INNOVATIVE WELFARE AND EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,GR. NOIDA vs. ADIT (E), TRUST CIRCLE, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri N. K. Choudhryito(Exemption), Vs. Innovative Welfare & Ward-1(2), Educational Society, New Delhi Regd. Office: B-19, Defence Colony, New Delhi Pan: Aaati4207R (Appellant) (Respondent)

penalty proceeding u/s 271(l)(c) separately, for furnishing false particulars of income 5. The Assessee being aggrieved challenged the assessment order before the Ld. Commissioner, who vide impugned order partly sustained the same, by allowing the appeal of the Assesseepartly. For brevity and ready reference the concluding part is reproduced herein below:- 4 Determination 4.1 Grounds of appeal

ITO (EXEMPTIONS), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. INNOVATIVE WELFARE AND EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri N. K. Choudhryito(Exemption), Vs. Innovative Welfare & Ward-1(2), Educational Society, New Delhi Regd. Office: B-19, Defence Colony, New Delhi Pan: Aaati4207R (Appellant) (Respondent)

penalty proceeding u/s 271(l)(c) separately, for furnishing false particulars of income 5. The Assessee being aggrieved challenged the assessment order before the Ld. Commissioner, who vide impugned order partly sustained the same, by allowing the appeal of the Assesseepartly. For brevity and ready reference the concluding part is reproduced herein below:- 4 Determination 4.1 Grounds of appeal

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)

2. Hon'ble ITAT Delhi in the case of Smt Kiran Devi Vs ACIT [2009] 125 TTJ 631 (Delhi) held that where certain income was disclosed in return filed in response to notice under section 153C following search, which income was not disclosed in original return, it was a clear case of concealment of income attracting penalty under section 271

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)

2. Hon'ble ITAT Delhi in the case of Smt Kiran Devi Vs ACIT [2009] 125 TTJ 631 (Delhi) held that where certain income was disclosed in return filed in response to notice under section 153C following search, which income was not disclosed in original return, it was a clear case of concealment of income attracting penalty under section 271

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)

2. Hon'ble ITAT Delhi in the case of Smt Kiran Devi Vs ACIT [2009] 125 TTJ 631 (Delhi) held that where certain income was disclosed in return filed in response to notice under section 153C following search, which income was not disclosed in original return, it was a clear case of concealment of income attracting penalty under section 271

SHRI CHETAN SETH,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara\Nand\Nshri Brajesh Kumar Singh\Nita Nos.1808/Del/2023 & 2983, 2984 & 2985/Del/2015\N[Assessment Years: 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08]\Nshri Chetan Seth,\Nplot No.14, Lcs, Sector-B-1,\Nvasant Kunj,\Nnew Delhi-110070\Npan-Aolps2992A\Nappellant\Nincome Tax Officer,\Nward-15(3),\Nvs New Delhi\Nrespondent\Nappellant By\Nrespondent By\Nshri Arun Kishore, Ca &\Nshri Alok Suri, Ca\Nshri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr.\N(Dr)\Ndate Of Hearing\Ndate Of Pronouncement\N28.03.2025\N25.06.2025\Norder\Nper Brajesh Kumar Singh, Am,\Nthese Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The\Norder Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Delhi, Dated\N24.02.2015 For Ay 2004-05, 27.02.2015 For Ay 2005-06, 2006-07 And\N2007-08 Respectively Arising Out Of Assessment Orders Passed U/S 147/144\Nof The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To ‘The Act') Dated\N31.10.2011 For All The Above Assessment Years, Respectively. Since, The\Nissues Are Common & Connected, Hence, These Appeals Were Heard\Ntogether & Are Disposed Of By This Common Order.\N2. First, We Shall Take Up The Ita No.1808/Del/2023 Pertaining To Ay\N2004-05.\N2.

271 (1) (c) of the Act for the above\nadditions were successfully represented by the same previous counsel\nbefore CIT (Appeals). Departmental appeals against the deletion of penalties\nwere dismissed.\n7. Appeals against additions u/s 2 (22) (e) for the three years 2005-06 to 2007-\n08 were also being represented till last year by the same previous counsel.It\nwas

SHYAM PRODUCTS P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-23(3), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C.

penalty proceedings u/s 271(l)(c) without any material on record.” 3. The ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submits that ground No. 1 of the grounds of appeal is raised challenging the very assumption of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer in re-opening the assessment. The ld. Counsel submits that an identical ground has been decided

OPTIMIST ELECTRONICS P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-19(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C.

penalty proceedings u/s 271(l)(c) without any material on record.” 3. The ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submits that ground No. 1 of the grounds of appeal is raised challenging the very assumption of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer in re-opening the assessment. The ld. Counsel submits that an identical ground has been decided

VIJAY SINGH CHAUHAN,NOIDA vs. ITO,WARD-2(5), NOIDA

The appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhir Pareek & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishravijay Singh Chauhan, Income Tax Officer, House No.-193, Gali No.-3, Vs. Ward- 2(5), Noida, Village Chhalera, Sector-44, Uttar Pradesh, Noida, Uttar Pradesh India. India. Pan No: Aeipc4637E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Sh. Naveen Kumar, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.09.2025 Order Per Sudhir Pareek, Jm: The Aforetitled Appeal Has Been Preferred Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter, In Short, ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 17.07.2023 For Ay 2015-16, By Which Appeal Of The Assessee Was Dismissed.

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is being initiated separately. 14. While deciding the appeal, the Learned CIT(A) observed that the action of the Learned AO in treating the interest income of Rs 13,43,02,195/- as assessed u/s 56(2)(viii) of the Act deserves to be upheld, relevant extract thereof as under: “5.1 During the course

SUBHASH GUJAR,JHAJJAR vs. ITO, WARD-4, ROHTAK

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

151 (1) of the competent authority i.e. JCIT, Rohtak Range, was obtained and thereafter, notice u/s 148 was issued to the assessee on 18.03.2014 which was duly served upon the assessee through Speed Post, sent vide dispatch no. 12388 dated 18.03.2014. In response to notice issued, the assessee did not file his return 6 of income. Again notice u/s

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAM PORTFOLIO PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 6219/Del/2015 (A.Y 2009-10)

151 of the Act and contended that since the Assessment was originally ccompledted u/s 143(3)/153C was annulled, hence, assessment u/s 147 could not have been done by the A.O. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee relied on several case laws in support of the contention and also the order passed by the coordinate Bench in the following cases

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAM PORTFOLIO PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 6219/Del/2015 (A.Y 2009-10)

151 of the Act and contended that since the Assessment was originally ccompledted u/s 143(3)/153C was annulled, hence, assessment u/s 147 could not have been done by the A.O. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee relied on several case laws in support of the contention and also the order passed by the coordinate Bench in the following cases

DHANSAMRIDHI FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 7(2), NEW DELHI , DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

Bench: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD (Judicial Member), SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member)

penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act and interest u/s. 234 of the Act is ex facie unsustainable in law as the very foundation of such proceedings namely, the impugned assessment order and impugned addition therein are without jurisdiction and contrary to law, facts and evidence filed in support thereof by the Appellant. 8. That the Appellant

RIVET ELECTRICAL PVT LTD,FARIDABAD vs. PR. CIT, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia[Assessment Year : 2014-15] Rivet Electrical Pvt.Ltd., Vs Pr.Cit, Ff-9, Vishnu Place, Faridabad, Near Neelam Flyover, Sec-20B, Haryana. Faridabad, Haryana-121002. Pan-Aafcr8803C Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Rajeev Saxena, Adv., Ms. Sumangl Saxena, Adv. & Shri Sahyamsunder, Adv. Respondent By Shri Anuj Garg, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 12.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 15.11.2022

151 - 156 M/s Tcxcity Construction Kovai Pvt. Ltd i. auditors report and balance sheet and profit and loss account for 157-166 FY 2014 - 15 relevant to assessment year 14-15 ii. Acknowledgment of return of income 167 iii. Confirmation of account 168 iv. Bank statement of IDBI Bank from 01.04.2013 to 31.03.2014 169-170 v. Intimation order u/s

RESHMA HARBAKHSH SINGH THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SH. VIKRAMADITYA SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-28(1), DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble Vice- & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Hon’Ble

penalty proceedings initiated under Section 271(1)(C) of the Act is incorrect, illegal and bad in law;” 2 | P a g e 6289_DEL_2025 Reshma Harbakhsh Singh through Legal Heir Vikaramaditya Singh VS DCIT 3. Although the assessee ‘s legal heir has raised several grounds, we first take up the legal ground at S. No. 4 wherein

M/S. INDIA EXPOSITION MART LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of\nthe Act, is initiated separately.”\n\n(2.3) The Assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) in which the following grounds\nof appeal were raised:\n\n\"1. The Learned DCIT erred in law by reopening assessment u/s 147 of\nIncome Tax on the basis of change in opinion.\n2. The Learned

SKY BLUE INFOTECH PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 23(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.438/Del/2020 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 बनाम Sky Blue Infotech Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer 206, Hans Bhawan, 1, Vs. Ward-23(4), Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, Room No.246, C.R. Bldg., New Delhi. I.P. Estate, New Delhi. Pan No. Aalcs1584K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) without any material on record.” 2. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submits that the assessee in ground nos. 3 & 5 challenged the very validity of the reassessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as the impugned reassessment order passed

MONTREAUX RESORTS PVT. LTD.,,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-17(1), DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

Penalty Order order dated under section 17.03.2020 271(1)(c) w.r.s 274 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. ITA Nos. 2352 & 2353/Del/2024 2 Montreaux Resorts Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO A.Y. 2007-08 2. To begin with, we shall first take up ITA No.2352/Del/2024 for Assessment Year 2007-08. ITA No.2352/Del/2024 Assessment Year 2007-08 : 3. As per the grounds

MONTREAUX RESORTS PVT. LTD.,,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-17(1), DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

Penalty Order order dated under section 17.03.2020 271(1)(c) w.r.s 274 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. ITA Nos. 2352 & 2353/Del/2024 2 Montreaux Resorts Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO A.Y. 2007-08 2. To begin with, we shall first take up ITA No.2352/Del/2024 for Assessment Year 2007-08. ITA No.2352/Del/2024 Assessment Year 2007-08 : 3. As per the grounds