GUNJAN GARG,DELHI vs. PR. CIT-16, NEW DELHI
Appeal of the assessee is allowed considering the above two aspects and keeping the other aspects open
ITA 1205/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2020AY 2015-16
Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Gunjan Garg, Vs. Pr. Cit-16, C/O. Raj Kumar & Associates Ca, Room No. 101, Drum Shape L-7A(Lgf) South Exten. Part-Ii, New Building, New Delhi Delhi Pan: Aagpg5718B (Appellant) (Respondent) Mukesh Garg, Vs. Pr. Cit-16, C/O. Raj Kumar & Associates Ca, Room No. 101, Drum Shape L-7A(Lgf) South Exten. Part-Ii, New Building, New Delhi Delhi Pan: Aaapg2585Q (Appellant) (Respondent)
For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Suniita Singh, CIT DR
Section 111Section 143Section 143(3)Section 245FSection 263Section 54B
gains. This issue was also not examined.
With respect to the agricultural income, it was noted that agricultural income of ₹ 5.90 lakhs were shown when there is no agricultural land holding. On the third issue, it was noted that when the property in Chanakyapuri is self occupied it need to examine in which year it was purchased. The fourth issue
