result of search, assumption of jurisdiction was also not in accordance with law. The SLP- 18121/2018 filed by the department in the case of Smt Meeta Gutgutia has been dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court. Further, it is a well…

Smt. Anju Saraf, Nagpur vs. A, C.I.T Cent Cir. 2(2), Nagpur

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 498/NAG/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

…on can be made. 3.3 No incriminating evidence was found during the course of search and hence the AD had no jurisdiction to assess u/s 153A 37 Smt. AanjuSaraf and hence the order passed is bad in law. The Hon'ble Delhi HC in Pr. CIT v. Lata .lain reported in 384 ITR 543 & Pr.CIT V. Meeta Gutgutia Prop. Ferns N Petals-395 ITR 526 held that in absence of any incriminating material found as a result of search, assumption of jurisdiction was also not in accordance with law. The SLP- 18121/2018 filed by the department in the case of Smt Meeta Gutgutia has been dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court. Further, it is a well…

Dy. C.I.T. Central Cir.-2(2), Nagpur vs. Smt. Anju Saraf, Nagpur

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 438/NAG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

…on can be made. 3.3 No incriminating evidence was found during the course of search and hence the AD had no jurisdiction to assess u/s 153A 37 Smt. AanjuSaraf and hence the order passed is bad in law. The Hon'ble Delhi HC in Pr. CIT v. Lata .lain reported in 384 ITR 543 & Pr.CIT V. Meeta Gutgutia Prop. Ferns N Petals-395 ITR 526 held that in absence of any incriminating material found as a result of search, assumption of jurisdiction was also not in accordance with law. The SLP- 18121/2018 filed by the department in the case of Smt Meeta Gutgutia has been dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court. Further, it is a well…

Dy. C.I.T. Central Cir.-2(2), Nagpur vs. Smt. Anju Saraf, Nagpur

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 436/NAG/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

…on can be made. 3.3 No incriminating evidence was found during the course of search and hence the AD had no jurisdiction to assess u/s 153A 37 Smt. AanjuSaraf and hence the order passed is bad in law. The Hon'ble Delhi HC in Pr. CIT v. Lata .lain reported in 384 ITR 543 & Pr.CIT V. Meeta Gutgutia Prop. Ferns N Petals-395 ITR 526 held that in absence of any incriminating material found as a result of search, assumption of jurisdiction was also not in accordance with law. The SLP- 18121/2018 filed by the department in the case of Smt Meeta Gutgutia has been dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court. Further, it is a well…

M/S New Viraj Housing Agency, Nagpur vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Nagpur

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the three years is allowed

ITA 183/NAG/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Banthia CAFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe (CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 133A(3)(ia)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153C

…g any incriminating evidence arises and no incriminating evidence seized from assessee has been brought on record. Hence the AO had no jurisdiction to assess u/s 153A and the order passed is bad in law. The Hon’ble Delhi HC in Pr. CIT v. Lata Jain reported in 384 ITR 543 &Pr.CIT V. Meeta Gutgutia Prop. Ferns N Petals-395 ITR 526held that in absence of any incriminating material found as a result of search, assumption of jurisdiction was also not in accordance with law. The SLP- 18121/2018 filed by the department in the case of Smt Meeta Gutgutia has been dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court. j) It is further submit…

M/S Shrigopal Rameshkumar Sales Pvt. Ltd, Nagpur vs. Assistant Comissioner Central Circle 1(3), Nagpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 163/NAG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur01 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 163/Nag/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Shrigopal Ramesh Kumar Sales Pvt. Ltd. 1St Floor, Sarvodaya Cloth Market, Gandhibagh, Nagpur. Pan : Aabcs9226J .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur. ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Vijay Chandak, Ca Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Headoo, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Chandak, CAFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Headoo, CIT DR
Section 132(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

…allowances. Our aforesaid view is also supported by the following judicial pronouncements: (i). Principal CIT Vs. Vikas Gutgutia (2017) 396 ITR 691 (Del.) (ii). Principal CIT Vs. Devangi (2017) 394 ITR 184 (Guj.) (iii). Principal CIT Vs. Ms. Lata Jain (2016) 384 ITR 543 (iv). Abhishek Lodha, Mumbai Vs. Assessee Mumbai ‘G’ Bench (v). Mala Builders (P) Ltd. Vs. Asst. CIT (2016) 51 ITR (Trib) 272 (Chd) (vi). Bishwanath Garodia Vs. Dy CIT (2016) Taxmann.com 81 (Kol-Trib) (vii). Jailokenath Oil Extractions (P) Ltd. Vs. Dy CIT (2017) 83 taxmann.com 369/166 ITO 161 (Kol) (viii). Asst CIT Vs. Layer Exports (P) Ltd. (20…

ACIT Centtral -2 Indore, Indore vs. M/S Kalyan Toll Infrastructure Ltd, Indore

Accordingly ground no. 2 of the cross objection stands allowed

ITA 13/IND/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore11 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year:2013-14 Dcit Central-2, M/S Kalyan Toll Infrastructure Indore Ltd., Indore बनाम/ (Appellant) (Respondent ) Vs. P.A. No.Aacck1840M

Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 68

…dismissed the special leave petition filed by the Department against this judgment. vi) Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Principal CIT Vs. Soumya Constructions (2016) 387 ITR 529, vii) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Lata Jain (2016) 384 ITR 543 (Del) viii) Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT, Kolkata v. Veerprabhu Marketing Ltd. (ITA no. 661/2008) ix) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia, ITA No. 306/2017. The SLP preferred by the department against aforesaid decision of Delhi High Court in case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Central -2,…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Ind- Sing Developers (P) Ltd., Bangalore

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

ITA 202/BANG/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Mar 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Jm

For Appellant: S/Sri. G.S.Prashanth, CA and Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, JCIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 40

…(i) CIT v. IBC Knowledge Park (P) Ltd. reported in 385 ITR 346 (Karnataka) (ii) Pr.CIT v. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.322/2018 (judgment dated 29.09.2021) (iii) CIT v. Kabur Chawla reported in 380 ITR 537 (Delhi) (iv) PCIT v. Ms.Lata Jain 384 ITR 543 (Delhi) (v) PCIT v. Devangi Alias Rupa 394 ITR 184 (Guj.) M/s.Ind Sing Developers Private Limited (vi) CIT v. Mechmen 380 ITR 591 (MP) (vii) CIT v. RRJ SEcuriites 380 ITR 612 (Delhi) (viii) CIT v. Ramesh Kumar 338 ITR 126 (P&H) (ix) CIT v. Lata J.Chandrashekar (HUF) 338 ITR 61 (Mad.) 5.1 The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the assessee sub…

M/S Ind Sing Developers Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 107/BANG/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Mar 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Jm

For Appellant: S/Sri. G.S.Prashanth, CA and Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, JCIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 40

…(i) CIT v. IBC Knowledge Park (P) Ltd. reported in 385 ITR 346 (Karnataka) (ii) Pr.CIT v. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.322/2018 (judgment dated 29.09.2021) (iii) CIT v. Kabur Chawla reported in 380 ITR 537 (Delhi) (iv) PCIT v. Ms.Lata Jain 384 ITR 543 (Delhi) (v) PCIT v. Devangi Alias Rupa 394 ITR 184 (Guj.) M/s.Ind Sing Developers Private Limited (vi) CIT v. Mechmen 380 ITR 591 (MP) (vii) CIT v. RRJ SEcuriites 380 ITR 612 (Delhi) (viii) CIT v. Ramesh Kumar 338 ITR 126 (P&H) (ix) CIT v. Lata J.Chandrashekar (HUF) 338 ITR 61 (Mad.) 5.1 The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the assessee sub…

ACIT, Central Circle-15, New Delhi vs. Luxman Builders Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the CO filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 817/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Dec 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2010-11 Acit, Vs Lumax Builders Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-15, 25, Bazar Lane, New Delhi. Bengali Market, New Delhi. Pan: Aaacl2184R Co No.93/Del/2018 (Ita No.817/Del/2018) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Lumax Builders Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit, 25, Bazar Lane, Central Circle-15, Bengali Market, New Delhi New Delhi. Pan: Aaacl2184R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate & Shri Lalit Mohan, Advocate Revenue By : Ms Paramita M. Biswas, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.09.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.12.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 3Rd November, 2017 Of The Cit(A)-26, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2010- 11. Co No.93/Del/2018 2. The Assessee Has Filed The Co Against The Appeal Filed By The Revenue. For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Paramita M. Biswas, CIT, DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153A

…ting materials are gathered in the course of search or during the proceedings u/s 153A which are contrary to and/or nor disclosed during the regular assessment proceedings. 44. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court again in the case of Pr.CIT vs. Lata Jain reported in 384 ITR 543 has held that in absence of any incriminating material found as a result of search, assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153A was not in accordance with law. The various other decisions relied on by the ld. counsel for the assessee also supports his case. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Sinhgad Technical Education Society reported in 3…

M/S Swadesh Devlopers and Builders, Bhopal vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2, Bhopal

ITA 705/IND/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 44ASection 80I

…ew our attention to the following decisions: a. CIT vs. Kabul Chawla 281 CTR 85 (Delhi) b. PCIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia 395 ITR 296 (Delhi) c. PCIT vs. Soumya Construction 387 ITR 529 (Guj.) d. CIT vs. Deepak Agrawal 251 Taxmann Pg.22 (Bom.) e. PCIT vs. Lata Jain 384 ITR 543 (Del.) f. Sainath Colonizer vs. ACIT (ITANo.289 to 291/Ind/2017 dated 28.02.2019. 9. Further Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the Hon’ble Indore Tribunal in the case of Shri Omprakash Gupta vs. ACIT in IT(SS) No.277 to 281 A.Y. 2005-06 to 2012-13 held that in Swadesh Developers absence of any incriminating documents found and seized…

Shrimati Jatinder Kaur (Alias Amrita), Jalandhar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2, Jalandhar

In the result all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 731/ASR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Jul 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 153ASection 56(1)(vii)Section 68

…sessment proceedings have not been abated at the time of search, the assessing officer had no jurisdiction to make addition u/s 153A. Copy of the decision is enclosed at page no. 7 to 9 [please see reverse of page no. 9]. (c) Pr. CIT vs. Lata Jain reported at 384 ITR 543 [Delhi High Court]: In the appeal filed by the revenue it was held that in the absence of incriminating material found during search, assessment could not be framed u/s 153A. Copy of the decision is enclosed at page no. 10 [please see page no. 10]. (d) Pr. CIT vs. Salasar Stock Broking Ltd [Calcutta High Court]: It was held that the assessing off…

Shrimati Jatinder Kaur ( Alias Amrita), Jalandhar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2, Jalandhar

In the result all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 730/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 153ASection 56(1)(vii)Section 68

…sessment proceedings have not been abated at the time of search, the assessing officer had no jurisdiction to make addition u/s 153A. Copy of the decision is enclosed at page no. 7 to 9 [please see reverse of page no. 9]. (c) Pr. CIT vs. Lata Jain reported at 384 ITR 543 [Delhi High Court]: In the appeal filed by the revenue it was held that in the absence of incriminating material found during search, assessment could not be framed u/s 153A. Copy of the decision is enclosed at page no. 10 [please see page no. 10]. (d) Pr. CIT vs. Salasar Stock Broking Ltd [Calcutta High Court]: It was held that the assessing off…

Shrimati Jatinder Kaur(Alias Amrita), Jalandhar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2, Jalandhar

In the result all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 728/ASR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 153ASection 56(1)(vii)Section 68

…sessment proceedings have not been abated at the time of search, the assessing officer had no jurisdiction to make addition u/s 153A. Copy of the decision is enclosed at page no. 7 to 9 [please see reverse of page no. 9]. (c) Pr. CIT vs. Lata Jain reported at 384 ITR 543 [Delhi High Court]: In the appeal filed by the revenue it was held that in the absence of incriminating material found during search, assessment could not be framed u/s 153A. Copy of the decision is enclosed at page no. 10 [please see page no. 10]. (d) Pr. CIT vs. Salasar Stock Broking Ltd [Calcutta High Court]: It was held that the assessing off…

Ashwani Talwar, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3156/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jun 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Kul Bharat

Section 153ASection 69

…uch no addition could have been made. He further submitted that the assessment has been framed contrary to the ratio laid down by the judgements of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573 [Del.] and Pr. CIT vs Lata Jain [2016] 384 ITR 543 [Del.]. He submitted that in the light of aforesaid judgements of Hon’ble Delhi High Court, the assessment so framed deserves to be quashed. 12. On the contrary, Ld. CIT DR opposed these submissions and supported the orders of the authorities below. 13. In rejoinder, Ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that the assessment in question is…

Ashwani Talwar, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3155/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jun 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Kul Bharat

Section 153ASection 69

…uch no addition could have been made. He further submitted that the assessment has been framed contrary to the ratio laid down by the judgements of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573 [Del.] and Pr. CIT vs Lata Jain [2016] 384 ITR 543 [Del.]. He submitted that in the light of aforesaid judgements of Hon’ble Delhi High Court, the assessment so framed deserves to be quashed. 12. On the contrary, Ld. CIT DR opposed these submissions and supported the orders of the authorities below. 13. In rejoinder, Ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that the assessment in question is…