“reassessment proceedings”

Mr. Ankur Bagoria, Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A. No.1847/Del/2019 (A.Y 2010-11) (Through Video Conferencing) Vs Ito Mr. Ankur Bagoria 1411, Maliwara, Nai Sarak, Ward-29(2) Chandni Chowk, New Delhi Delhi Alvpb7382G (Appellant) (Respondent)

both erroneous and misconceived both of which merit to be quashed, the Ld. AR further pointed out that the current reassessment proceeding for the year owes its origin and source to the regular assessment order for AY 2011-12 on which basis entirely the subject reassessment proceedings were initiated ... same is not pressed by the assessee, hence, the same is dismissed. As relates to Ground No. 1 & 3 to 6, the current reassessment proceedings for the year of its origin and source to the regular assessment order for Assessment Year 2011-12 on which basis the present reassessment proceedings

Anand Pershad Jaiswal, New Delhi vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, all appeals filed by the respective assesses are

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Karamjit S Jaiswal has been filing return of income as Legal Heir of Late Ladli Pershad Jaiswal and accordingly for above discussed income, reassessment proceeding have been correctly initiated in his hands as Legal Heir of Late Sh. Ladli Pershad Jaiswal. As regards gathering information from Sh. Anand Pershad Jaiswal ... following grounds of appeal:- 1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) was not justified in confirming initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s. 148 even though initiation of proceedings u/s. 148 are illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction in the absence of tangible material and recording

Anand Pershad Jaiswal, New Delhi vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, all appeals filed by the respective assesses are

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Karamjit S Jaiswal has been filing return of income as Legal Heir of Late Ladli Pershad Jaiswal and accordingly for above discussed income, reassessment proceeding have been correctly initiated in his hands as Legal Heir of Late Sh. Ladli Pershad Jaiswal. As regards gathering information from Sh. Anand Pershad Jaiswal ... following grounds of appeal:- 1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) was not justified in confirming initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s. 148 even though initiation of proceedings u/s. 148 are illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction in the absence of tangible material and recording

Sh. Karamjit S. Jaiwswal, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all appeals filed by the respective assesses are

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Karamjit S Jaiswal has been filing return of income as Legal Heir of Late Ladli Pershad Jaiswal and accordingly for above discussed income, reassessment proceeding have been correctly initiated in his hands as Legal Heir of Late Sh. Ladli Pershad Jaiswal. As regards gathering information from Sh. Anand Pershad Jaiswal ... following grounds of appeal:- 1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) was not justified in confirming initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s. 148 even though initiation of proceedings u/s. 148 are illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction in the absence of tangible material and recording

Sh. Karamjit S. Jaiwswal, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all appeals filed by the respective assesses are

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Karamjit S Jaiswal has been filing return of income as Legal Heir of Late Ladli Pershad Jaiswal and accordingly for above discussed income, reassessment proceeding have been correctly initiated in his hands as Legal Heir of Late Sh. Ladli Pershad Jaiswal. As regards gathering information from Sh. Anand Pershad Jaiswal ... following grounds of appeal:- 1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) was not justified in confirming initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s. 148 even though initiation of proceedings u/s. 148 are illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction in the absence of tangible material and recording

Rajesh Gupta (HUF), New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 31(4), New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year : 2011-12 Rajesh Gupta Huf, Vs. Ito, C/O-Raj Kumar & Associates, Ward-31(4), Chartered Accountants, R. No.1209, Civic Centre, L-7A (Lgf), South Extension New Delhi-110002 Part-Ii, New Delhi-110049 Pan-Aaghr9262M

such accommodation entry. 4. In appeal, the learned CIT(A), sustained the addition made by the Assessing Officer. He also upheld the validity of reassessment proceedings challenged before him. 5. Aggrieved with such order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising following ... decisions, he submitted that when the approval has been given in a mechanical manner, such approval is not accordance with law and therefore, the reassessment proceedings has to be held as invalid. He submitted that the Assessing Officer in the instant case has initiated reassessment proceedings in a mechanical manner

Digvijay Advisor Pvt. Ltd, Ghaziabad Up vs. ITO Ward-7(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year : 2008-09

from the Investigation Wing that the assessee has obtained accommodation entries of Rs.30 lakhs on account of share capital. The Assessing Officer, thereafter initiated reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act after recording the reasons and with the approval of the competent authority. The reasons so recorded were 2 provided ... valid, he submitted that in view of the following decisions, such action of the Assessing Officer is illegal and vitiates the entire reassessment proceedings. i. CIT V. RAMENDRA NATH GHOSH 82 ITR 888 (SC) ii. CIT V MASCOMPTEL INDIA LTD [2012] 345 ITR 58 (DELHI) iii. AVI -OIL INDIA

Shagun Kumar Jain Enterprises, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-47(5), New Delhi

In the result, this appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Assessment Year 2010-11. Grounds taken in this appeal of Assessee are as under: “1. That the Ld. CIT (A) has wrongly held the reassessment proceeding u/s 147 is valid. 1(b) That the Ld. CIT (A)-16, New Delhi has wrongly held it as a typographical human error ... /Del/2017. Shagun Kumar Jain Enterprises. 1(d) That the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly held that objections to reassessment proceedings were filed after the assessment had been completed. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. A.O. for treating

Garg Zevar Palace Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-1(3), Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 9542/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Garg Zevar Palace Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income Tax Officer(E), C/O Kapil Goel, Adv., Ward-1(3), F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Faridabad, Haryana New Delhi-110085 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccg0565H Assessee By : Sh. Kapil Goel, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Prakash Dubey, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.01.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.03.2021

Supreme Court in the case of NDTV Ltd. Vs. DCIT vide Civil Appeal Mo. 1008 of 3rd 2020 dated April, 2020, has quashed the reassessment proceedings for not mentioning the first proviso neither in the reason recorded nor in the notice issued u/s 148. The Hon ’Me Delhi High Court ... there is complete non-application of mind by the AO as well as by both the superior authorities. Therefore, on this score also, the reassessment proceedings have to be quashed and the decision relied on by the ld. DR in the case of Sonia Gandhi (supra

DCIT, Circle- 1(1), Gurgaon vs. Dlf Universal Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and consequently, the cross objections filed by the assessee becomes infructuous

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Through Video Conferencing]

where the Assessing Officer has mentioned the date of the search as 23/01/2016. She submitted that in case search is conducted on 23.01.2016, the reassessment proceedings initiated on 14/11/2013 are validly pending as on date of search, and therefore ratio in the case of Kabul Chawala (supra) would ... assessment year under consideration. 6.2 Regarding the second condition, according to the Assessing Officer notice under section 148 of the Act for commencing reassessment proceeding was issued on 23/10/2013 and notice under section 153A was issued on 10/03/2015 and therefore 6 ITA No.5963/Del./2017 & C.O. No.12/Del./2018 assessment was pending

M/S Super Industries, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2006-07 Super Industries, Vs Ito, Prop. S. Jagjit Singh, Ward-33(3), L/H Shri Joginder Singh, New Delhi. N.7, Gali No.9, Anand Parbat Industrial Area, New Delhi. Pan: Aasps8033M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ramesh Goyal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Ranu Mukherjee, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 17.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.03.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 15Th September, 2015 Of The Cit(A)-17, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2006- 07. 2. This Appeal Was Earlier Dismissed By The Tribunal For Non-Appearance. Subsequently, The Tribunal, Vide Ma No.118/Del/2017, Order Dated 16Th February, 2018, Recalled Its Earlier Order. Hence, This Is A Recalled Matter. 3. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & The Proprietor Of M/S Super Industries. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 27Th October, 2006 Declaring The Total Income At Rs.1,89,640/-. Subsequently, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened On The Basis Of Information Obtained That The Assessee Indulged In Bogus Purchases/Accommodation Entries Provided By Shri Rakesh Gupta, Shri Vishesh Gupta, Shri Navneet & Shri Vaibhav Jain. Accordingly, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened After Recording Reasons As Per The Provisions Of Section 147 Of The Act. Notice U/S 148 Dated 28Th March, 2013 Was Issued & Served Upon The Assessee. The Ao, Thereafter, Issued Statutory Notices. Rejecting The Various Explanations Given By The Assessee & Observing That The Assessee Has Made Bogus Purchase Of Rs.13,03,692/- From Shree Bankey Bihari Trading Co. & Shree Shyam Trading Co., Which Are Owned By The Persons Named Earlier, Made Addition Of Rs.13,03,692/- U/S 69C Of The It Act.

dated 15th May, 2017 and ITA No.3187/Del/2017, order dated 07.11.2017 for A.Y. 2008- 09, submitted that under identical circumstances the Tribunal has quashed the reassessment proceedings on the ground that the case was reopened on the basis of information received from the Investigation Wing and the AO has not applied ... mind before reopening of the assessment. He accordingly submitted that the validity of reassessment proceedings has been decided by the Tribunal in assessee’s own case in the two subsequent years and, therefore, this being a covered matter, the additional ground raised by the assessee should be allowed

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Arizona Venutres Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI

Virender Kumar, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward - 3, Rewari

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

Rohtak, relating to assessment year 2011-12. 2. The assessee, in the various grounds of appeal has challenged the validity of the reassessment proceedings as well as addition of Rs.3,62,000/- sustained by the CIT(A) out of addition of Rs.8,57,200/- made ... Tribunal. 7. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the time of hearing, did not press the legal ground challenging the validity of reassessment proceedings for which the ld. DR has no objection. Accordingly, the ground challenging the validity of reassessment proceedings is dismissed as not pressed

Balbir Investment Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 4(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2009-10

However, the learned CIT(A) was not satisfied with the arguments advanced by the assessee and dismissed the grounds of challenging the validity of reassessment proceedings and upheld the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 5. Aggrieved with such order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal ... Therefore, the reassessment should be quashed on this reason itself, since, the reasons are based on non-existing facts. He, accordingly, submitted that the reassessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer should be quashed. 6.1. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ranbaxy

M/S. Kalinga Conduits Electricables (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT- 9, New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2010-11 Kalinga Conduits Electricables (P) Vs Pr. Cit-9, Ltd., New Delhi. 81/41, Punjabi Bagh West, New Delhi. Pan : Aacck5784H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate; Shri Rajiv Sabharwal, Ca; & Shri Lalit Mohan, Ca. Revenue By : Mrs. Aashna Paul, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.02.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.03.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23Rd March, 2017 Passed U/S 263 Of The It Act, 1961 By The Pcit, New Delhi, Relating To The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company & Filed Its Return Of Income On 30Th September, 2010 Declaring An Income Of Rs.5,940/-. The Said Return Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Act. Subsequently, The Cit-Ii, New Delhi, Vide His Letter No. File 148/2012-13/2817 Dated 15Th March, 2013, Forwarded The Letter Of Investigation Ii, Delhi, Vide F. No.Dit (Inv.)-Ii/U/S 148/2012-13/197 Dated 12Th March, 2013 Giving Information About An Accommodation Entry Of Rs.40 Lakhs Received By The Assessee From M/S Victory Software Pvt. Ltd., Zenith Automotive Pvt. Ltd. & Humtum Marketing Pvt. Ltd. Based On The Above, The Ao Issued Notice U/S 148 After Recording The Reasons.

case of Deniel Merchants Private Limited (supra) no enquiry was conducted by the AO whereas in the instant case enequiries were during the reassessment proceedings and order was passed u/s. 143 (3)/ 147. Further, all the investing companies are assessed u/s 153C/153A prior to completion of the assessment ... part of the AO is concerned, we find in the instant case thorough enquiries were conducted by the AO at the time of reassessment proceedings. Full details giving the names, addresses, number of shares of nominal value and share premium amount of all the share holders alongwith their bank statements

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ircon International Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in allowing the grounds related to challenging the initiation of 2 reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act without discussing this issue on merits. 3. The assessee is a Government of India Undertaking, engaged inter alia

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

recorded for reopening of assessment is irrelevant and cannot be considered as having any evidentiary value against the assessee so as to initiate the reassessment proceedings against the assessee. He has referred to PB-32 which is letter filed by the assessee before A.O. in respect of notice under section ... relied upon the Orders of the authorities below and submitted that even if A.O. recorded reasons on 17.03.2017 for initiation of reassessment proceedings, it is still within the period of limitation as prescribed under the Law. The Pr. CIT has granted approval as per law even if Addl

Savita Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 22(4), New Delhi

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

been directed against the order of Ld. CIT(Appeals)-31, New Delhi dated 25.09.2018 for AY 2010-11, challenging the initiation of the reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the I.T. Act and additions of Rs. 2,15,84,086/- u/s 68 of the Act holding the share application money ... appeal of the assessee. 5. Ld. Counsel for assessee referred to PB 34 which is copy of the reasons recorded for initiation of the reassessment proceedings. The same reads as under: 6 ITA.No.1389/Del./2019 “Name of the assessee: M/s Savita Holdings P. Ltd. AY 2010- 11 PAN: AABCS3394P ASSESSMENT

Dua Health Care Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 11(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya[Assessment Year: 2012-13]

Delhi in the case of Monarch Education Society 387 ITR 416 wherein it was held as under: “6. However, in the course of the reassessment proceedings, as is evident from the assessment order dated December 10, 2010 passed by the Assessing Officer, the sum that was sought to be added

Raman Sood, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-28(4), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

were brought to the notice of the Assessing Officer in the very first instance when the assessee was raising objections against the initiation of reassessment proceedings. Even the table produced by the Assessing Officer in his assessment order depicts only payments made to M/s Maa Durga Trading Company and there ... thereafter, proceeded to reopen the assessment on wrong appreciation facts on record, in such a situation, we have no option but to quash the reassessment proceedings itself. Accordingly, relying on the above mentioned judicial precedents, we quash the re-assessment proceedings. Before parting, we would also like to add that