Shamshad Khan v. ACIT

GDR FINANCE AND LEASING P. LTD,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S Gdr Finance & Leasing Vs. Assessment Unit, Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer, 323, Agrawal Plaza, Nfac. Dda Community Centre, Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi – 110 088. Pan: Aaacg2363D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate; Shri Rupinder Aggarwal, Shri R.P. Mall, Shri Uma Shankar, Ms Suman Verma & Ms Vidushi Aggarwal, Advocates Revenue By : Shri Om Parkash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2025 Order Per Vimal Kumar, Jm:

…ita A. Choksey vs. ITO W.P. 3344 of 2018 dated 10.1.2019 HC (Bom) v. Mumtaz Hazi Mohmad Memon Vs. ITO 408 ITR 268 (Guj) vi. Pr. CIT v. RMG Ply vinyl (I) Ltd. 396 ITR 5 (Del) vii. PCIT vs. SNG Developers Limited 404 ITR 312 (Del) 6 viii. Shamshad Khan vs. ACIT 395 ITR 265 (Del) ix. Synfonia Tradelinks (P). Ltd. vs. ITO 435 ITR 642 (Del) x. Sunrise Education Trust vs. ITO (Exemption) 92 taxmann.com 74 (Guj) 6. Learned authorized representative for the Department submitted that the assessee, in response to notice u/s 148A(b), merely issued a blanket denial of having taken accommodation entries from M/s K.G. Finvest…

SH. ATAR SINGH,FARIDABAD vs. ITO WARD-1(1), FARIDABAD

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Amitabh Shuklai.T.A. No. 2732/Del/2025 (A.Y 2012-13) Sh. Atar Singh Vs Income Tax Officer House No. 5, Village, Gazipur, Ward 1(1) Gazipur Road, Faridabad, Faridabad, Haryana Haryana-121005 122001 Pan: Dmpps6598B Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. S.S. Nagar, Ca Revenue By Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29/10/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19/12/2025 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal

…t of the Assessing Officer. The Appellate Tribunal was justified in confirming the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and holding that the reopening of the assessment was bad in law.” 18. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Shamshad Khan Vs. ACIT [2017] 395 ITR 265 (Del.) held as under: 9 Sh. Atar Singh Vs. ITO “Held, allowing the petition, that the form for recording the reasons for initiating the proceedings under section 148 of the Act for obtaining approval of the Commissioner itself proceeded on the erroneous basis that the quantum of income which had escaped assessment was Rs.28,75,000 whereas the a…

SANTOSH RANI LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SH PARVEEN KALYAN,KURUKSHETRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, KARNAL, KARNAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Santosh Rani Vs Ito, Legal Heir Of Late Shri Parveen Ward-1, Karnal, Kalyan, Krishna Nagar, Gamri, Haryana-132001. Thanesar, Distt.-Kurukshetra, Haryana-136118. Pan-Awhpr4944D Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Suresh K.Gupta, Ca Respondent By Shri Dheeraj Kumar Jaiswal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 01.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19.09.2025 Order

…income escaping assessment. From above facts, it is evident clear the reopening is based on incorrect facts, reliance is placed on following decisions:  M/s Synfonia Tradelinks P. Ltd vs ITO W.P.(C) No.12544/2018 dt: 26.03.2021 (Del);  Shamshad Khan vs ACIT 395 ITR 265 (Del);  Pr CIT vs M/S SNG Developers Ltd404 ITR 312 (Del) approved by Hon'ble Apex Court by dismissing SLP of revenue in SLP 42379/2017 Dt: 09.02.2018;  CIT vs Suren International Pvt Ltd 357 ITR 24 (Del);  Pr. CIT vs. RMG Polyvinyl (1) Ltd (2017) 396 ITR 5 (Del);  CIT vs., Atlas Cycle industries (1989) 180 ITR 319 (P&H);  Siemens Informatio…

NAMAH SHIVAYA TRADING PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD WARD - 17(3), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: supply of reasons thereby debarring appellant to file objection to the assumption of jurisdiction for initiation of reassessment proceedings. 4. The Ld. AR raising above legal contentions submitted that since the AO did not assume valid jurisdiction to initiate the reassessment proceedings and to issue notice u/s 148 of the Act, therefore, initiation of reassessment proceedings and all constant

…eads to invalidation of reassessment proceedings. 7. To support first legal contention, the Ld. AR has relied on the various judgments and orders including recent judgment of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of Shamshad Khan Vs. ACIT (395 ITR 265) and PCIT Vs. SNG Developers Ltd. (404 ITR 312) (Del.) approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court by dismissing SLP of Revenue No.42379/2017 dated 09.02.2018. 8. Regarding second legal contention of Ld. AR that the AO has not made any enquiry on the factual information received by Investigation Wing is concerned. From the copy of reasons recorded pl…

ACIT, CIRCLE- 23(1), NEW DELHI vs. SHREE BALKISHAN AGARWAL GLASS INDUSTRIES LTD., DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

…l of return of income leads to quashing of assessment. Reliance for non-examination of return of income is placed in the case of Brij Pal Singh Tomer ITA No.2539/Del/2019 and the Judgment of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Delhi High Court in Shamshad Khan vs ACIT 395 ITR 265 (Del). The department cannot and is not entitled to raise the plea that companies existence on other PAN number was not known to it as the same assessing authority has completed the assessment of assessee for AY 2003- 04 on the PAN number on which return of income for present AY was filed. 3. Assumption of jurisdiction on the basis of invalid not…

HARISH CHANDER ,FARIDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), FARIDABAD

In the result assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year: 2012-13

…wrong facts recorded for reopening assessment. Reliance is also placed on the judgements of 4 Harish Chander Vs. ITO CIT v. Atlas Cycle Industries [1989] 180 ITR 319 [P&H] Pr. CIT v. SNG Developers Ltd [2018] 404 ITR 312 (Del.) Shamshad Khan v. ACIT [2017] 395 ITR 265 (Del.)” 4. On the contrary, learned DR opposed the submissions and supported the orders of the authorities below. 5. I have heard the rival contentions of the parties. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that cash was deposited in the bank account of the assessee. Before the Assessing Officer no explanation was furnished regarding the…

GM OVERSEAS,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-48(1), NEW DELHI

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

…above mistake of quantification makes the reassessment invalid. Relying on the following decisions, he submitted that incorrect quantification of income in the reason can be a valid ground for quashing of reassessment proceedings:- (i) Shamshad Khan vs ACIT 395 ITR 265 (Del); (ii) Pr CIT vs M/s SNG Developers Ltd, 404 ITR 312 (Del); (iii) CIT vs Suren International Pvt Ltd., 357 ITR 24 (Del); (iv) Pr. CIT vs. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd (2017) 396 ITR 5 (Del); (v) CIT vs. Atlas Cycle industries (1989) 180 ITR 319 (P&H); (vi) Siemens Information System Ltd., vs. ACIT & Others (2007) 293 ITR 548 (Bom.); (vii) Ankita A.…

VIJAYSHREE FOOD PRODUCTS P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, NEW DELHI

In the result, both these appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2014-15 Vijayshree Food Products P. Ltd., Vs. Acit, C/O Ravi Gupta, Advocate, Central Circle-30, E-6A, Kailash Colony, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaccv4721C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.C. Yadav, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.09.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.12.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28Th December, 2018 Of The Cit(A)-30, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing & Export Of Tobacco Products. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 30Th September, 2014 Declaring The Loss Of Rs.18,78,467/-. The Return Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Act On 26Th November, 2014 At The Returned Income. Subsequently, The Ao Reopened The Assessment As Per The Provisions Of Section 147 Of The Act By Recording The Following Reasons:-

…mitted that if the AO mentioned wrong facts which are contrary to the records, then assumption of jurisdiction is bad in law:- i. CIT Vs. Atlas Cycle Industries 180 ITR 319( P&H) ii. Pr. CIT Vs. SNG Developers Ltd. 404 ITR 312(Del) iii. Shamshad Khan vs. ACIT 395 ITR 265;(Del) iv. Siemens Information System Ltd. Vs. ACIT 293 ITR 548.(Bom) v. CIT Vs Rainee Singh 330 ITR 417(Del) vi. VSR Enterprises- ITA No 1856/Del/2016- dated 17.02.2021. vii. Shri Natrajan Monie- ITA NO 1817/Del/2017- dated-07.12.2020. viii. SJM international in ITA No-3762/Del/2018 dated 09.08.2021 8.7 Referring to the following decisions, he s…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MAHARAJI EDUCATION TRUST, GHAZIABAD

The appeal are dismissed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

…k into the return of income is a sufficient reason to quash the re- assessment proceedings. For this proposition he relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Pr. CIT Vs. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. 395 ITR 677 (Del), Shamshad Khan Vs. ACIT (2017) 395 ITR 265 (Del.) and the decision of the co-ordinate bench in Brijpal Singh Tomar Vs. ITO in ITA. 2539/Del/2019 dated 26.04.2019. 20. He further referred to the proforma for obtaining sanction of the Act u/s 151 of the Act and referred to column No. 6.1 of the proforma stating that the Assessing Officer mentioned that assessed income of the assessee is Rs.…

ASHISH BHARDWAJ,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO WARD-36(4), NEW DELHI

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

…tted that the reasons based on patently incorrect facts do not clothe the AO to issue a valid notice u/s 148 being without application of mind and without foundation:- i) Kolahai Infotech P. Ltd. vs. (2018) 409 ITR 595 (Del); ii) Shamshad Khan vs. ACIT [2017] 395 ITR 265: 82 taxmann.com 35 (Delhi); iii) Mumtaz Hazi Mohamad Memon (2018) 408 ITR 268 (Guj); iv) Shri Sanjeev Malhotra vs. DCIT -ITA No. 6723/D/2018(Del-‘G’); v) Jagat Singh vs. ITO - ITA NO. 2749/D/18 (Del-C); vi) ACIT vs.. M/s Asis Plywood Pvt. Ltd.(ITA No. 2144/D/l5) (28/01/2019); & vii)Pr. CIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas [2017] 82 taxmann.com 300 (Delhi)…

M/S SHRI SHYAM SUNDER INFRASTRUCTURE (P) LTD.,,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

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

…he Assessing Officer. The Appellate Tribunal was justified in confirming the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and holding that the reopening of the assessment was bad in law.” 7.2. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Shamshad Khan vs., ACIT [2017] 395 ITR 265 (Del.) in which it was held as under : “Held, allowing the petition, that the form for recording the reasons for initiating the proceedings under section 148 of the Act for obtaining approval of the Commissioner itself proceeded on the erroneous basis that the quantum of income which had escaped assessment was Rs.28,75,000 16 ITA.No.2106/Del./2…

M/S vs. R ENTERPRISES,NEW DELHIVS.ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year : 2007-08

…he Assessing Officer. The Appellate Tribunal was justified in confirming the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and holding that the reopening of the assessment was bad in law.” 6.4. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Shamshad Khan vs., ACIT [2017] 395 ITR 265 (Del.) in which it was held as under : “Held, allowing the petition, that the form for recording the reasons for initiating the proceedings under section 148 of the Act for obtaining approval of the Commissioner itself proceeded on the erroneous basis that the quantum of income which had escaped assessment was Rs.28,75,000 whereas the assessee h…

SUNGROW IMPEX PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD-24(3), NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of assessee allowed

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

…e assessment. Resultantly, all additions stand deleted.” 14.1 Ld. Counsel for assessee in support of the above contention also relied upon following decisions: 31 ITA.No.4183/Del./2019 M/s. Sungrow Impex Private Limited, New Delhi. 1. Shamshad Khan vs. ACIT 395 ITR 265 (Del.) 2. Pr. CIT vs. M/s SNG Developers Ltd. 404 ITR 312 (Del.). 3. CIT vs. Atlas Cycle Industries 180 ITR 319(P&H) 4. Siemens Information System Ltd. vs. ACIT 293 ITR 548 (Bom.). 15. On the other hand, Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below and submitted that since the assessee did not disclose bank account so AO applied his mi…

SAVITA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 22(4), NEW DELHI

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

…se of M/s SNG Developers Ltd., 404 ITR 312 (Del.) in which departmental SLP has been dismissed by the Supreme Court vide order dated 09.02.2018. He has also relied upon the judgment of Delhi 12 ITA.No.1389/Del./2019 High Court in the case of Shamshad Khan 395 ITR 265 (Del.), judgment of (P&H) in the case of Atlas Cycle Industries 180 ITR 319 and judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of Siemens Information System Ltd. 293 ITR 548. None of the annexure referred by the AO in the assessment order have any reference in the reasons for reopening of the assessment. The AO in the show-cause notice dated 23.0…

KARAN KHURANA ,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 48(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

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

…l./2019 Shri Karan Khurana, Delhi. below and quash the reopening of the assessment. Resultantly, all additions stand deleted.” 14.1 Ld. Counsel for assessee in support of the above contention also relied upon following decisions: 1. Shamshad Khan vs. ACIT 395 ITR 265 (Del.) 2. Pr. CIT vs. M/s SNG Developers Ltd. 404 ITR 312 (Del.). 3. CIT vs. Atlas Cycle Industries 180 ITR 319(P&H) 4. Siemens Information System Ltd. vs. ACIT 293 ITR 548 (Bom.). 15. On the other hand, Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below and submitted that since the assessee did not disclose bank account so AO applied his mi…

BISHAN SHARUP GUPTA,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 45(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

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

…confirming the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and holding that the reopening of the assessment was bad in law.” 19 ITA.No.8083/Del./2019 Shri Bishan Sharup Gupta, New Delhi. 6.4. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Shamshad Khan vs., ACIT [2017] 395 ITR 265 (Del.) in which it was held as under : “Held, allowing the petition, that the form for recording the reasons for initiating the proceedings under section 148 of the Act for obtaining approval of the Commissioner itself proceeded on the erroneous basis that the quantum of income which had escaped assessment was Rs.28,75,000 whereas the assessee h…

M/S vs. R ENTERPRISES,NEW DELHIVS.ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

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

…he Assessing Officer. The Appellate Tribunal was justified in confirming the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and holding that the reopening of the assessment was bad in law.” 6.4. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Shamshad Khan vs., ACIT [2017] 395 ITR 265 (Del.) in which it was held as under : “Held, allowing the petition, that the form for recording the reasons for initiating the proceedings 28 ITA.No.1856/Del./2016 M/s. VSR Enterprises, New Delhi. under section 148 of the Act for obtaining approval of the Commissioner itself proceeded on the erroneous basis that the quantum of income which had…

ANITA CHAUDHARY,MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-2(5), KHATULI

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

…se of CIT vs., Atlas Cycle Industries [1989] 180 ITR 319 [P&H], Judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs., SNG Developers Ltd., [2018] 404 ITR 312 (Del.), Judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Shamshad Khan vs., ACIT [2017] 395 ITR 265 (Del.) and Judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Siemens Information Systems Ltd., vs., ACIT & Others [2007] 293 ITR 548 [Bom.]. It may also be noted here that though A.O. has referred to the commission earned by the assessee in assessment year under appeal, but, no addition have been made in the re- assessment order. Considering t…