AVICHAL KULSHRESTHA,LONDON vs. ITO WARD 35(7), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

section 69B have no applicability. 6. That on the peculiar facts of the case and in law, the addition of Rs.825581/- made u/s 69B is liable to be deleted.” 7. Before us, ld. AR of the assessee submitted his submissions and also filed synopsis for the sake of clarity, the same is reproduced as under :- 5 “1. The assessee

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT USHA GUPTA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

69B of the Income Tax Act. The AO is required to find out the real and actual consideration paid by the assessee and to see whether such consideration has been recorded in the books. c) It is clear that AO can disturb the value recorded in the conveyance deed only and only if he has positive evidences of extra consideration

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT ANJU GUPTA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

69B of the Income Tax Act. The AO is required to find out the real and actual consideration paid by the assessee and to see whether such consideration has been recorded in the books. c) It is clear that AO can disturb the value recorded in the conveyance deed only and only if he has positive evidences of extra consideration

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT ANJU GUPTA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

69B of the Income Tax Act. The AO is required to find out the real and actual consideration paid by the assessee and to see whether such consideration has been recorded in the books. c) It is clear that AO can disturb the value recorded in the conveyance deed only and only if he has positive evidences of extra consideration

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT. ANJU GUPTA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

69B of the Income Tax Act. The AO is required to find out the real and actual consideration paid by the assessee and to see whether such consideration has been recorded in the books. c) It is clear that AO can disturb the value recorded in the conveyance deed only and only if he has positive evidences of extra consideration

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT ANJU GUPTA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

69B of the Income Tax Act. The AO is required to find out the real and actual consideration paid by the assessee and to see whether such consideration has been recorded in the books. c) It is clear that AO can disturb the value recorded in the conveyance deed only and only if he has positive evidences of extra consideration

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SATYA REALTORS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

69B of the Income Tax Act. The AO is required to find out the real and actual consideration paid by the assessee and to see whether such consideration has been recorded in the books. c) It is clear that AO can disturb the value recorded in the conveyance deed only and only if he has positive evidences of extra consideration

H.S. BEDI vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI

The appeals are allowed but in the circumstances with no order as to costs

house of 4.73 acres was undervalued. The AO referred the matter to the Department Valuation Cell by issuing a commission under Section 131 of the Act for finding out the correct area of the farm and also for finding out the extent of the Assessees‟ investment in the said farm. 4. The Department Valuation Officer („DVO‟) submitted a report estimating

H.S. BEDI vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI

The appeals are allowed but in the circumstances with no order as to costs

house of 4.73 acres was undervalued. The AO referred the matter to the Department Valuation Cell by issuing a commission under Section 131 of the Act for finding out the correct area of the farm and also for finding out the extent of the Assessees‟ investment in the said farm. 4. The Department Valuation Officer („DVO‟) submitted a report estimating

R.S. BEDI

The appeals are allowed but in the circumstances with no order as to costs

house of 4.73 acres was undervalued. The AO referred the matter to the Department Valuation Cell by issuing a commission under Section 131 of the Act for finding out the correct area of the farm and also for finding out the extent of the Assessees‟ investment in the said farm. 4. The Department Valuation Officer („DVO‟) submitted a report estimating

R.S. BEDI vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI

The appeals are allowed but in the circumstances with no order as to costs

house of 4.73 acres was undervalued. The AO referred the matter to the Department Valuation Cell by issuing a commission under Section 131 of the Act for finding out the correct area of the farm and also for finding out the extent of the Assessees‟ investment in the said farm. 4. The Department Valuation Officer („DVO‟) submitted a report estimating

M.S. BEDI vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI

The appeals are allowed but in the circumstances with no order as to costs

house of 4.73 acres was undervalued. The AO referred the matter to the Department Valuation Cell by issuing a commission under Section 131 of the Act for finding out the correct area of the farm and also for finding out the extent of the Assessees‟ investment in the said farm. 4. The Department Valuation Officer („DVO‟) submitted a report estimating

R.S. BEDI vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI

The appeals are allowed but in the circumstances with no order as to costs

house of 4.73 acres was undervalued. The AO referred the matter to the Department Valuation Cell by issuing a commission under Section 131 of the Act for finding out the correct area of the farm and also for finding out the extent of the Assessees‟ investment in the said farm. 4. The Department Valuation Officer („DVO‟) submitted a report estimating

R.S. BEDI

The appeals are allowed but in the circumstances with no order as to costs

house of 4.73 acres was undervalued. The AO referred the matter to the Department Valuation Cell by issuing a commission under Section 131 of the Act for finding out the correct area of the farm and also for finding out the extent of the Assessees‟ investment in the said farm. 4. The Department Valuation Officer („DVO‟) submitted a report estimating

R.S. BEDI

The appeals are allowed but in the circumstances with no order as to costs

house of 4.73 acres was undervalued. The AO referred the matter to the Department Valuation Cell by issuing a commission under Section 131 of the Act for finding out the correct area of the farm and also for finding out the extent of the Assessees‟ investment in the said farm. 4. The Department Valuation Officer („DVO‟) submitted a report estimating

CIT vs. NAVEEN GERA

Bench: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN

house over and above the investment disclosed in VDIS. On the basis of the DVO’s report, the AO made an addition of ` 2,24,08,820/-. 4. On an appeal being filed by the respondent-assessee, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [for short CIT(A)] allowed the same and deleted the addition made

ACIT, HARIDWAR vs. M/S SANT STEEL & ALLOYS (P) LTD., KOTDWAR

In the result, appeals filed by Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kant

house property, profits and gains of business or profession, or capital gains, nor is it income from "other sources" because the provisions of ss. 69, 69A, 69B and 69C treat unexplained investments, unexplained money, bullion, etc. and unexplained expenditure as deemed income where the nature and source of investment, acquisition or expenditure, as the case may be, have not been

ACIT, HARIDWAR vs. M/S SANT STEEL & ALLOYS (P) LTD., KOTDWAR

In the result, appeals filed by Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kant

house property, profits and gains of business or profession, or capital gains, nor is it income from "other sources" because the provisions of ss. 69, 69A, 69B and 69C treat unexplained investments, unexplained money, bullion, etc. and unexplained expenditure as deemed income where the nature and source of investment, acquisition or expenditure, as the case may be, have not been