RENU SINGH,DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Vimal Kumarshri Vimal Kumar

132A of the Act. This section allow the AO to initiate proceedings against any other person (not the section allow the AO to initiate proceedings against any other person (not the section allow the AO to initiate proceedings against any other person (not the searched person) if there are indications of undisclosed income. A key searched person) if there

PRAKHAR DALMIA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-34(1), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Us & Prayed That Additional

Capital Gain is not admissible to the appellant. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has in the facts and circumstances of the case erred in confirming the order of the Ld. AO in making addition of Rs.14,944/- as unexplained expenditure under section 69C of the Act, based on conjecture and surmises and without any evidence on record to substantiate

JCIT(OSD), JHANDEWALAN vs. NARENDRA AGGARWAL, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwaljcit (Osd), Jhandewalan, Vs. Narendra Aggarwal, Delhi H.No. 467, Sector-21-A, Fardidabad, Haryana (Pan: Aagpa1441D) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr.Rakesh Gupta, Adv., Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv., Saksham Agarwal, Ca & Deepesh Garg, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.11.2025 Date Of Order : 19.12.2025 O R D E R Per Sudhir Kumar, Jm :

Capital Gain u/s 111 of the Act AO passed the assessment order under section 143(3) of the Act on 27.12.2017 wherein the returned income was accepted. Thereafter, the PCIT initiated the proceeding under section 263 of the Act and set aside the assessment order passed by the 11 AO u/s 143(3) in terms of the provisions of section

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs. BAJRANG LAL AGGARWAL, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1247/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2015-16 बनाम Dcit, Bajrang Lal Aggarwal Central Circle-28, Vs. Room No.327, E-2, Ara Centre, New Delhi. Jhandewalan Extension, New Delhi. Pan No.Aagpa0771J अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re- opened by the AO in exercise of powers under Sections 147/148 of the Act, subject to fulfilment of the conditions as envisaged/mentioned under sections 147/148 of the Act and those powers are saved.” 7.5 In view of the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court it is clear that

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, NEW DELHI vs. GURPREET KOCHAR, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Dcit Vs. Harpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4656N New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurmeet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4654Q New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aizpk6763F New Delhi Appellant Respondent C.O No. 46/Del/2023 In Ita No. 938/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Harpreetkochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4656N Appellant Respondent C.O No. 49/Del/2023 In Ita No. 939/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Gurmeet Kochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4654Q Appellant Respondent C.O Nos. 46, 47 & 49/Del/2020 Dcit Vs. Harpreetkochar

Gain and section 54F of the Income Tax Act 1961. 2. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on fact in allowing relief u/s 54F of Income Tax Act 1961 by ignoring the finding of the Assessing Officer that there was no investment in purchase of property at 5, K. G. Marg, New Delhi as the assessee was residing

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, NEW DELHI vs. HARPREET KOCHAR, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Dcit Vs. Harpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4656N New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurmeet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4654Q New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aizpk6763F New Delhi Appellant Respondent C.O No. 46/Del/2023 In Ita No. 938/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Harpreetkochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4656N Appellant Respondent C.O No. 49/Del/2023 In Ita No. 939/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Gurmeet Kochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4654Q Appellant Respondent C.O Nos. 46, 47 & 49/Del/2020 Dcit Vs. Harpreetkochar

Gain and section 54F of the Income Tax Act 1961. 2. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on fact in allowing relief u/s 54F of Income Tax Act 1961 by ignoring the finding of the Assessing Officer that there was no investment in purchase of property at 5, K. G. Marg, New Delhi as the assessee was residing

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, NEW DELHI vs. GURMEET KOCHAR, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Dcit Vs. Harpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4656N New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurmeet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4654Q New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aizpk6763F New Delhi Appellant Respondent C.O No. 46/Del/2023 In Ita No. 938/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Harpreetkochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4656N Appellant Respondent C.O No. 49/Del/2023 In Ita No. 939/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Gurmeet Kochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4654Q Appellant Respondent C.O Nos. 46, 47 & 49/Del/2020 Dcit Vs. Harpreetkochar

Gain and section 54F of the Income Tax Act 1961. 2. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on fact in allowing relief u/s 54F of Income Tax Act 1961 by ignoring the finding of the Assessing Officer that there was no investment in purchase of property at 5, K. G. Marg, New Delhi as the assessee was residing

HECTOR ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 29, DELHI

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Capital Gain\nu/s 45 of the Act.\nAggrieved by the assessment order dated\n26/03/2022, Assessee preferred the present Appeal on the grounds\nmentioned above.\n4.\nThe Ld. Counsel for the Assessee vehemently submitted that\nduring the search operation dated 14/10/2020, no incriminating\nmaterial was seized in the Assessee's premises and the impugned\naddition

ANOOP JAIN,DELHI vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD), CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1, NOIDA , NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2013-14] Ritu Jain Vs Jcit (Osd) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1 Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida Pan-Aampj9586C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2013-14] Anoop Jain Vs Jcit (Osd) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1, Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida Pan-Aadpj2136K Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2013-14] Anoop Jain Huf Vs Jcit (Osd) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1, Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida Pan-Aaaha6321A Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri S.K.Tulsian, Adv. & Shri Bhoomija Verma, Adv. Respondent By Shri Mahes Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 03.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.10.2025 Order

capital gains. It is further seen that AO in his order has referred the order of SEBI passed in the case of assessee PMC Fin Corp Ltd. which was set aside by the Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai vide its order dated 12.09.2023. In the said order, the Hon’ble Tribunal has quashed the order of SEBI by placing reliance

ANOOP JAIN HUF,DELHI vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD), CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1 , NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2013-14] Ritu Jain Vs Jcit (Osd) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1 Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida Pan-Aampj9586C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2013-14] Anoop Jain Vs Jcit (Osd) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1, Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida Pan-Aadpj2136K Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2013-14] Anoop Jain Huf Vs Jcit (Osd) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1, Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida Pan-Aaaha6321A Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri S.K.Tulsian, Adv. & Shri Bhoomija Verma, Adv. Respondent By Shri Mahes Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 03.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.10.2025 Order

capital gains. It is further seen that AO in his order has referred the order of SEBI passed in the case of assessee PMC Fin Corp Ltd. which was set aside by the Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai vide its order dated 12.09.2023. In the said order, the Hon’ble Tribunal has quashed the order of SEBI by placing reliance

RITU JAIN,DELHI vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD), CC - 1 , NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2013-14] Ritu Jain Vs Jcit (Osd) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1 Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida Pan-Aampj9586C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2013-14] Anoop Jain Vs Jcit (Osd) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1, Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida Pan-Aadpj2136K Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2013-14] Anoop Jain Huf Vs Jcit (Osd) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1, Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida Pan-Aaaha6321A Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri S.K.Tulsian, Adv. & Shri Bhoomija Verma, Adv. Respondent By Shri Mahes Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 03.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.10.2025 Order

capital gains. It is further seen that AO in his order has referred the order of SEBI passed in the case of assessee PMC Fin Corp Ltd. which was set aside by the Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai vide its order dated 12.09.2023. In the said order, the Hon’ble Tribunal has quashed the order of SEBI by placing reliance

AMIT BANSAL,HARYANA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-16, DELHI

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

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

Capital Gain. He submitted that the Assessing Officer cannot mechanically proceed to impugned penalty when he completed the assessment only based on revised return of income filed by the assessee. He submitted that in the similar facts on Amit Bansal and Suresh Chand Bansal vs. ACIT record, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Neeraj

AMIT BANSAL,HARYANA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-16, DELHI

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

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

Capital Gain. He submitted that the Assessing Officer cannot mechanically proceed to impugned penalty when he completed the assessment only based on revised return of income filed by the assessee. He submitted that in the similar facts on Amit Bansal and Suresh Chand Bansal vs. ACIT record, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Neeraj

SURESH CHAND BANSAL,HARYANA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-16 , DELHI

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

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

Capital Gain. He submitted that the Assessing Officer cannot mechanically proceed to impugned penalty when he completed the assessment only based on revised return of income filed by the assessee. He submitted that in the similar facts on Amit Bansal and Suresh Chand Bansal vs. ACIT record, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Neeraj

RITU KAPUR,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NOIDA

In the result, Appeals filed by the Assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shrimanish Agarwal

132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened by the AO in exercise of powers under Sections 147/148 of the Act, subject to fulfilment of the conditions as envisaged/mentioned under sections 147/148 of the Act and those powers are saved. 14.3. Since in the present case no incriminating material was found from the possession

RITU KAPUR,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NOIDA

In the result, Appeals filed by the Assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shrimanish Agarwal

132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened by the AO in exercise of powers under Sections 147/148 of the Act, subject to fulfilment of the conditions as envisaged/mentioned under sections 147/148 of the Act and those powers are saved. 14.3. Since in the present case no incriminating material was found from the possession

RITU KAPUR,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NOIDA

In the result, Appeals filed by the Assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shrimanish Agarwal

132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened by the AO in exercise of powers under Sections 147/148 of the Act, subject to fulfilment of the conditions as envisaged/mentioned under sections 147/148 of the Act and those powers are saved. 14.3. Since in the present case no incriminating material was found from the possession

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NOIDA vs. RITU KAPUR, NOIDA

In the result, Appeals filed by the Assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shrimanish Agarwal

132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened by the AO in exercise of powers under Sections 147/148 of the Act, subject to fulfilment of the conditions as envisaged/mentioned under sections 147/148 of the Act and those powers are saved. 14.3. Since in the present case no incriminating material was found from the possession

RAGHAV BAHL,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NOIDA

In the result, Appeals filed by the Assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened by the AO in exercise of powers under Sections 147/148 of the Act, subject to fulfilment of the conditions as envisaged/mentioned under sections 147/148 of the Act and those powers are saved. 14.3. Since in the present case no incriminating material was found from the possession