How many judgments cite Sagar Enterprises v. ACIT?

45 judgments on BharatTax cite Sagar Enterprises v. ACIT (257 ITR 335), spanning 2017 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Sagar Enterprises v. ACIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 147, Section 148, Section 151, Section 142(1), Section 143(3), Section 144.

Sagar Enterprises v. ACIT

257 ITR 335High Court2002#2587 most cited

What is Sagar Enterprises v. ACIT authority for?

Reassessment proceedings under Section 147/148 are invalid if the Assessing Officer's recorded reasons for believing income has escaped assessment are based on factually incorrect premises or do not exist on record, as such reasons cannot confer jurisdiction.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sagar Enterprises v. ACIT · Section 147 · Section 148 · reopening of assessment · factually incorrect reasons · invalid jurisdiction · reasons recorded dehors the fact · income escaping assessment · application of mind · no independent enquiry · reasons not on record

Also reported as

62 Taxmann.com 66

Sections most often in play

Section 147 Section 148 Section 151 Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144 Section 148A Section 144B

Issues it is cited on

sanctioning authority within four years beyond four years material facts necessary for assessment kelvinator accumulated profits section 2(22)change of opinion escapement of income deemed dividend section 2(22)(e)income escaping assessment

Judgments citing Sagar Enterprises v. ACIT

Seema Singh, New Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 32(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2777/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr.B.R.R.Kumar[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Seema Singh, Vs Ito, E-65, Chatterpur Extension, Near Ward-32(3), Suman Chowk, New Delhi-110074. New Delhi. Pan-Cazps4606K Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Pulkit Verma, Adv. Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 23.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 30.04.2024 Order Per Kul Bharat, Jm : The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld.Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“Nfac”), Delhi Dated 29.03.2023 For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…arious Tribunals: - i. Artech Infosystems reported in 206 Taxman 432 (Del.) ii. CIT V. Narain Das Taneja order dated 18.12.2014 in ITA No. 769/2014. iii. Baba Kartar Singh Dukki Educational Trust V. ITO [2015] 63 Taxmann.com 112. iv. Mitul Gems V. ACIT [2015] 62 Taxmann.com 66. v. CIT V. Atlas Cycle Industries 180 ITR 319. (P&H). Further, the coordinate bench of this Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of Shark Packaging (P.) Ltd. V. ITO in ITA No. 8309/Del/2019 categorically held that reassessment initiated on the basis of incorrect facts depicts non- application of mind on the part of AO and liable to be quashed. The…

ITO, Ward-35(7), New Delhi vs. Sumitra Devi, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed and the Cross Objection of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 906/DEL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2010-11 & Co. No. 173/Del/2022 Asstt. Year 2010-11 Ito, Ward-35(7), Vs. Smt. Sumitra Devi, New Delhi. Plot No. 132/133, First Floor, Pocket-12, Sector-24, Rohini, Delhi-110 085. Pan Craps6145R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sachin Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 45(1)Section 45(5)(b)

…n to believe that income escaped assessment. The Ld. AR placed reliance on the decisions of Jaipur Bench of the Tribunal in Narain Dutta Sharma vs. ITO (2018) 91 taxmann.com 463 (Jaipur-Trib) and Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in Sagar Enterprises vs. ACIT (2002) 257 ITR 335(Guj) in support of his submissions. Following the decisions (supra) and applying their ratio to the facts of the assessee’s case we sustain CO No. 2 of the assessee which is sufficient to hold that the notice under section 148 issued to the assessee is bad in law and deserves to be quashed. We do so. 10. CO No. 3 is about issue of notice under s…

Om Sai Stone Limited, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(1)(4), Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 667/SRT/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Dec 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

…ke in the reasons recorded for reopening. On factual incorrect basis, notice under Section 148 of the Act cannot be sustained. To support such view, the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in Sagar Enterprises Vs ACIT (2202) 257 ITR 335 (Guj). 7. On other issue of share capital, the assessee also denied such reasoning regarding bogus entry. The assessee submitted that the share issued to Aditi Exports and Vrajendra Thakkar are incorrect. The assessee also demanded satisfactory note issued by Pr.CIT. The ld. AR of the assessee further submits that the Assessing Officer without di…

Om Sai Stone Limited, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 2(1)(4), Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 666/SRT/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

Sruthi Riedl, Hyderabad vs. ITO, International Taxation-2, Hyderabad

ITA 126/HYD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 Sruthi Riedl, Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad Vs. (International [Pan No. Aggpp6953R] Taxation)-2, Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा /Assessee By: Shri H. Srinivasulu, Ar /Revenue By: Ms. T. Vijaya Lakshmi, Cit-Dr राजस्‍वजस्‍व द्वारा सुनवाई ई की तारीखीख/Date Of Hearing: 28/08/2023 घोषणा की तारीखीख/Pronouncement On: 08/11/2023

For Appellant: Shri H. Srinivasulu, ARFor Respondent: Ms. T. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 2(47)

…The assessment has to be reopened on correct facts. In the present case reasons recorded contained factual errors. In this context, the appellant relies on the following decisions. 1) Ankita A.choksey Vs ITO - 411 ITR 207 (Born). 2) Sagar enterprises Vs ACIT 257 ITR 335 (Guj). 3) Shodiman Investments (P) Ltd —422 ITR 337(Born). 10.The assessee objected to the reopening of the assessment on 24.11.2021 and 11.02.2022 (Pages 7 to 16 of PB-1). Ld A.O did not pass a speaking order separately disposing of the objections and there by violated the ratio laid down by the apex court in GKN Drivershaft India Ltd - 259 ITR…

Kunwar Ayub Ali, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward- 1(3), Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3137/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr.DR

Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)

…Section 148 for reopening the assessment was quashed for assumption of jurisdiction on factually incorrect premise. In the similar fact situation, the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court also quashed the re-assessment proceedings in Sagar Enterprises vs. ACIT, (2001) 257 ITR 335 (Guj.) where reasons were recorded dehors the fact, i.e., return not filed when the return was actually filed. Similarly, Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Dr. Ajit Gupta vs. ACIT, 383 ITR 361 (Del) has observed that reason for reopening of assessment based on mistaken factual premise is unsustainable in law. 11. In the light of the aforesaid judgment…

Sri.John Mathew N, Alappuzha vs. The ITO, WD-2, Alappuzha

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 81/COCH/2018[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Feb 2023AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Sandeep Gosainshri John Mathew N. The Income Tax Officer Neroth House Ward - 2, Alleppey Vs. No. 1, Jubilee Road Alappuzha [Pan: Acupm8885D] Appellant Respondent Appellant By: Shri Anil D. Nair & Shri P.K. Biju, Advocates Respondent By: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 03.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.02.2023 O R D E R Per Bench This Appeal By The Assessee Challenges The Validity Of The Reassessment Under Section 147 Read With Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) Dated 20.11.2007 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2001-02, Since Upheld In First Appeal Vide Order Dated 24.01.2018 By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Kottayam (‘Cit(A)’ For Short). 2.1 At The Outset, Shri Anil D. Nair, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee-Appellant, Would Submit That The Basis Of The Assessee’S Challenge Is Two-Fold: (A) Non-Supply Of The Reasons Recorded; & (B) True & Full Disclosure Of All Material Facts Relating To The Income Escaping Assessment By The Assessee Per His Return Of Income.

For Appellant: Shri Anil D. Nair &For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(2)Section 230ASection 234B

…e, explaining that being the reason for his limiting his challenge to the two areas afore-stated (see para 2.1). The appeal in fact involves, he would continue, another legal issue in view of the decisions in the case of Sagar Enterprises vs. Asst. CIT [2002] 257 ITR 335 (Guj) and DHFL Venture Capital Fund vs. ITO [2013] 358 ITR 471 (Bom). In both these decisions it stands clarified that reassessment under the Act cannot be contingent on the happening of a future event, or a hypothesis. It only relates to the income that has already escaped assessment, i.e., an event that has already taken place, which cannot thu…

Rajesh Gulati, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-4(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5170/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Vipin Jain CAFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151(1)

…dentically placed issue has been decided in favour of the assessee in Sunrise Education Trust vs. ITO (E) (Special Civil) Application No.16726 of 2017 judgment dated 19th February, 2018; Mumtaz Haji Mohmad Memon vs. ITO, 408 ITR 268 (Guj.); Sagar Enterprises, 257 ITR 335 (Guj.); Khem Chand Sankhla vs. Union of India, 181 CTR 380 (Raj.). Clearly, the assumption of jurisdiction on the basis of non existent premise is without authority of law and thus cannot be sustained. The re-assessment notice issued on the basis of wrong assumption of jurisdiction is a complete non-starter and I.T.A. No.5170/Del/2019 5 thus sta…

Ritika Gupta, Kanpur vs. ITO1(2)(3), Kanpur

ITA 48/LKW/2021[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow17 Aug 2022AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri T.S. Kapoorassessment Year 2012-13

Section 139Section 148

…t reopening initiated on the basis of wrong facts is bad in law and reliance in this respect was placed on the following judgments: 1. Mumtaz Haji Mohammad Memon vs. ITO, Ward 6(1)(1), reported in 408 ITR 268 (Guj). 2. Sagar Enterprises vs. ACIT, reported in 257 ITR 335 (Guj.) 6. The ld. AR further placed his reliance on an order of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Shri Sunil Kumar Rastogi HUF vs. ITO, Writ Tax No. 658 of 2017 where vide order dated 02.12.2019 the Hon'ble Court has held in favour of the assessee under similar facts and circumstances. 6. The ld. DR, on the other hand, submitted that o…

Measage Bhai Industries Private Limited, Moga vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Moga

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 358/ASR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir SehgalFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 44A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 358/Asr/2019 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s Bhai Industries Pvt. Vs. Income Tax Officer Ltd., 7th Mile Stone, Moga Ward-1, Moga Ludhiana G.T. Road, Moga [PAN: AABCB 5965B] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal Respondent by: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 06.07.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 11.08.2022 ORDER Per Dr. M. L. Meena, A.M.: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 12.03.2019 passe…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Hyderabad vs. Coastal Projects Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the C.O. filed by the assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 497/HYD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri H. SrinivasuluFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 153ASection 69

…s that assumption of jurisdiction by the AO under proviso to 147 was on the basis of wrong facts. The Appellant relies on the following decisions in this context. [PB-Caselaws Vol.1- Pages 59 - 65] (i) Anita A.choksey- 411 ITR 207 (Bom) (ii) sagar Enterprises-257 ITR 335 (Guj) (iii) Mumtaz Haji Mohammed Memon- 408 ITR 268 (Guj) , PB - 59 - 65 (caselaws) (iv) Misra Preserves (P) Ltd -350 ITR 222 (All) (v) Fair Investment Ltd- 357 ITR 146 (Del) Further, the AO has not adverted to the dates of payment by Safeco Project (I)) Ltd. A portion of RS.7.65 Cr was received in FY 2009-10 and not the total amount. Thus, the r…

Bansal Rice Traders, Sangrur vs. ITO-Ward, Sangrur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 90/CHANDI/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh31 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 148

…a Rani V/s The Income Tax Officer ITA NO.582/CHD/2019 CHD-TRIB • Gaurav Joshi V/s The Income Tax Officer 55 CCH 83 JAL-TRIB • Commissioner of Income Tax V/s Atlas Cycle Industries 180 ITR 319 P&H-HC • Sagar Enterprises V/s Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 257 ITR 335 GUJ-HC • Prabha Goyal V/s The Income Tax Officer ITA NO.1139/CHD/2017 CHD-TRIB • Amrik Singh V/s Income Tax Officer 142 DTR 6 ASR-TRIB-SMC • Smt. Charanjit Kaur Vs ITO as reported in [2021] 88 ITR (Trib.) 41 • Sh. Jaspal Singh Vs ITO as reported in [2021] 88 ITR (Trib.) 407. • Sh. Satnam Singh in ITA No. 579/Asr/2019 for A.Y. 2013-14 vide order,…

Jsk Industries Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-8(1), Mumbai

ITA 5891/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singh

Section 147Section 68

…come has escaped assessment. The ld. AR contended that thus the reopening of assessment on incorrect factual matrix cannot be held to be valid. The ld. AR in defense of arguments placed reliance on the following decisions: a. Sagar Enterprises vs. ACIT (2002) 257 ITR 335 (Guj) b. Ashwin S. Mehta v. DCIT [ITA No. 421/Mum/2016] dated 28.06.2019. 6.5. With respect to the disallowance on account of deduction u/s 80-IB of the Act, the ld AR submitted that the issue was discussed at length in original assessment proceedings and was M/s. JSK Industries Pvt. Ltd. & ors disallowed in the assessment framed u/s 143(3) of th…

Sanjeev Chandrakant Deo, Mumbai vs. ITO 29 (3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 2280/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri M. Balaganesh ()

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 282Section 292BSection 4Section 68Section 69B

…for reopening the assessment is erroneous. Therefore, the assessment order passed in pursuance to such wrong initiation of proceeding would be invalid. In support of such contention, he relied upon the following decisions:- 1. Sagar Enterprises vs ACIT (2002) 257 ITR 335 (Guj) 2. Mumtaz Haji Mohmad Memon vs ITO (2018) 408 ITR 268 (Guj) 3. Baba Kartar Singh Dukki Educational Trust vs ITO (2016) 158 ITD 965 (Chandigarh Trib.) 7. Strongly relying upon the observations of the assessing officer and learned Commissioner (Appeals) the learned departmental representative submitted, the issues regarding valid service of…

Simar Kaur, Kurukshetra vs. ACIT, Circle, Kurukshetra

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 220/CHANDI/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 May 2021AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir SehgalFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna, Addl. CIT

Section 147Section 148Section 282

…ong reasons recorded as the amount alleged m reasons to be deposited hi bank and actual amount deposited were found to be different during the assessment proceedings. Monika Rani vs ITO in ITA No.582/Chd/2019 dated 28.02.2020 Sagar Enterprises vs. ACIT (2002) 257 ITR 335 (Gujarat High Court) Harjeet Singh Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi), order dated 12.11.2018, in ITA No. 2013/DEL/2015 KMV Collegiate Sr. Sec. School v. ITO (2017) 163 ITD 653(Asr.) (Trib.): From the above discussion, it is evident that both the reasons recorded by the AO for reopening the completed assessments of the assessee are based on factual errors, re…

Bhavesh Ravindra Gokal, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (It)-2(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 5477/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Sachin RomaniFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

…ssessment proceedings are invalid and consequently the re-assessment order passed u/s. 147 r.w.s 143(3) of the Act is invalid and is required to be quashed. In support of his contentions reliance was placed on the following decisions: - (i) Sagar Enterprises [257 ITR 335 (Guj)] (ii) Pal Gram Hindu Sarajanik Trust v. ITO [241 Taxman 84 (Guj)] (iii) Narain Dutt Sharma [91 taxmann.com 463 (Jp)] 13. Ld. DR on the other hand vehemently supported the orders of the Ld.CIT(A) in sustaining the re-opening of assessment. However, Ld. DR submits that the Ld.CIT(A) is not at all justified in deleting the addition on merits.…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (It)-2(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Bhavesh R Gokal, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 5443/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Sachin RomaniFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (It)-2(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Bhavesh R Gokal, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 5442/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Sachin RomaniFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

Ashwin S. Mehta, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 23, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 421/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice Shri P.P.Bhatt & Shri G.S. Pannu: (A.Y : 2010-2011) Ashwin S Mehta, Vs Dcit, Cent. Circle 23, 32, Madhuli Dr. A.B. Road, Now Dcit Cc 4(1), Worli, Mumbai. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Pan : Abapm2121M (Appellant) Mumbai. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah &For Respondent: Smt. Dr. P Daniel (DR)

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 234BSection 57

…income since last few years and the income tax department had to resort to section 148 to tax this escaped income. The Learned Authorized Representative relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Sagar Enterprises vs. ACIT (2002) 257 ITR 335 (Guj) wherein, it was held that a notice issued under section 148 on a factually incorrect basis that the assessee had not filed its return could not be sustained even on the basis of alternative reason since it could not be said with certainty as to which factor weighed with the concerned officer when he issued the impugned notice and when the a…

K.P. International, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed”

ITA 2246/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Diva Singhassessment Year: 2007-08 K.P. International Ito F-47, Desh Bandhu Gupta Vs. Ward-51(4) Market, Karol Bagh, New New Delhi Delhi

Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2007-08 K.P. International ITO F-47, Desh Bandhu Gupta Vs. Ward-51(4) Market, Karol Bagh, New New Delhi Delhi PAN : AADFK9317K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Jaspal Singh Sethu, Advocate Respondent by Sh. T. Vasanthan, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing 24-08-2017 Date of pronouncement 050050 20.10.20170500 O R D E R PER DIVA SINGH, J.M. : The present appeal has been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order dated 2.2.2017 of CIT(A)-17, New Delhi pertaining to 2007-08 a…