Shri Dilipkumar Lalwani and Others (107 Appeals) 21 19.12 In Pr. CIT v. Vinita Chaurasia

394 ITR 758High Court2017#1597 most cited

What is Shri Dilipkumar Lalwani and Others (107 Appeals) 21 19.12 In Pr. CIT v. Vinita Chaurasia authority for?

The amended provisions of Section 153C require that documents found during a search must 'pertain to' or 'relate to' the assessee. The High Court held that this requirement does not apply to searches conducted prior to the amendment.

71

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Shri Dilipkumar Lalwani · Pr. CIT v. Vinita Chaurasia · section 153C · search · amended provisions · pertains to · relates to · assessment

Also reported as

82 Taxmann.com 153248 Taxmann 172

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 10(37)Section 145A(b)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 263Section 56(2)(viii)

Issues it is cited on

buyback of sharessection 141section 282a(1)section 194lasection 269tsection 2(43)onus of proofsection 269ssection 145a(b)section 145bsection 271esection 158bb

Judgments citing Shri Dilipkumar Lalwani and Others (107 Appeals) 21 19.12 In Pr. CIT v. Vinita Chaurasia

The ACIT, (Central)-1, Indore vs. M/S. Prakash Ashphlting & Toll Highway Ltd., Indore

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 797/IND/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…nt were actually transferred from one side to another, addition under section 69C were not sustainable. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Vinita Chaurasia [2018] 98 Taxman.com 468 (SC) arising out of Order of HC in CIT Vs.VinitaChaurasia [2017] 82 Taxmann.com 153 dismissed the departmental SLP and affirm the very principle again that when a addition was made to the assessee income by invoking 153C on the basis of document seized in the course of search carried out in the case of L and later L retracted his statement that said document belong to Assessee and moreover there were various internal inco…

The ACIT, (Central)-1, Indore vs. M/S. Prakash Ashphlting & Toll Highway Ltd., Indore

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 796/IND/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…nt were actually transferred from one side to another, addition under section 69C were not sustainable. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Vinita Chaurasia [2018] 98 Taxman.com 468 (SC) arising out of Order of HC in CIT Vs.VinitaChaurasia [2017] 82 Taxmann.com 153 dismissed the departmental SLP and affirm the very principle again that when a addition was made to the assessee income by invoking 153C on the basis of document seized in the course of search carried out in the case of L and later L retracted his statement that said document belong to Assessee and moreover there were various internal inco…

The ACIT, (Central)-1, Indore vs. M/S. Prakash Ashphlting & Toll Highway Ltd., Indore

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 795/IND/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…nt were actually transferred from one side to another, addition under section 69C were not sustainable. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Vinita Chaurasia [2018] 98 Taxman.com 468 (SC) arising out of Order of HC in CIT Vs.VinitaChaurasia [2017] 82 Taxmann.com 153 dismissed the departmental SLP and affirm the very principle again that when a addition was made to the assessee income by invoking 153C on the basis of document seized in the course of search carried out in the case of L and later L retracted his statement that said document belong to Assessee and moreover there were various internal inco…

The ACIT, (Central)-1, Indore vs. M/S. Prakash Ashphlting & Toll Highway Ltd., Indore

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 794/IND/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…nt were actually transferred from one side to another, addition under section 69C were not sustainable. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Vinita Chaurasia [2018] 98 Taxman.com 468 (SC) arising out of Order of HC in CIT Vs.VinitaChaurasia [2017] 82 Taxmann.com 153 dismissed the departmental SLP and affirm the very principle again that when a addition was made to the assessee income by invoking 153C on the basis of document seized in the course of search carried out in the case of L and later L retracted his statement that said document belong to Assessee and moreover there were various internal inco…

The ACIT, (Central)-1, Indore vs. M/S. Prakash Ashphlting & Toll Highway Ltd., Indore

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 793/IND/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…nt were actually transferred from one side to another, addition under section 69C were not sustainable. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Vinita Chaurasia [2018] 98 Taxman.com 468 (SC) arising out of Order of HC in CIT Vs.VinitaChaurasia [2017] 82 Taxmann.com 153 dismissed the departmental SLP and affirm the very principle again that when a addition was made to the assessee income by invoking 153C on the basis of document seized in the course of search carried out in the case of L and later L retracted his statement that said document belong to Assessee and moreover there were various internal inco…

ACIT(Central)-1, Indore vs. Shri Punit Agrawal, Mhow

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 791/IND/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shrib.M. Biyani

Section 132Section 153ASection 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

…nt were actually transferred from one side to another, addition under section 69C were not sustainable. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Vinita Chaurasia [2018] 98 Taxman.com 468 (SC) arising out of Order of HC in CIT Vs.VinitaChaurasia [2017] 82 Taxmann.com 153 dismissed the departmental SLP and affirm the very principle again that when a addition was made to the assessee income by invoking 153C on the basis of document seized in the course of search carried out in the case of L and later L retracted his statement that said document belong to Assessee and moreover there were various internal inco…

ACIT(Central)-1, Indore vs. Shri Punit Agrawal, Mhow

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 790/IND/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shrib.M. Biyani

Section 132Section 153ASection 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

…nt were actually transferred from one side to another, addition under section 69C were not sustainable. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Vinita Chaurasia [2018] 98 Taxman.com 468 (SC) arising out of Order of HC in CIT Vs.VinitaChaurasia [2017] 82 Taxmann.com 153 dismissed the departmental SLP and affirm the very principle again that when a addition was made to the assessee income by invoking 153C on the basis of document seized in the course of search carried out in the case of L and later L retracted his statement that said document belong to Assessee and moreover there were various internal inco…

ACIT(Central)-1, Indore vs. Shri Punit Agrawal, Mhow

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 789/IND/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shrib.M. Biyani

Section 132Section 153ASection 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

…nt were actually transferred from one side to another, addition under section 69C were not sustainable. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Vinita Chaurasia [2018] 98 Taxman.com 468 (SC) arising out of Order of HC in CIT Vs.VinitaChaurasia [2017] 82 Taxmann.com 153 dismissed the departmental SLP and affirm the very principle again that when a addition was made to the assessee income by invoking 153C on the basis of document seized in the course of search carried out in the case of L and later L retracted his statement that said document belong to Assessee and moreover there were various internal inco…

ACIT(Central)-1, Indore vs. Shri Punit Agrawal, Mhow

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 788/IND/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shrib.M. Biyani

Section 132Section 153ASection 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

…nt were actually transferred from one side to another, addition under section 69C were not sustainable. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Vinita Chaurasia [2018] 98 Taxman.com 468 (SC) arising out of Order of HC in CIT Vs.VinitaChaurasia [2017] 82 Taxmann.com 153 dismissed the departmental SLP and affirm the very principle again that when a addition was made to the assessee income by invoking 153C on the basis of document seized in the course of search carried out in the case of L and later L retracted his statement that said document belong to Assessee and moreover there were various internal inco…

ACIT(Central)-1, Indore vs. Shri Punit Agrawal, Mhow

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 787/IND/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shrib.M. Biyani

Section 132Section 153ASection 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

…nt were actually transferred from one side to another, addition under section 69C were not sustainable. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Vinita Chaurasia [2018] 98 Taxman.com 468 (SC) arising out of Order of HC in CIT Vs.VinitaChaurasia [2017] 82 Taxmann.com 153 dismissed the departmental SLP and affirm the very principle again that when a addition was made to the assessee income by invoking 153C on the basis of document seized in the course of search carried out in the case of L and later L retracted his statement that said document belong to Assessee and moreover there were various internal inco…

Alka Chaturvedi, Noida vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Noida

The appeals are allowed and the impugned demand on the basis of non-est orders is quashed

ITA 2488/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. M. Balaganesh & Sh.Anubhav Sharmaita No. 2486/Del/2022, A.Y. 2013-14 Abhimanyu Chaturvedi Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of D-64, Sector 47, Income Tax, Gautam Buddha Nagar, Central Circle-I, Noida Noida- 201303 Pan : Anqpc4031N Appellant Respondent

Section 143Section 153Section 153ASection 234ASection 271Section 69ASection 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘A’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SH. M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH.ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 2486/Del/2022, A.Y. 2013-14 Abhimanyu Chaturvedi Vs. Deputy Commissioner of D-64, Sector 47, Income Tax, Gautam Buddha Nagar, Central Circle-I, Noida Noida- 201303 PAN : ANQPC4031N Appellant Respondent ITA No. 2487/Del/2022, A.Y. 2013-14 Mallika Chaturvedi Vs. Deputy Commissioner of D-64, Sector 47, Income Tax, Gautam Buddha Nagar, Central Circle-I, Noida Noida- 201303 PAN : ANQPC4029G Appellant Respondent ITA No. 2488/Del/2022, A.Y. 2013-14 Alka Cha…

Mallika Chaturvedi, Noida vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Noida

The appeals are allowed and the impugned demand on the basis of non-est orders is quashed

ITA 2487/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. M. Balaganesh & Sh.Anubhav Sharmaita No. 2486/Del/2022, A.Y. 2013-14 Abhimanyu Chaturvedi Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of D-64, Sector 47, Income Tax, Gautam Buddha Nagar, Central Circle-I, Noida Noida- 201303 Pan : Anqpc4031N Appellant Respondent

Section 143Section 153Section 153ASection 234ASection 271Section 69ASection 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘A’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SH. M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH.ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 2486/Del/2022, A.Y. 2013-14 Abhimanyu Chaturvedi Vs. Deputy Commissioner of D-64, Sector 47, Income Tax, Gautam Buddha Nagar, Central Circle-I, Noida Noida- 201303 PAN : ANQPC4031N Appellant Respondent ITA No. 2487/Del/2022, A.Y. 2013-14 Mallika Chaturvedi Vs. Deputy Commissioner of D-64, Sector 47, Income Tax, Gautam Buddha Nagar, Central Circle-I, Noida Noida- 201303 PAN : ANQPC4029G Appellant Respondent ITA No. 2488/Del/2022, A.Y. 2013-14 Alka Cha…

Abhimanyu Chaturvedi, Noida vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Noida

The appeals are allowed and the impugned demand on the basis of non-est orders is quashed

ITA 2486/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. M. Balaganesh & Sh.Anubhav Sharmaita No. 2486/Del/2022, A.Y. 2013-14 Abhimanyu Chaturvedi Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of D-64, Sector 47, Income Tax, Gautam Buddha Nagar, Central Circle-I, Noida Noida- 201303 Pan : Anqpc4031N Appellant Respondent

Section 143Section 153Section 153ASection 234ASection 271Section 69ASection 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘A’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SH. M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH.ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 2486/Del/2022, A.Y. 2013-14 Abhimanyu Chaturvedi Vs. Deputy Commissioner of D-64, Sector 47, Income Tax, Gautam Buddha Nagar, Central Circle-I, Noida Noida- 201303 PAN : ANQPC4031N Appellant Respondent ITA No. 2487/Del/2022, A.Y. 2013-14 Mallika Chaturvedi Vs. Deputy Commissioner of D-64, Sector 47, Income Tax, Gautam Buddha Nagar, Central Circle-I, Noida Noida- 201303 PAN : ANQPC4029G Appellant Respondent ITA No. 2488/Del/2022, A.Y. 2013-14 Alka Cha…

Kaur Kookies (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. Pr, CIT, Delhi-4, New Delhi

Appeal are allowed

ITA 1119/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 263Section 36

…S TO HOW THE ORDER OF AO IS PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF REVENUE i) 142 ITR 778 (Pat) CIT vs. Shanti LalAggarwala ii) 96 ITR 310 (All) CIT vs. Late Sunder Lai iii) 111 ITR 326 (All) J.P. Srivastava& Sons v. CIT iv) 170 ITR 28 (All) CIT vs. KashiNath& Co. v) 394 ITR 758 (Del) PCIT v. Vinita Chaurasia PROPOSITION II; THAT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CANNOT SIMPLY ASK THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RE-EXAMINE THE MATTER. HE CAN DO SO ONLY AFTER FINDING ORDER OF ASSESSMENT IS ERRONEOUS AND PREJUDICIAL TO INTERST OF REVENUE i) 203 ITR 108 (Bom) CIT vs. Gabriel India Ltd. ii) 341 ITR 240 (Del) CIT vs. Software Consultants P…

M/S. Great Value Infra Promoters Pvt. Ltd., Meerut vs. ACIT, Meerut

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1839/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Sapra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT- DR
Section 132Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 69

…of Ankit Gupta [supra]. The relevant observations /findings read as under: “7. Learned counsel for the Respondents-Assessees, on the other hand, pointed out that this Court has, in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-2) v. Vinita Chaurasia [2017] 394 ITR 758 (Del), after considering the aforementioned three decisions, reiterated the settled legal position as explained in Pepsico India Holdings P. Ltd. v. ACIT [2015] 370 ITR 295 (Del), that for the purpose of initiating proceedings under Section 153C of the Act, the seized documents had to be shown to belong to the other person and not merely pertaini…

Kush Kedia vs. A.C.I.T. 2(1), Raipur (Cg)

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 106/BIL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Mar 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 105 & 106/Rpr/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05 & 2005-06 Kush Kedia Kedia Bhawan, Mandi Road, Balodabazar.Dist. Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aklpk5127B .......अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-2(1), Raipur. (C.G.) ……""यथ" /Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT D.R
Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 68

…y did not belong to them. Therefore, one essential jurisdictional requirement to justify the assumption of jurisdiction under section 153C of the Act was met in the case of the two Assessees.” (emphasis supplied by us) (iii). PCIT Vs. Vinita Chaurasia (2017) 394 ITR 758 (Del) : 20 Kush Kedia Vs. ACIT-2(1) ITA Nos. 105 & 106 /RPR/2015 Adopting a similar view the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi had observed that as per the pre-amended Sec. 153C (i.e prior to 01.06.2015), it was obligatory on the part of the revenue to show that the document seized during the course of the search proceedings belonged to the assessee…

Kush Kedia vs. A.C.I.T. 2(1), Raipur (Cg)

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 105/BIL/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Mar 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 105 & 106/Rpr/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05 & 2005-06 Kush Kedia Kedia Bhawan, Mandi Road, Balodabazar.Dist. Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aklpk5127B .......अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-2(1), Raipur. (C.G.) ……""यथ" /Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT D.R
Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 68

…y did not belong to them. Therefore, one essential jurisdictional requirement to justify the assumption of jurisdiction under section 153C of the Act was met in the case of the two Assessees.” (emphasis supplied by us) (iii). PCIT Vs. Vinita Chaurasia (2017) 394 ITR 758 (Del) : 20 Kush Kedia Vs. ACIT-2(1) ITA Nos. 105 & 106 /RPR/2015 Adopting a similar view the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi had observed that as per the pre-amended Sec. 153C (i.e prior to 01.06.2015), it was obligatory on the part of the revenue to show that the document seized during the course of the search proceedings belonged to the assessee…

Smt. Vanita Vaswani, Ahmedabad vs. The Pr. CIT (Central), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 133/AHD/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Years : 2010-11 Smt. Vanita Vaswani, The Pcit (Central), 2, Samprat Co-Op. Housing Vs Ahmedabad Society Limited, Opp. Rivera, 11, Prahladnagar, Ahmedabad - 380015 Pan : Aakpv 7868 D अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "त् "त् यथ" "त् "त् यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate Shri Parimalsinh B Parmar, Ar & Shri Vijay Govani, Ar Revenue By : Shri Virendra Ojha, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/07/2021 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/09/2021 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Rajpal Yadav: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Ahmedabad Dated 28.03.2021, Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”), For Assessment Year 2010-2011. The Assessee Has Taken 7 Grounds Of Appeal Which Read As Under:- “1. The Ld. Pcit (Central), Ahmedabad ("The Pcit") Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Invoking Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act") & Has Further Erred In Directing The Ld. Ao To Pass Fresh Assessment Order Incorporating The Market Value Of The Property As Per Section 50C Of The Act. 2. The Ld. Pcit Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Passing Order U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 In The Case Of The Appellant In Failing To Take Smt. Vanita Vaswani Vs. Pr. Cit Ay : 2010-2011 2

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Virendra Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263Section 50C

…swani Vs. Pr. CIT AY : 2010-2011 11 as required under section 153C of the Act prior to the coming into force of the amended provisions and in any another case after the coming into force of the amended provisions. 19.12 In Pr. CIT v. Vinita Chaurasia, [2017] 394 ITR 758/248 Taxman 172/82 taxmann.com 153 (Delhi), the Delhi High Court has held that, at the outset, it requires to be noticed that the search in the present case took place on 19th June, 2009, i.e., prior to the amendment in section 153C(1) of the Act with effect from 1st June, 2015. Therefore, it is not open to the Revenue to seek to point out that th…

Nkb Infrastructure (P) Ltd, Rewari vs. Pr. CIT, Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 450/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2015-16

Section 143(3)Section 263

…s not in accordance with law. 7 In support of above ratio, the learned Counsel relied on the following decisions: 1. PCIT Vs Delhi Airport Metro Express P Ltd 398 ITR 8 (Delhi) 2. ITO Vs DG Housing Projects Ltd 343 ITR 329 (Delhi) 3. PCIT Vs Vinita Chaurasia 394 ITR 758 (Delhi) 4. ITA No. 771/CHD/2017 Shri Abhimanyu Gupta Vs PCIT 5. Narayan Tatu Rane Vs ITO, 70 taxmann.com 227 5. On the contrary, the learned DR referred to Explanation-2(i) below the section 263 of the Act. She submitted that in view of the Explanation which has been inserted by the Finance Act, 2015 with effect from 01/06/2015, the assessment o…

Mr. Abhisar Sharma, Noida vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 3285/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jan 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2005-06 Mr. Abhisar Sharma, Vs Dcit, B-602, Plot No.F-2, Circle-64(1), The Crescent, B-Block, Room No.314, Sector-50, Pratyakshkar Bhawan, Noida. Civic Centre, New Delhi. Pan: Aigps3840N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate & Shri Lalit Mohan, Ca Revenue By : Shri J.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr. Date Of Hearing : 12.01.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.01.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30Th March, 2015 Passed U/S 263 Of The It Act By The Pcit-22, Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2005-06. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed His Return Of Income On 22Nd July, 2005 Declaring Income Of Rs.9,00,355/-. The Assessee In The Return Of Income Had Declared Income From Salary At Rs.9,81,964/- & Loss From House Property At Rs.81,609/-. The Return Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Act On 4Th July, 2006 At The Same Income. Subsequently, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened By Issue Of Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Dated 27Th March, 2012 After Obtaining Prior Approval Of The Addl. Cit, Range-7, New Delhi, Vide His Letter No.526 Dated 27Th March, 2012. The Ao Completed The Assessment U/S 147/143(3) On 28Th March, 2013, Determining The Income Of The Assessee At Rs.11,03,270/- As Against The Returned Income Of Rs.9,00,355/- Wherein He Made The Following Additions:-

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 17Section 17(2)Section 263Section 68Section 69C

…, 332 ITR 167 (Del); iii) CIT vs. DLF Ltd., 350 ITR 555 (Del); iv) CIT vs. Max India Ltd., 295 ITR 282; v) ITO vs. DG Housing Projects Ltd., 343 ITR 329 (Del); vi) Director of Income-tax vs. Jyoti Foundation, 357 ITR 388 (Del); vii) PCIT vs. Vinita Chaurasia, 394 ITR 758 (Del); viii) Delhi Airport Metro Express (P) Ltd., 398 ITR 8 (Del) ix) Shri Abhimanyu Gupta vs. PCIT, ITA No. 771/CHD/2017; x) Narayan Tatu Rane vs. ITO 70 taxmann.com 227 (Mumbai Trib.); xi) Jeewanlal Ltd. vs. Addl. ICT, 108 ITR 407 (Cal); xii) B&A Plantation & Industries Ltd. vs. CIT, 290 ITR 395 (Gau); xiii) CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd., 332 ITR…