DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S NIRALA HOUSING PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the five appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri S.K. Yadav & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

bogus expenses; Rs8,00,000 that was part of the surrendered sum of Rs 10 crores but had not been reflected as additional business income against any of the companies of the group; and Rs 8,21,575 as disallowance u/s 14A. He also initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271AAA and 271(l)(c). While adjudicating the appeal filed

M/S. NIRALA HOUSING PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the five appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri S.K. Yadav & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

bogus expenses; Rs8,00,000 that was part of the surrendered sum of Rs 10 crores but had not been reflected as additional business income against any of the companies of the group; and Rs 8,21,575 as disallowance u/s 14A. He also initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271AAA and 271(l)(c). While adjudicating the appeal filed

M/S. NIRALA HOUSING PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the five appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri S.K. Yadav & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

bogus expenses; Rs8,00,000 that was part of the surrendered sum of Rs 10 crores but had not been reflected as additional business income against any of the companies of the group; and Rs 8,21,575 as disallowance u/s 14A. He also initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271AAA and 271(l)(c). While adjudicating the appeal filed

RR CARWELL PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AY

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

151) and determine the total income of the assessee. Such determination in the orders passed under Section 153A would be similar to the orders passed in any reassessment, where the total income determined in the original assessment order and the income that escaped assessment are clubbed together and assessed as the total income. In such a case, to reiterate, there

RR CARWELL PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AY

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

151) and determine the total income of the assessee. Such determination in the orders passed under Section 153A would be similar to the orders passed in any reassessment, where the total income determined in the original assessment order and the income that escaped assessment are clubbed together and assessed as the total income. In such a case, to reiterate, there

RR CARWELL PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AY

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

151) and determine the total income of the assessee. Such determination in the orders passed under Section 153A would be similar to the orders passed in any reassessment, where the total income determined in the original assessment order and the income that escaped assessment are clubbed together and assessed as the total income. In such a case, to reiterate, there

RR CARWELL PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AY

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

151) and determine the total income of the assessee. Such determination in the orders passed under Section 153A would be similar to the orders passed in any reassessment, where the total income determined in the original assessment order and the income that escaped assessment are clubbed together and assessed as the total income. In such a case, to reiterate, there

RR CARWELL PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AY

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

151) and determine the total income of the assessee. Such determination in the orders passed under Section 153A would be similar to the orders passed in any reassessment, where the total income determined in the original assessment order and the income that escaped assessment are clubbed together and assessed as the total income. In such a case, to reiterate, there

RR CARWELL PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AY

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

151) and determine the total income of the assessee. Such determination in the orders passed under Section 153A would be similar to the orders passed in any reassessment, where the total income determined in the original assessment order and the income that escaped assessment are clubbed together and assessed as the total income. In such a case, to reiterate, there

SURANA JEWELLERS,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-47(3), NEW DELHI

Accordingly appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2008 – 09 is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

2) of the act and thus the reassessment is liable to be quashed. ii. That the Honourable Commissioner of income tax (appeals) has erred in law as much as on facts of the case by upholding the addition of ₹ 820600/– alleged to be bogus purchases made by the appellant from M/s Mohit international, are concerned alleged to have been controlled

SURANA ENTERPRISES,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-47(3), NEW DELHI

Accordingly appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2008 – 09 is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

2) of the act and thus the reassessment is liable to be quashed. ii. That the Honourable Commissioner of income tax (appeals) has erred in law as much as on facts of the case by upholding the addition of ₹ 820600/– alleged to be bogus purchases made by the appellant from M/s Mohit international, are concerned alleged to have been controlled

SURANA JEWELLERS,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-47(3), NEW DELHI

Accordingly appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2008 – 09 is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

2) of the act and thus the reassessment is liable to be quashed. ii. That the Honourable Commissioner of income tax (appeals) has erred in law as much as on facts of the case by upholding the addition of ₹ 820600/– alleged to be bogus purchases made by the appellant from M/s Mohit international, are concerned alleged to have been controlled

ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-18, NEW DELHI vs. JAGANANTH HEMCHAND JAIN, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

2) do not meet the pre-requisites of Section 147 of the Act and hence the jurisdiction assumed in consequence of such I.T.A. Nos.7754 & 7755/Del/2018 9 CO Nos.15 & 16/Del/2023 invalid reasons are without the sanction of law. 6.1 The ld. counsel firstly contends that the jurisdiction assumed under Section 147 itself is incorrect and contrary to the scheme

ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-18, NEW DELHI vs. JAGANANTH HEMCHAND JAIN, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

2) do not meet the pre-requisites of Section 147 of the Act and hence the jurisdiction assumed in consequence of such I.T.A. Nos.7754 & 7755/Del/2018 9 CO Nos.15 & 16/Del/2023 invalid reasons are without the sanction of law. 6.1 The ld. counsel firstly contends that the jurisdiction assumed under Section 147 itself is incorrect and contrary to the scheme

KRISHNA DEVI,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 38(3), NEW DELHI

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6356/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Krishna Devi, Vs Income Tax Officer, F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Ward-38(3), New Delhi-110085 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abrpd0875E Assessee By : Sh. Kapil Goel, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.10.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.01.2022

purchased the shares at the market rate and sold the same at market rate through recognized stock broker of Security Exchange Board of India, it cannot be said that the transaction was a bogus one”. In the circumstances, I am inclined to follow the decision of Co- ordinate Bench in the case of Nirav Kumar Mahendra Kumar Sapani (supra). Transactions

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 46(1), NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs. MAM RAJ CHUNNI LAL EXIM, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. Sudhir Kumar & Sh. Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2016-17 Income Tax Officer, Vs Mam Raj Chunni Lal Exim Ward- 46 (1) Shop No. 5183, Ground New Delhi Floor, Lahori Gate, Naya Bazar, Delhi -110006 Pan No.Aaxfm0533B (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 147 to 151 A have not been complied with. (2) That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case Ld. CIT(A) ought to have deleted the impugned addition of Rs.144,15,042/- on merit also made by Ld. AO on account of alleged bogus purchase

ANIL CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

151 2,34,55,383 2,60,85,530 and v) 2018-19 37,46,910 3,02,30,766 3,39,77,680 2019-20 vi) 2019-20 63,28,050 3,34,21,765 3,97,49,820 xi) 24.8.2022 Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), dismissed the appeal of the appellant. 3 The brief facts

ANIL CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

151 2,34,55,383 2,60,85,530 and v) 2018-19 37,46,910 3,02,30,766 3,39,77,680 2019-20 vi) 2019-20 63,28,050 3,34,21,765 3,97,49,820 xi) 24.8.2022 Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), dismissed the appeal of the appellant. 3 The brief facts