Sarthak Securities Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO

Esprit Finco Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

Bench: Smt Diva Singh

…l & Finance Pvt. Ltd. [ITA No.278/Del2010 dated 10.05.2016]; Genius Electricals & Electronics Pvt.Ltd. vs ITO [ITA No.3623/Del/2014 dated 22.04.2016]; CIT vs SFIL Stockbroking Co. [2010] 325 ITR 285 (Del.); Sarthak Securities Company PVt.Ltd. vs ITO [2009] 329 ITR 110; and Signature Hotels (P.) Ltd. vs ITO [2011] 338 ITR 51 (Del.), it was submitted that the assessment deserves to be quashed. 5. On merits, it was again submitted that the assessee has brought on record that the evidences from each of the shareholders which included confirmations, copy of ITR, balance sheet, assessment order etc. has been made…

M/S. Khatri Projects Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, Delhi

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

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita No. 4353/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 M/S Khatri Projects Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income Tax Officer, A-2/106, Sector-16, Rohini, Ward-5(2), Delhi-110085 Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacck7376A Assessee By : Sh. Vivek Bansal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 19.10.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.12.2016 Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 30.05.2016 Of Ld. Cit(A)-36, New Delhi.

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC-II’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, Accountant Member ITA No. 4353/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 M/s Khatri Projects Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income Tax Officer, A-2/106, Sector-16, Rohini, Ward-5(2), Delhi-110085 Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AACCK7376A Assessee by : Sh. Vivek Bansal, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 19.10.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 16.12.2016 ORDER This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 30.05.2016 of ld. CIT(A)-36, New Delhi. 2. The following grounds have been raised in this appeal:…

M/S. Palos Verdes Estate Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita No. 4235/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 M/S Palos Verdes Estate Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, 48, Friends Colony, Central Circle-23, New Delhi-110065 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacp7081P Assessee By : Sh. Sashi Tulsiyan, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. F. R. Meena, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 19.09.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.12.2016 Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 11.02.2015 Of Ld. Cit(A)-30, New Delhi. 2. Following Grounds Have Been Raised In This Appeal: “1. That The Cit (Appeals) Erred On Facts & In Law In Upholding The Impugned Assessment Order Passed Under Sections 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Which Is Without Jurisdiction, Illegal & Bad In Law Since The Prerequisite Conditions For Initiating Proceedings Under Section 147 Of The Act Were Not Fulfilled In The Present Case. 2. That The Cit (Appeals) Erred On Facts & In Law In Upholding The Alleged Fair Rental Value At Rs.1 1,77,528/- & Thereby Making An Addition Of Rs.8,24,270/-Under The Head Income From House Property.” 2 Palos Verdes Estate Pvt. Ltd. 3. Vide Ground No. 1, The Grievance Of The Assessee Relates To The Validity Of The Jurisdiction For Reopening The Assessment U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Act).

…otice U/s 148 is not valid in law and needs to be quashed. We rely on following judgements; - MOH1NDER SINGH MALIK 267 ITR 716 (P&H). MADHUKAR KHOSLA VS. ACIT 367 ITR 165 (DEL) CIT VS. SMT. PRAMJ1T KAUR 205 TAXATION515 (P & H.) SARTHAK SECURITIES CO. (P) LTD. 329 ITR 110 (DEL) 5 Palos Verdes Estate Pvt. Ltd. CIT VS. (1) ATUL JAIN (2) SMT. VINITA JAIN 299 ITR 383 (DEL) SECOND, that as per para 2 of the reasons supplied to us is that, "The brief facts are that search and seizure action was carried out at various premises of Today group and its associate concerns and persons on 26.11.2009 and was finally concluded…

M/S. Standard Watch Co. (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

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

…incipal CIT vs. G & G Pharma India Ltd. – ii) CIT vs. Khamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd. & Ors. – 248 CTR (Del.) 33; iii) CIT vs. Atul Jain & Ors. – 299 ITR 383 (Del.); iv) CIT vs. SFIL Stock Brooking Ltd.- 233 CTR (Del. 69; v ) Sarthak Securities Co. (P) Ltd.- 329 ITR 110 (Del.); vi) CIT vs. Smt. Pramjit Kaur – 311 ITR 38 ( P&H); 8. The Learned AR submitted further that initiation of reassessment proceedings is also not valid since it is amounting to 7 change of opinion that too after four years with no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose truly and fully all facts necessary for assessments. He point…

M/S. Mehta Realtors Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

…confronted to the assessee before initiating the proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act. Reliance is placed on plenty of decisions as under : 6 ITA No.1633/Del. 2013 (i). Sheo Nath Singh v. AAC 82 ITR 147 (SC) (ii). Sarthak Securities Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (2010) 329 ITR 110 (Del) (iii) CIT v. G & G Pharma India Ltd. (2016)384 ITR 147(Del). (iv). Advance India Project Ltd. v. ACtT, ITA No.54/Del/2015 decided on 14.08.2015 – ITAT (v). Jiten Gurnani v. ITO, ITA No.4908/Del/2012 decided on 31.03.2015 – ITAT. (vi). Chanderiya Real Estate (P) Ltd. v. ACIT, ITA No. 657/Del/2015- ITAT. (vii). The Central India Electric Supp…

M/S. Blossom Advertisers Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri L.P. Sahu

…nd, hence the re-opening is void and the assessment should be quashed. The same was held in: 1. CIT vs. Atul Jain (2008) 299 ITR 383 (Del) 2. United Electrical Company (P) Ltd. vs. CIT & Ors (2002) 258 ITR 317 (Del) 3. Sarthak Securities Co. Pvt Ltd. vs. ITO 195 Taxmann 262 (Del) 4. Capricon Shopping Complex vs. ITO 218 ITR 721 (Ker) 5. C. Vasanthlal & Co. vs. CIT 45 ITR 206 (SC) 6. CIT vs. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd. 325 ITR 285 (Del) e. Taking all the above submissions together the issue of notice u/s 148 is void and without jurisdiction, hence the order u/s 147 should be quashed impromptu. 5. Addition of Rs. 21…

Sh. Sanjay Gupta, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

…g end of the reassessment proceedings, a fact admitted by the Assessing Officer 15 himself in the assessment order. The judgment relied upon by the learned AR also supports the case of the assessee. In the case of Sarthak Securities Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO (2009) 329 ITR 110 the Hon’ble jurisdictional Delhi High Court has held that under the circumstances narrated hereinabove the reopening cannot be said to be a valid reopening. The Hon’ble Court has held as under:- “In the case at hand, as is evincible, the AO was aware of the existence of four companies with whom the assessee had entered into transaction. Both the…

Sh. Satya Sheel Gupta, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

…fag end of the reassessment proceedings, a fact admitted by the Assessing Officer himself in the assessment order. The judgment relied upon by the learned AR also supports the case of the assessee. In the case of Sarthak Securities Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO (2009) 329 ITR 110 the Hon’ble jurisdictional Delhi High Court has held that under the circumstances narrated hereinabove the reopening cannot be said to be a valid reopening. The Hon’ble Court has held as under:- “In the case at hand, as is evincible, the AO was aware of the existence of four companies with whom the assessee had entered into transaction. Both t…

Sonarika Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the Assessee’s Appeal stands allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2008-09 Sonarika Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward-9(1) C/O Sh. Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi A-1/25, Sector-15, Rohini, Delhi – 110 085 (Pan: Aakcs1233L) (Appellant) (Respondent)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘G’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2008-09 Sonarika Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ITO, WARD-9(1) C/o Sh. Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi A-1/25, Sector-15, Rohini, Delhi – 110 085 (PAN: AAKCS1233L) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by : Sh. Kapil Goel, Advocate Revenue by : Smt. Anima Barnwal, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 04-07-2016 Date of order : 08-07-2016 ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, J.M. The Assessee has filed the Appeal against the Order dated 26.8.2013 of the Ld. CIT(A)-XII, New D…

Shree Metal, Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri O.P. Kant Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shree Metal, Vs. Ito, 5487 Basti Harphool Singh, Ward 39(3), Sadar Thana Road, New Delhi. Delhi. (Pan: Aafdj4351C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Ved Jain & Ashish Goyal, Adv. Department By: Shri Anima Barnwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 23 .03.2016 Date Of Pronouncement: 20:06.2016 Order Per I.C. Sudhir:The Assessee Has Questioned First Appellate Order On Several Grounds Mainly Involving Two Issues. Firstly, As To Whether The Learned Cit(Appeals) Was Justified In Rejecting The Contention Of The Assessee That The Initiation Of The Reassessment Proceedings & The Reassessment Order Are Both Bad In Law & Liable To Be Quashed. Secondly, As To Whether The Learned Cit(Appeals) Has Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.3,38,147 On Account Of Bogus Purchases. 2. At The Outset Of Hearing, The Learned Ar Pointed Out That Issues Raised In The Present Appeal Is Fully Covered By The Decision Of Delhi Bench Of The 2

…ll fag end of the reassessment proceedings, a fact admitted by the Assessing Officer himself in the assessment order. The judgment relied upon by the learned AR also supports the case of the assessee. In the case of Sarthak Securities Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO (2009) 329 ITR 110 the Hon’ble jurisdictional Delhi High Court has held that under the circumstances narrated hereinabove the reopening cannot be said to be a valid reopening. The Hon’ble Court has held as under:- “In the case at hand, as is evincible, the AO was aware of the existence of four companies with whom the assessee had entered into transaction. Both the…

M.K. Cycle Industries Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2003-04 M/S. M.K. Cycle Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward – 6(1), New Delhi G-76, Sant Nagar Extn., Tilak Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aaecs3075L) (Appellant) (Respondent)

…id reason to believe was void-ab-initio. In support of the contention, the learned Authorized Representative relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of M/s. Sarthak Securities Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer, reported in 329 ITR 110; CIT Vs. Indo Arab Air Services, [2016] 283 CTR 92 (Delhi) and the order of Tribunal in the case of Varun Tibrewal Vs. ITO, in ITA No. 2301 & 2302/Del/2012 (dated 31st October, 2013). 6.2 On the other hand, learned Sr. Departmental Representative, referring to the reasons recorded, submitted that the Investigation Wing of the Department had condu…

Sh. Rajat Shubra Chatterji, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu Assessment Year: 2007-08 Rajat Shubra Chatterji, Vs. Acit, C-502, Npsc Housing Society, Circle 37(1), Sector-5, Dwarka, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aarpc5101F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Pc Yadav,Adv. Department By: Shri Rajesh Kumar Kedia, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 02 .03.2016 Date Of Pronouncement: 20 :05.2016 Order Per I.C. Sudhir:The Assessee Has Questioned First Appellate Order On The Following Grounds:

…AR referred page Nos. 26 of the paper book where copy of the reasons to belief recorded by the Assessing Officer has been made available. The Learned AR placed reliance on the following decisions: i) Signature Hotel – 338 ITR 51 (Del.); ii) Sarthak Security -329 ITR 110 (Del.); iii) Ranee Singh – 330 ITR 417 (Del.); 5. The Learned AR submitted further that the reasons recorded are neither signed nor is there any date on which these were recorded. He 6 contended that the action taken by the Assessing Officer under sec. 147 is also not tenable for the simple reason that provisions of sec. 153C of the Act are app…

G.G. Metal Udyog, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

…fag end of the reassessment proceedings, a fact admitted by the Assessing Officer himself in the assessment order. The judgment relied upon by the learned AR also supports the case of the assessee. In the case of Sarthak Securities Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO (2009) 329 ITR 110 the Hon’ble jurisdictional Delhi High Court has held that under the circumstances narrated hereinabove the reopening cannot be said to be a valid reopening. The Hon’ble Court has held as under:- 20 “In the case at hand, as is evincible, the AO was aware of the existence of four companies with whom the assessee had entered into transaction. Bot…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Gulshan International (P) Ltd., New Delhi

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri O.P. Kant Assessment Year: 2003-04 Acit, Vs. Gulshan International (P) Ltd., Circle-12(1), B-20/1, Wazirpur International New Delhi. Area, Phase-Ii, New Delhi. (Pan: Aabcg1201H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: S/Shri Satyen Sethi & A. Pandu, Adv. Department By: Shri T. Vasudevan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.01.2016 Date Of Pronouncement: 22:04.2016 Order Per I.C. Sudhir:The Revenue Has Questioned First Appellate Order Raising The Issue As To Whether The Learned Cit(Appeals) Was Correct In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.40,02,780 Made By The Assessing Officer Under Sec. 68 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Treating The Share Application Money As Unexplained Cash Credits.

…ince similar figure have been repeated thrice against the same cheque No. dated 16.11.2002. He placed reliance on the following decisions: a) Signatures Hotel (P) Ltd., vs. ITO – (2011) – 338 ITR 51 (Del.); b) Sarthak Securities Co. (P) Ltd. vs. ITO – 2010) – 329 ITR 110 (Del.); c) Pr. CIT vs. G& G Pharma India Ltd.- ITA 545/2015 – order dated 08.10.2015 (Del.); d) ITO vs. Rajat Export Imports (P) Ltd., - ITA No. 2820/Del/2011 (A.Y. 2003-04) – order dated 27.11.2015; e) Rasalika Trading & Investment Co.(P) Ltd., vs. ITO – ITA No. 3103/Del/2013 (A.Y. 2004-05) – order dated 27.11.2015; f) RKG International Pvt. Ltd…

Karshni Metal Store, Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

…ll fag end of the reassessment proceedings, a fact admitted by the Assessing Officer himself in the assessment order. The judgment relied upon by the learned AR also supports the case of the assessee. In the case of Sarthak Securities Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO (2009) 329 ITR 110 the Hon’ble jurisdictional Delhi High Court has held that under the circumstances narrated hereinabove the reopening cannot be said to be a valid reopening. The Hon’ble Court has held as under:- “In the case at hand, as is evincible, the AO was aware of the existence of four companies with whom the assessee had entered into transaction. Both the…

Shraddha Jain, Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal ground

Bench: Sri G.D. Agarwal, Hon’Blesri C.M.Gargita No. 3280/Del. 2015 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05

…heard arguments of both the side on the said legal grounds and also carefully perused the materials placed on record before us. 4. The Ld. AR placing reliance of the prepositions laid down Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Sarthak Securities u/s 270 329 ITR 110 (Delhi), CIT vs. Vineeta Jain 299 ITR 383 (Delhi), CIT vs. Insecticides (India) Ltd. 357 ITR 330 (Delhi) and orders of ITAT Delhi in the case of ITO vs. On Exims Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 57 TTJ 633 (ITAT-Delhi) and ACIT vs. Shri Devesh Kumar in ITA no. 2068/Del/2010 dated 31.10.2014 submitted that the AO in the reasons recorded for initiation of proceedi…