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

M/S. Venus Infrabuild, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., Cent.Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 837/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

…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. Shri Dilipkumar Lalwani and Others (107 Appeals) 21 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…

M/S. Venus Infrabuild, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., Cent.Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 836/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

…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. Shri Dilipkumar Lalwani and Others (107 Appeals) 21 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…

M/S. Venus Infrabuild, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., Cent.Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 834/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

…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. Shri Dilipkumar Lalwani and Others (107 Appeals) 21 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…

DCIT, Central Circle -1(1), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Deepak Kumar Vaswani, Ahmedabad

ITA 807/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

…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. Shri Dilipkumar Lalwani and Others (107 Appeals) 21 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…

The DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Ashok Sunderdas Vaswani, Ahmedabad

ITA 806/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

…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. Shri Dilipkumar Lalwani and Others (107 Appeals) 21 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…

The DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Rajesh Sunderdas Vaswani, Ahmedabad

ITA 805/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

…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. Shri Dilipkumar Lalwani and Others (107 Appeals) 21 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…

Shri Deepak Budharmal Vaswani, Ahmedabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle -1(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 461/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

…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. Shri Dilipkumar Lalwani and Others (107 Appeals) 21 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…

Shri Rajesh Sunderdas Vaswani, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 457/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

…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. Shri Dilipkumar Lalwani and Others (107 Appeals) 21 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…

Shri Ashok Sunderdas Vaswani, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 456/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

…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. Shri Dilipkumar Lalwani and Others (107 Appeals) 21 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…

ACIT, Central Circle- 16, New Delhi vs. Vinita Chaurasia, New Delhi

ITA 7382/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Oct 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conference)

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri F.R. Meena, Senior DR
Section 147Section 15Section 153ASection 153C

…following the decisions rendered by the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in ITA No.3343/Del/2013 & Ors. vide 4 ITA No.7382/Del./2017 order dated 29.05.2015, confirmed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in assessee’s own case for AY 2010-11 reported in (2017) 394 ITR 758 (Delhi), wherein the same document Annexure A-1, Page 5, is held to be of Lalit Modi and not of the assessee in this case. 7. Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal vide order dated 29.05.2015 (supra) passed in assessee’s own case for AY 2010-11 held that, “the document, Annexure A-1, Page 5, belongs to Lalit Modi and the assessee, Vinita Chaurasi…

Riddhi Siddhi Developers P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. D.C.I.T. Cent. Cir. - 6(4), Mumbai

ITA 646/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri N.K. Pradhanita Nos.646-647/Mum/2018 (Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Riddhi Siddhi Developers P. Ltd Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, 45, Maker Chambers-Iii, Central Circle – 6(4), Room No. 1925, Vs. 223 Nariman Point, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Mumbai – 400 021 Nariman Point , Mumbai – 400 021 Pan – Aaacr0426N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Hema KatariaFor Respondent: Shri Manjunatha Swami, CIT D.R
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153C

…i Siddhi Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT Central Circle 6(4), Mumbai 18 ITA Nos. 646-647/Mum/2018 – A.Y 2013-14 & A.Y 2014-15 of jurisdiction under Section 153 C of the Act was not met in the case of the two Assessees.” (iii). PCIT Vs. Vinita Chaurasia (2017) 394 ITR 758 (Del) : 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 i.e a person other than the person searched, and it was n…

Rajgul Ctrditnvest P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. Prcit, Delhi-7, New Delhi

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

ITA 2519/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Smt. Sulekha Verma, CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 44ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 2519/DEL/2019 A.Y. : 2009-10 RAJGUL CREDITNVEST P. LTD., PR. CIT, DELHI-7 474-75, AGGARWAL MILLENNIUM VS. NEW DELHI TOWER-II, NETAJI SUBHASH PLACE, PITAMPURA, NEW DELHI – 110 034 (PAN: AAACR5900M) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by : Sh. Gautam Jain, Adv. & Sh. Lalit Kumar, Adv. Department by : Smt. Sulekha Verma, CIT(DR) ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU : JM This Appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the Order dated 18/21-01-2019 passed by the Ld. Pr. Com…

Shri Bharat Singh, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3256/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 234BSection 234C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: “A”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 2001 & 3256/Del/2017 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2012-13 Shri Bharat Singh, Vs. ACIT, 14, Ashoka Avenue Road, Central Circle-26, New Delhi DLF Farms, Chattapur, New Delhi PAN :AAXPS3124L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Rajesh Malhotra, CA Respondent by Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT(DR) Date of hearing 09.01.2019 Date of pronouncement 25.01.2019 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, A.M.: These two appeals by the assessee are directed against two separate orders dated 20/01/20…

Shri Bharat Singh, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2001/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 234BSection 234C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: “A”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 2001 & 3256/Del/2017 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2012-13 Shri Bharat Singh, Vs. ACIT, 14, Ashoka Avenue Road, Central Circle-26, New Delhi DLF Farms, Chattapur, New Delhi PAN :AAXPS3124L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Rajesh Malhotra, CA Respondent by Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT(DR) Date of hearing 09.01.2019 Date of pronouncement 25.01.2019 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, A.M.: These two appeals by the assessee are directed against two separate orders dated 20/01/20…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Smt Urmila Chandulal Patel, New Delhi

Accordingly all the appeals of the revenue with respect to all these assesses are dismissed

ITA 1459/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charyacit, Vs. Rohan Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Asjpp8428L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Himanshu Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Actpp8270C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Praduman Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Ajhpp2206P (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Krish Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aqvpp2875R (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Urmila Chandulal Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aeipp1395R

For Appellant: Shri Raj Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142Section 153Section 153C

…ails to fulfil the jurisdictional requirement. No reasons are recorded for the identical conclusion in either satisfaction note that the seized documents mentioned therein belong not to the searched person but to the Assessee. ‖ — Pr. CIT Vs. Vinita Chaurasia 394 ITR 758 (Dei.) (63-73) (SLP of Deptt. dismissed - 407 ITR 26 (St.) (74) TWO - The word ―pertain to‖ substituted in Sec.l53C(l) w.e.f.|oi.06.15 j Prior to 01.06.15, the documents found were required to be belonging to a 3rd person as per Sec. 153C(1) However the scope of Sec.l53C(l) stood enlarged w.e.f. 01.06.15 by substituting Sec.l53C(l) wherein, the w…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Krish Patel, New Delhi

Accordingly all the appeals of the revenue with respect to all these assesses are dismissed

ITA 1458/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charyacit, Vs. Rohan Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Asjpp8428L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Himanshu Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Actpp8270C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Praduman Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Ajhpp2206P (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Krish Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aqvpp2875R (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Urmila Chandulal Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aeipp1395R

For Appellant: Shri Raj Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142Section 153Section 153C

…ails to fulfil the jurisdictional requirement. No reasons are recorded for the identical conclusion in either satisfaction note that the seized documents mentioned therein belong not to the searched person but to the Assessee. ‖ — Pr. CIT Vs. Vinita Chaurasia 394 ITR 758 (Dei.) (63-73) (SLP of Deptt. dismissed - 407 ITR 26 (St.) (74) TWO - The word ―pertain to‖ substituted in Sec.l53C(l) w.e.f.|oi.06.15 j Prior to 01.06.15, the documents found were required to be belonging to a 3rd person as per Sec. 153C(1) However the scope of Sec.l53C(l) stood enlarged w.e.f. 01.06.15 by substituting Sec.l53C(l) wherein, the w…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Praduman Patel, New Delhi

Accordingly all the appeals of the revenue with respect to all these assesses are dismissed

ITA 1457/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charyacit, Vs. Rohan Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Asjpp8428L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Himanshu Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Actpp8270C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Praduman Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Ajhpp2206P (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Krish Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aqvpp2875R (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Urmila Chandulal Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aeipp1395R

For Appellant: Shri Raj Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142Section 153Section 153C

…ails to fulfil the jurisdictional requirement. No reasons are recorded for the identical conclusion in either satisfaction note that the seized documents mentioned therein belong not to the searched person but to the Assessee. ‖ — Pr. CIT Vs. Vinita Chaurasia 394 ITR 758 (Dei.) (63-73) (SLP of Deptt. dismissed - 407 ITR 26 (St.) (74) TWO - The word ―pertain to‖ substituted in Sec.l53C(l) w.e.f.|oi.06.15 j Prior to 01.06.15, the documents found were required to be belonging to a 3rd person as per Sec. 153C(1) However the scope of Sec.l53C(l) stood enlarged w.e.f. 01.06.15 by substituting Sec.l53C(l) wherein, the w…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Himanshu Patel, New Delhi

Accordingly all the appeals of the revenue with respect to all these assesses are dismissed

ITA 1456/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charyacit, Vs. Rohan Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Asjpp8428L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Himanshu Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Actpp8270C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Praduman Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Ajhpp2206P (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Krish Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aqvpp2875R (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Urmila Chandulal Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aeipp1395R

For Appellant: Shri Raj Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142Section 153Section 153C

…ails to fulfil the jurisdictional requirement. No reasons are recorded for the identical conclusion in either satisfaction note that the seized documents mentioned therein belong not to the searched person but to the Assessee. ‖ — Pr. CIT Vs. Vinita Chaurasia 394 ITR 758 (Dei.) (63-73) (SLP of Deptt. dismissed - 407 ITR 26 (St.) (74) TWO - The word ―pertain to‖ substituted in Sec.l53C(l) w.e.f.|oi.06.15 j Prior to 01.06.15, the documents found were required to be belonging to a 3rd person as per Sec. 153C(1) However the scope of Sec.l53C(l) stood enlarged w.e.f. 01.06.15 by substituting Sec.l53C(l) wherein, the w…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Rohan Patel, New Delhi

Accordingly all the appeals of the revenue with respect to all these assesses are dismissed

ITA 1455/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charyacit, Vs. Rohan Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Asjpp8428L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Himanshu Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Actpp8270C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Praduman Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Ajhpp2206P (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Krish Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aqvpp2875R (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Urmila Chandulal Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aeipp1395R

For Appellant: Shri Raj Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142Section 153Section 153C

…ails to fulfil the jurisdictional requirement. No reasons are recorded for the identical conclusion in either satisfaction note that the seized documents mentioned therein belong not to the searched person but to the Assessee. ‖ — Pr. CIT Vs. Vinita Chaurasia 394 ITR 758 (Dei.) (63-73) (SLP of Deptt. dismissed - 407 ITR 26 (St.) (74) TWO - The word ―pertain to‖ substituted in Sec.l53C(l) w.e.f.|oi.06.15 j Prior to 01.06.15, the documents found were required to be belonging to a 3rd person as per Sec. 153C(1) However the scope of Sec.l53C(l) stood enlarged w.e.f. 01.06.15 by substituting Sec.l53C(l) wherein, the w…

M/S. M.L. Singhi & Associates (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, we hold that addition of share capital in the year under consideration has been made without relying on any incriminating material found during the course of search

ITA 3337/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 3335/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Smt. Shefali Swaroop, CIT DR
Section 153ASection 68

…at none of the documents/papers pointed out by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order belong to the assessee and therefore, the notice issued u/s. 153C itself is invalid. Reliance is placed on the following decisions: (i). Pr. CIT vs. Vinita Chaurasia, 394 ITR 758 (Del.) (ii). CIT vs. Arpit Land (P) Ltd., 393 ITR 276 (Bom) (iii). Canyon Financial Services Ltd. vs. ITO, 399 ITR 202 (Del) (iv). CIT vs. Renu Construction (P) Ltd., 399 ITR 262 (Del.) (v). Pepsi Foods Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO, 367 ITR 112 (Del), SLP dismissed by Supreme Court in Appeal © No. 4659/2015 dated 04.12.2017 M. L. Singhi & Associates (P) Lt…