Smt Sunita Gupta & Anr. v. CIT & Anr.

290 CTR 361High Court2016#1929 most cited
59

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2023.

Issues it is cited on

section 133(a)abatement of assessmentsection 153b(1)(a)time barred assessmentsection 148(1)section 153(1)(a)bona fide mistakestatement under section 132(4)section 90asection 153b(1)retracted statementsection 153(4)

Judgments citing Smt Sunita Gupta & Anr. v. CIT & Anr.

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Parminder Singh Kalra, New Delhi

ITA 5330/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sushma Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 153A

…Del/2016 ITA Nos. 6701 & 6702/Del/2017 Pariminder Singh Kalra admitting that said gift was bogus, impugned addition was to be confirmed. k) Smt.Dayawanti Vs CIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that where inferences drawn in respect of undeclared income of assessee were premised on materials found as well as statements recorded by assessee's son in course of search operations and assessee had not been able to show as to how estimation made by Assessing Officer was arbitrary or unreasonable, a…

Paraminder Singh Kalra, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 4576/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sushma Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 153A

…Del/2016 ITA Nos. 6701 & 6702/Del/2017 Pariminder Singh Kalra admitting that said gift was bogus, impugned addition was to be confirmed. k) Smt.Dayawanti Vs CIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that where inferences drawn in respect of undeclared income of assessee were premised on materials found as well as statements recorded by assessee's son in course of search operations and assessee had not been able to show as to how estimation made by Assessing Officer was arbitrary or unreasonable, a…

Paraminder Singh Kalra, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 4575/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sushma Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 153A

…Del/2016 ITA Nos. 6701 & 6702/Del/2017 Pariminder Singh Kalra admitting that said gift was bogus, impugned addition was to be confirmed. k) Smt.Dayawanti Vs CIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that where inferences drawn in respect of undeclared income of assessee were premised on materials found as well as statements recorded by assessee's son in course of search operations and assessee had not been able to show as to how estimation made by Assessing Officer was arbitrary or unreasonable, a…

M/S. Sir Shadilal Enterprises Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5728/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 5727/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 5728/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 M/S Sir Shadilal Enterprises Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Ltd., 4A, Hansalaya, 15, Tax, Circle-8(1), Barakhamba Road, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaecs3636D Assessee By : Sh. G. N. Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.09.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.12.2019

For Appellant: Sh. G. N. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 153A(2)Section 153CSection 37Section 68Section 69C

…ann.com 274, 215 Taxman 229, 351 ITR 143) (Copy Enclosed) (iii) CIT Vs M. S. Aggarwal [2018] 93 taxmann.com 247 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) (iv) Smt Dayawanti Vs CIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) ITA Nos. 5727 & 5728/Del/2014 16 Sir Shadilal Enterprises Ltd. (v) M/s Pebble Investment and Finance Ltd Vs ITO (2017-TIOL-238-SC-IT) (Copy Enclosed) M/s Pebble Investment and Finance Ltd Vs ITO (2017- TIOL-188-HC-MUM-IT) Bombay High Court confirmed (Copy Enclosed) (vi) Greenview Restaurant Vs ACIT [2003] 133 Taxman 432…

M/S. Sir Shadilal Enterprises Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5727/DEL/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 5727/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 5728/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 M/S Sir Shadilal Enterprises Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Ltd., 4A, Hansalaya, 15, Tax, Circle-8(1), Barakhamba Road, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaecs3636D Assessee By : Sh. G. N. Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.09.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.12.2019

For Appellant: Sh. G. N. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 153A(2)Section 153CSection 37Section 68Section 69C

…ann.com 274, 215 Taxman 229, 351 ITR 143) (Copy Enclosed) (iii) CIT Vs M. S. Aggarwal [2018] 93 taxmann.com 247 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) (iv) Smt Dayawanti Vs CIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) ITA Nos. 5727 & 5728/Del/2014 16 Sir Shadilal Enterprises Ltd. (v) M/s Pebble Investment and Finance Ltd Vs ITO (2017-TIOL-238-SC-IT) (Copy Enclosed) M/s Pebble Investment and Finance Ltd Vs ITO (2017- TIOL-188-HC-MUM-IT) Bombay High Court confirmed (Copy Enclosed) (vi) Greenview Restaurant Vs ACIT [2003] 133 Taxman 432…

Ved Prakash, Haryana vs. ACIT, Bhiwani

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is on this ground is dismissed

ITA 1413/DEL/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhudr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1409/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2001-02 Ita No. 1410/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2002-03 Ita No. 1411/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Ita No. 1412/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 1413/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ved Parkash, Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income S/O Sh. Partap Singh, Tax, Sco 202-203, Office Of Paras Wali Gal, Near Bus Stand, Income Tax, Huda City Centre, Charkhi Dadri, Haryana Bhiwani (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Azyps0463J Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.07.2019 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Rohtak Each Dated 30.12.2016. 2. In Ita No. 1409/Del/2017, The Assessee Has Raised The Following Effective Grounds: “1. That The Ld. Cit(A) In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case Has Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Without Considering That The Assessed Income After Giving Appeal Effect Of Order Of Ld. Cit(A) & Hon'Ble Itat Was Wrongly Determined On 03/03/2011 At Rs.1,58,925/- Instead Of Correct Computation At Rs.66,425/-. Even This Issue Has Not Been Considered Though Raised. 2. That The Ld. Cit(A) In The Facts Of The Case Has Erred In Confirming The Assessment Of Income From School Without

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR

…med. It is humbly submitted that the following decisions may kindly be considered with regard to additions confirmed despite retraction: 1. Smt. Dayawanti Vs CIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that where inferences drawn in respect of undeclared income of assessee were premised on materials found as well as statements recorded by assessee's son in course of search operations and assessee had not been able to show as to how estimation made by Assessing Officer was arbitrary or…

Ved Prakash, Haryana vs. ACIT, Bhiwani

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is on this ground is dismissed

ITA 1412/DEL/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhudr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1409/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2001-02 Ita No. 1410/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2002-03 Ita No. 1411/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Ita No. 1412/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 1413/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ved Parkash, Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income S/O Sh. Partap Singh, Tax, Sco 202-203, Office Of Paras Wali Gal, Near Bus Stand, Income Tax, Huda City Centre, Charkhi Dadri, Haryana Bhiwani (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Azyps0463J Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.07.2019 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Rohtak Each Dated 30.12.2016. 2. In Ita No. 1409/Del/2017, The Assessee Has Raised The Following Effective Grounds: “1. That The Ld. Cit(A) In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case Has Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Without Considering That The Assessed Income After Giving Appeal Effect Of Order Of Ld. Cit(A) & Hon'Ble Itat Was Wrongly Determined On 03/03/2011 At Rs.1,58,925/- Instead Of Correct Computation At Rs.66,425/-. Even This Issue Has Not Been Considered Though Raised. 2. That The Ld. Cit(A) In The Facts Of The Case Has Erred In Confirming The Assessment Of Income From School Without

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR

…med. It is humbly submitted that the following decisions may kindly be considered with regard to additions confirmed despite retraction: 1. Smt. Dayawanti Vs CIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that where inferences drawn in respect of undeclared income of assessee were premised on materials found as well as statements recorded by assessee's son in course of search operations and assessee had not been able to show as to how estimation made by Assessing Officer was arbitrary or…

Ved Prakash, Haryana vs. ACIT, Bhiwani

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is on this ground is dismissed

ITA 1411/DEL/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhudr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1409/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2001-02 Ita No. 1410/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2002-03 Ita No. 1411/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Ita No. 1412/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 1413/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ved Parkash, Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income S/O Sh. Partap Singh, Tax, Sco 202-203, Office Of Paras Wali Gal, Near Bus Stand, Income Tax, Huda City Centre, Charkhi Dadri, Haryana Bhiwani (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Azyps0463J Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.07.2019 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Rohtak Each Dated 30.12.2016. 2. In Ita No. 1409/Del/2017, The Assessee Has Raised The Following Effective Grounds: “1. That The Ld. Cit(A) In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case Has Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Without Considering That The Assessed Income After Giving Appeal Effect Of Order Of Ld. Cit(A) & Hon'Ble Itat Was Wrongly Determined On 03/03/2011 At Rs.1,58,925/- Instead Of Correct Computation At Rs.66,425/-. Even This Issue Has Not Been Considered Though Raised. 2. That The Ld. Cit(A) In The Facts Of The Case Has Erred In Confirming The Assessment Of Income From School Without

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR

…med. It is humbly submitted that the following decisions may kindly be considered with regard to additions confirmed despite retraction: 1. Smt. Dayawanti Vs CIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that where inferences drawn in respect of undeclared income of assessee were premised on materials found as well as statements recorded by assessee's son in course of search operations and assessee had not been able to show as to how estimation made by Assessing Officer was arbitrary or…

Ved Prakash, Haryana vs. ACIT, Bhiwani

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is on this ground is dismissed

ITA 1410/DEL/2017[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhudr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1409/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2001-02 Ita No. 1410/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2002-03 Ita No. 1411/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Ita No. 1412/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 1413/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ved Parkash, Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income S/O Sh. Partap Singh, Tax, Sco 202-203, Office Of Paras Wali Gal, Near Bus Stand, Income Tax, Huda City Centre, Charkhi Dadri, Haryana Bhiwani (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Azyps0463J Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.07.2019 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Rohtak Each Dated 30.12.2016. 2. In Ita No. 1409/Del/2017, The Assessee Has Raised The Following Effective Grounds: “1. That The Ld. Cit(A) In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case Has Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Without Considering That The Assessed Income After Giving Appeal Effect Of Order Of Ld. Cit(A) & Hon'Ble Itat Was Wrongly Determined On 03/03/2011 At Rs.1,58,925/- Instead Of Correct Computation At Rs.66,425/-. Even This Issue Has Not Been Considered Though Raised. 2. That The Ld. Cit(A) In The Facts Of The Case Has Erred In Confirming The Assessment Of Income From School Without

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR

…med. It is humbly submitted that the following decisions may kindly be considered with regard to additions confirmed despite retraction: 1. Smt. Dayawanti Vs CIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that where inferences drawn in respect of undeclared income of assessee were premised on materials found as well as statements recorded by assessee's son in course of search operations and assessee had not been able to show as to how estimation made by Assessing Officer was arbitrary or…

Ved Prakash, Haryana vs. ACIT, Bhiwani

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is on this ground is dismissed

ITA 1409/DEL/2017[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhudr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1409/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2001-02 Ita No. 1410/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2002-03 Ita No. 1411/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Ita No. 1412/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 1413/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ved Parkash, Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income S/O Sh. Partap Singh, Tax, Sco 202-203, Office Of Paras Wali Gal, Near Bus Stand, Income Tax, Huda City Centre, Charkhi Dadri, Haryana Bhiwani (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Azyps0463J Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.07.2019 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Rohtak Each Dated 30.12.2016. 2. In Ita No. 1409/Del/2017, The Assessee Has Raised The Following Effective Grounds: “1. That The Ld. Cit(A) In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case Has Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Without Considering That The Assessed Income After Giving Appeal Effect Of Order Of Ld. Cit(A) & Hon'Ble Itat Was Wrongly Determined On 03/03/2011 At Rs.1,58,925/- Instead Of Correct Computation At Rs.66,425/-. Even This Issue Has Not Been Considered Though Raised. 2. That The Ld. Cit(A) In The Facts Of The Case Has Erred In Confirming The Assessment Of Income From School Without

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR

…med. It is humbly submitted that the following decisions may kindly be considered with regard to additions confirmed despite retraction: 1. Smt. Dayawanti Vs CIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that where inferences drawn in respect of undeclared income of assessee were premised on materials found as well as statements recorded by assessee's son in course of search operations and assessee had not been able to show as to how estimation made by Assessing Officer was arbitrary or…

M/S.Geetanjali Space Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT CC-1(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 782/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negiassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Dilip Lakhani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/s. Geetanjali Space Dy. CIT CC-1(1), Pvt. Ltd., Room No.903, B-47, Shakti Dhara 9th Floor, Society, Vs. Pratishtha Bhavan, Colony Road, M.K. Road, Bapu Nagar, Ahmedabad, Mumbai - 400020 Gujarat – 382 350 PAN: AADCG2733L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dy. CIT, M/s. Geetanjali Space Central Circle -1(1), Pvt. Ltd., Room No.903, 9th Floor, B-47, Shakti Dhara Pratishtha Bhavan, Vs. Society, Old C.G.O. Bldg. (Annexe) Colony R…

Surya Agrotech Infrastructure Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-8, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 1158/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawal, Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawal, G.D. Agrawal, Vice G.D. Agrawal, Vice & And & Ms. Suchitra Kamble Ms. Suchitra Kamblems. Suchitra Kamble Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 37Section 68

…xmann.com 308 (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (D (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (D (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (D elhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 elhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 elhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that where inferences drawn in respect of undeclared income of assessee were premised on materials found as well as statements recorded…

Surya Agrotech Infrastructure Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-8, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 1157/DEL/2019[201`3-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 May 2019

Bench: Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawal, Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawal, G.D. Agrawal, Vice G.D. Agrawal, Vice & And & Ms. Suchitra Kamble Ms. Suchitra Kamblems. Suchitra Kamble Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 37Section 68

…xmann.com 308 (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (D (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (D (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (D elhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 elhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 elhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that where inferences drawn in respect of undeclared income of assessee were premised on materials found as well as statements recorded…

Surya Processed Food Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-8, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 1156/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawal, Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawal, G.D. Agrawal, Vice G.D. Agrawal, Vice & And & Ms. Suchitra Kamble Ms. Suchitra Kamblems. Suchitra Kamble Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 37Section 68

…xmann.com 308 (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (D (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (D (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (D elhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 elhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 elhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that where inferences drawn in respect of undeclared income of assessee were premised on materials found as well as statements recorded…

M/S. Raj Buildcon Construction Ltd., Gurgaon vs. JCIT, Gurgaon

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

ITA 2422/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Raj Buildcon Vs. Jcit(A), Construction Ltd., Range-Ii, Gurgaon (Haryana) 404, Welldone Tech Park, Sector-48, Sohna Road, Gurgaon (Haryana) Pan :Aadcr6387F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rohit Tiwari, Adv. Respondent By Smt. Rinku Singh, Sr.Dr

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 3

…ficer was justified in rejecting audited balance-sheet filed by assessee and making assessment by applying net profit rate of 12 per cent 2. Smt Davawanti Vs CIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) 12 where Hon’ble Delhi High Court, in para 22 of its order, upheld order of Hon’ble ITAT estimating GP @15% and estimating sales at Rs.1 crore. 3. C1T Vs Chadha Automobiles (India) [2011] 13 taxmann.com 152 (Delhi)/[2011] 202 Taxman 268 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court upheld addition on account of G…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Pearl Bottling Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 5306/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. P.C. Yadav, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Sulekha Verma, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 145(2)Section 153A

…s of the material on record and the statements made by the employees and directors during search and survey proceedings is not arbitrary 3. Smt Dayawanti Vs CIT f20161 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi/[2017] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court, in para 22 of its order, upheld order of Hon’ble ITAT estimating GP @15% and estimating sales at Rs.1 crore. 4. CIT Vs Chadha Automobiles (India) f2011113 taxmann.com 152 (Delhi)/r20111 202 Taxman 268 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court upheld addition on account of…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Pearl Bottling Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 5305/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. P.C. Yadav, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Sulekha Verma, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 145(2)Section 153A

…s of the material on record and the statements made by the employees and directors during search and survey proceedings is not arbitrary 3. Smt Dayawanti Vs CIT f20161 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi/[2017] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court, in para 22 of its order, upheld order of Hon’ble ITAT estimating GP @15% and estimating sales at Rs.1 crore. 4. CIT Vs Chadha Automobiles (India) f2011113 taxmann.com 152 (Delhi)/r20111 202 Taxman 268 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court upheld addition on account of…

DCIT, CC-II, Chandigarh vs. M/S Chandigarh Developers Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is

ITA 994/CHANDI/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Sept 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms.Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptathe D.C.I.T., Vs. M/S Chandigarh Developers Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-Ii, Sco 49-50, Sector 26, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. Pan: Aadcc6359G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Gulshan Raj, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA
Section 132Section 153ASection 68

…Kerala Court held that notice issued under section 153A -return must be filed even if no incriminating documents discovered during search 5. Smt Davawanti Vs CIT F20161 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi)/[2017/ 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/[20161 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Though Stayed by the Apex Court) (PAGE NO.32 TO 44 OF ANNEXURE) where Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that Where inferences drawn in respect of undeclared income of assessee were premised on materials found as well as statements recorded by assessee's son in course of search operations and assessee had not been able to show as to how estim…

Himanshu Kohli, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 28, New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 6592/DEL/2017[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Sh. Sri Gautam Jain & Piyush K. KamalFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139Section 143(1)Section 153A

…Del/2017) (Himanshu Kohli) on statements recorded during search operations cannot be deleted without proving statements to be incorrect. 3 Smt. Dayawanti v. CIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi) [2017] 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that where inferences drawn in respect of undeclared income of assessee were premised on materials found as well as statements recorded by assessee’s son in course of search operations and assessee had not been able to show as to how estimation made by Assessing Officer was arbitrary or…

Himanshu Kohli, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 28, New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 6591/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Sh. Sri Gautam Jain & Piyush K. KamalFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139Section 143(1)Section 153A

…Del/2017) (Himanshu Kohli) on statements recorded during search operations cannot be deleted without proving statements to be incorrect. 3 Smt. Dayawanti v. CIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi) [2017] 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that where inferences drawn in respect of undeclared income of assessee were premised on materials found as well as statements recorded by assessee’s son in course of search operations and assessee had not been able to show as to how estimation made by Assessing Officer was arbitrary or…