PURUSHUTTAM LAL SONI,DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-14, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

condoned: Sl. No. Delay in filing the appeal Appeal number 1. 58 days 3509/Del/2025 2. 58 days 3510/Del/2025 3. 58 days 3511/Del/2025 4. 58 days 3512/Del/2025 5. 58 days 3513/Del/2025 6. 28 days 3514/Del/2025 7. 58 days 3515/Del/2025 3. We take up the assessee’s first and foremost appeal ITA No. 3509/Del/2025 in assessment years 2011-12 as the “lead

PURUSHTTAM LAL SONI,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-14, DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

condoned: Sl. No. Delay in filing the appeal Appeal number 1. 58 days 3509/Del/2025 2. 58 days 3510/Del/2025 3. 58 days 3511/Del/2025 4. 58 days 3512/Del/2025 5. 58 days 3513/Del/2025 6. 28 days 3514/Del/2025 7. 58 days 3515/Del/2025 3. We take up the assessee’s first and foremost appeal ITA No. 3509/Del/2025 in assessment years 2011-12 as the “lead

PURUSHTTAM LAL SONI,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-14, DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

condoned: Sl. No. Delay in filing the appeal Appeal number 1. 58 days 3509/Del/2025 2. 58 days 3510/Del/2025 3. 58 days 3511/Del/2025 4. 58 days 3512/Del/2025 5. 58 days 3513/Del/2025 6. 28 days 3514/Del/2025 7. 58 days 3515/Del/2025 3. We take up the assessee’s first and foremost appeal ITA No. 3509/Del/2025 in assessment years 2011-12 as the “lead

PURUSHTTAM LAL SONI,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-14, DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

condoned: Sl. No. Delay in filing the appeal Appeal number 1. 58 days 3509/Del/2025 2. 58 days 3510/Del/2025 3. 58 days 3511/Del/2025 4. 58 days 3512/Del/2025 5. 58 days 3513/Del/2025 6. 28 days 3514/Del/2025 7. 58 days 3515/Del/2025 3. We take up the assessee’s first and foremost appeal ITA No. 3509/Del/2025 in assessment years 2011-12 as the “lead

PURUSHTTAM LAL SONI,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-14, DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

condoned: Sl. No. Delay in filing the appeal Appeal number 1. 58 days 3509/Del/2025 2. 58 days 3510/Del/2025 3. 58 days 3511/Del/2025 4. 58 days 3512/Del/2025 5. 58 days 3513/Del/2025 6. 28 days 3514/Del/2025 7. 58 days 3515/Del/2025 3. We take up the assessee’s first and foremost appeal ITA No. 3509/Del/2025 in assessment years 2011-12 as the “lead

DILEEP K GUPTA,DELHI vs. DCIT CC-31, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

65B, after section 65. These provisions are very important. They govern the integrity of the electronic record as evidence, as well as, the process for creating electronic record. Importantly, they impart faithful output of computer the same evidentiary value as original without further proof or production of original. Accordingly, while handling any digital evidence, the procedure

DILEEP K GUPTA,DELHI vs. DCIT, CC-31, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

65B, after section 65. These provisions are very important. They govern the integrity of the electronic record as evidence, as well as, the process for creating electronic record. Importantly, they impart faithful output of computer the same evidentiary value as original without further proof or production of original. Accordingly, while handling any digital evidence, the procedure

DILEEP K GUPTA,DELHI vs. DCIT CC-31, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

65B, after section 65. These provisions are very important. They govern the integrity of the electronic record as evidence, as well as, the process for creating electronic record. Importantly, they impart faithful output of computer the same evidentiary value as original without further proof or production of original. Accordingly, while handling any digital evidence, the procedure

DILEEP K GUPTA,DELHI vs. DCIT CC-31, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

65B, after section 65. These provisions are very important. They govern the integrity of the electronic record as evidence, as well as, the process for creating electronic record. Importantly, they impart faithful output of computer the same evidentiary value as original without further proof or production of original. Accordingly, while handling any digital evidence, the procedure

DILEEP K GUPTA,DELHI vs. DCIT CC-31 , DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

65B, after section 65. These provisions are very important. They govern the integrity of the electronic record as evidence, as well as, the process for creating electronic record. Importantly, they impart faithful output of computer the same evidentiary value as original without further proof or production of original. Accordingly, while handling any digital evidence, the procedure

DILEEP K GUPTA,DELHI vs. DCIT, CC-31 , DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

65B, after section 65. These provisions are very important. They govern the integrity of the electronic record as evidence, as well as, the process for creating electronic record. Importantly, they impart faithful output of computer the same evidentiary value as original without further proof or production of original. Accordingly, while handling any digital evidence, the procedure

MANOJ KUMAR SINGH,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumarmanoj Kumar Singh Vs. Dcit, S-17, Ground Floor, Central Circle-28 Panchsheel Enclave, New Delhi New Delhi – 110 017 Pan: Aaxps2824H (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Vs. Manoj Kumar Singh Central Circle-28 S-17, Ground Floor, New Delhi Panchsheel Enclave, New Delhi- 110 017 Pan: Aaxps2824H (Appellant) (Respondent)

delay in dispute is condoned and appeal of the revenue stands admitted. 2. Heard the rival contentions and perused the records. The preliminary and legal issue argued before us was questioning the approval given by the Ld. JCIT, Range- 8, Delhi to the Draft Assessment Order, and as per the contentions of Ld. AR the approval was given u/s 153D

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs. MANOJ KUMAR SINGH , NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumarmanoj Kumar Singh Vs. Dcit, S-17, Ground Floor, Central Circle-28 Panchsheel Enclave, New Delhi New Delhi – 110 017 Pan: Aaxps2824H (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Vs. Manoj Kumar Singh Central Circle-28 S-17, Ground Floor, New Delhi Panchsheel Enclave, New Delhi- 110 017 Pan: Aaxps2824H (Appellant) (Respondent)

delay in dispute is condoned and appeal of the revenue stands admitted. 2. Heard the rival contentions and perused the records. The preliminary and legal issue argued before us was questioning the approval given by the Ld. JCIT, Range- 8, Delhi to the Draft Assessment Order, and as per the contentions of Ld. AR the approval was given u/s 153D

DILEEP KUMAR GUPTA,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-31, DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

65B, after section 65. These provisions are very\nimportant. They govern the integrity of the electronic record as\nevidence, as well as, the process for creating electronic record.\nImportantly, they impart faithful output of computer the same\nevidentiary value as original without further proof or production of\noriginal. Accordingly, while handling any digital evidence, the\nprocedure

DILEEP KUMAR GUPTA,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-31, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

65B, after section 65. These provisions are very\nimportant. They govern the integrity of the electronic record as\nevidence, as well as, the process for creating electronic record.\nImportantly, they impart faithful output of computer the same\nevidentiary value as original without further proof or production of\noriginal. Accordingly, while handling any digital evidence, the\nprocedure