Raj Kumar Dugar (HUF) v. ITO

12 DTR 16High Court#12062 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2022.

Judgments citing Raj Kumar Dugar (HUF) v. ITO

Nadeem Hasan, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 46(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 445/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.445/Del/2020 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 बनाम Nadeem Hasan Ito, 159, Meena Bazar, Vs. Ward 46(4) Jama Masjid, Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No. Accph8788G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 139(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69Section 69A

…iance on the following decisions in support of the above contention: 1. PCIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. 395 ITR 677 (Del.); 2. Amrik Singh vs. ITO 159 ITD 329 (Asr.); 3. Bahadur Singh Sizwati vs. ITO 68 SOT 197 (Del.); 4. Raj Kumar Duggar (HUF) vs. ITO 12 DTR 16 (Del.). 7. The Ld. Counsel further submits that the Ld. PCIT who has accorded his approval u/s 151 of the Act acted in a mechanical manner without due application of mind. Ld. Counsel submits that the Ld. AO has acted in casual and mechanical manner without independently applying his mind on the AIR Information and the material available on recor…

Abdul Samad, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward- 1(5), Ghaziabad

In the result appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 7404/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainiita No. 7403/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Hameeda Begum, Vs Income Tax Officer, W/O Shri Bundhu Khan, Ward-1(3), A-393-394, Sector-11, New Vijay Ghaziabad-201001 Nagar, Ghaziabad-201009 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ahepb8139L Ita No. 7404/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Abdul Samad, Vs Income Tax Officer, S/O Shri Aas Mohammad, Ward-1(5), A-262, Nahal-2, Ghaziabad-201002 Ghaziabad-201302 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Issps5169A Assessee By : Sh. Anup Sharma, Adv. & Sh. Sanjay Prashar, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S. L. Anuragi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.08.2019 Order Both The Appeals By Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Orders Of Ld. Cit(A), Ghaziabad Dated 28.09.2018 For Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. I Have Heard Ld. Representatives Of Both The Parties & Perused The Materials Available On Record. Both The Parties Mainly Argued In The Case Of Assessee Abdul Samad & Have Stated That Issue Is Same In Both The Appeals, Therefore, Order In This Case Could Not Followed In The Case Of Assessee Smt. Hameeda Begum.

For Appellant: Sh. Anup Sharma, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. S. L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148

…ening of assessment has been held as bad and not in accordance with the law, therefore, I deem it not necessary to deal with the other grounds of appeal as they have become infructuous.” 3) order of ITA Delhi Bench in the case of Raj Kumar Dugar (HUF) vs. ITO 12 DTR 16 in which it was held as under :- “Reason recorded by the AO that assessee had not filed IT return for asstt. year 1998-99 being based on incorrect facts because assessee ITA Nos. 7403 & 7404/Del/2018 7 Hameeda Begum & Abdul Samad had in fact filed IT return for the said year, issuance of notice under section 148 and consequent assessment could n…

Hameeda Begum, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward- 1(3), Ghaziabad

In the result appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 7403/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainiita No. 7403/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Hameeda Begum, Vs Income Tax Officer, W/O Shri Bundhu Khan, Ward-1(3), A-393-394, Sector-11, New Vijay Ghaziabad-201001 Nagar, Ghaziabad-201009 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ahepb8139L Ita No. 7404/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Abdul Samad, Vs Income Tax Officer, S/O Shri Aas Mohammad, Ward-1(5), A-262, Nahal-2, Ghaziabad-201002 Ghaziabad-201302 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Issps5169A Assessee By : Sh. Anup Sharma, Adv. & Sh. Sanjay Prashar, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S. L. Anuragi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.08.2019 Order Both The Appeals By Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Orders Of Ld. Cit(A), Ghaziabad Dated 28.09.2018 For Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. I Have Heard Ld. Representatives Of Both The Parties & Perused The Materials Available On Record. Both The Parties Mainly Argued In The Case Of Assessee Abdul Samad & Have Stated That Issue Is Same In Both The Appeals, Therefore, Order In This Case Could Not Followed In The Case Of Assessee Smt. Hameeda Begum.

For Appellant: Sh. Anup Sharma, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. S. L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148

…ening of assessment has been held as bad and not in accordance with the law, therefore, I deem it not necessary to deal with the other grounds of appeal as they have become infructuous.” 3) order of ITA Delhi Bench in the case of Raj Kumar Dugar (HUF) vs. ITO 12 DTR 16 in which it was held as under :- “Reason recorded by the AO that assessee had not filed IT return for asstt. year 1998-99 being based on incorrect facts because assessee ITA Nos. 7403 & 7404/Del/2018 7 Hameeda Begum & Abdul Samad had in fact filed IT return for the said year, issuance of notice under section 148 and consequent assessment could n…

Inder Jeet, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 2(5), Gurgaon

In the result, ITA.No.1384/Del

ITA 2740/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Dec 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…ng of assessment has been held as bad aqd not. in accordance with the law, therefore, I deem it not necessary to deal with the other grounds of appeal as they have become infructuous. ” 3) Order of ITA Delhi Bench in the case of Raj Kumar Dugar (HUF) vs. ITO 12 DTR 16 in which it was held as under :- “Reason recorded by the AO that assessee had not filed IT return for asstt. year 1998-99 being based on incorrect 30 ITA.No.2740, 1384 & 2647/Del./2018 Shri Inder Jeet, Delhi, And Shri Ashok Kumar, Ghaziabad. facts because assessee had in fact filed IT return for the said year, issuance of notice under section 148…

Ashok Kumar, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Ghaziabad

In the result, ITA.No.1384/Del

ITA 2647/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Dec 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…ng of assessment has been held as bad aqd not. in accordance with the law, therefore, I deem it not necessary to deal with the other grounds of appeal as they have become infructuous. ” 3) Order of ITA Delhi Bench in the case of Raj Kumar Dugar (HUF) vs. ITO 12 DTR 16 in which it was held as under :- “Reason recorded by the AO that assessee had not filed IT return for asstt. year 1998-99 being based on incorrect 30 ITA.No.2740, 1384 & 2647/Del./2018 Shri Inder Jeet, Delhi, And Shri Ashok Kumar, Ghaziabad. facts because assessee had in fact filed IT return for the said year, issuance of notice under section 148…

Ashok Kuamr, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward- 1(1), Ghaziabad

In the result, ITA.No.1384/Del

ITA 1384/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Dec 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…ng of assessment has been held as bad aqd not. in accordance with the law, therefore, I deem it not necessary to deal with the other grounds of appeal as they have become infructuous. ” 3) Order of ITA Delhi Bench in the case of Raj Kumar Dugar (HUF) vs. ITO 12 DTR 16 in which it was held as under :- “Reason recorded by the AO that assessee had not filed IT return for asstt. year 1998-99 being based on incorrect 30 ITA.No.2740, 1384 & 2647/Del./2018 Shri Inder Jeet, Delhi, And Shri Ashok Kumar, Ghaziabad. facts because assessee had in fact filed IT return for the said year, issuance of notice under section 148…

Sh. Tajendra Kumar Ghai, New Delhi vs. ITO- 1(5), Rudrapur

In the result appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 971/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jun 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh GuptaFor Respondent: Ms. Bedobani, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 44A

…ing of assessment has been held as bad and not in accordance with the law, therefore, I deem it not necessary to deal with the other grounds of appeal as they have become infructuous.” 3) order of ITA Delhi Bench in the case of Raj Kumar Dugar (HUF) vs. ITO 12 DTR 16 in which it was held as under :- “Reason recorded by the AO that assessee had not filed IT return for asstt. year 1998-99 being based on incorrect facts because assessee had in fact filed IT return for the said year, issuance of notice under section 148 and consequent assessment could not be sustained; further, assessment could not be reopened in…

Sh. Tajendra Kumar Ghai, New Delhi vs. ITO- 1(5), Rudrapur

In the result appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 970/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jun 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh GuptaFor Respondent: Ms. Bedobani, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 44A

…ing of assessment has been held as bad and not in accordance with the law, therefore, I deem it not necessary to deal with the other grounds of appeal as they have become infructuous.” 3) order of ITA Delhi Bench in the case of Raj Kumar Dugar (HUF) vs. ITO 12 DTR 16 in which it was held as under :- “Reason recorded by the AO that assessee had not filed IT return for asstt. year 1998-99 being based on incorrect facts because assessee had in fact filed IT return for the said year, issuance of notice under section 148 and consequent assessment could not be sustained; further, assessment could not be reopened in…

Raj Kumar Dugar (HUF) v. ITO (12 DTR 16) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax