ASHA BURMAN,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 46(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed for

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.539 To 544/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2012-13 To 2017-18 बनाम Asha Burman Acit, 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, Vs. Circle 46(1), 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. Drum Shape Building, Ito, Pan No.Aaepb0966C New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

house property at such notional figure of Rs. 1,78,76,700/- on gross basis vide order dated 27th December 2017. 3. Before the CIT (Appeals), the assessee challenged the action of the Assessing Officer and stated that the inclusion of ALV of whole of the building on notional basis by assuming that the whole building has been given

ASHA BURMAN,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 46(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed for

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.539 To 544/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2012-13 To 2017-18 बनाम Asha Burman Acit, 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, Vs. Circle 46(1), 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. Drum Shape Building, Ito, Pan No.Aaepb0966C New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

house property at such notional figure of Rs. 1,78,76,700/- on gross basis vide order dated 27th December 2017. 3. Before the CIT (Appeals), the assessee challenged the action of the Assessing Officer and stated that the inclusion of ALV of whole of the building on notional basis by assuming that the whole building has been given

ASHA BURMAN,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 46(1), NEW DLEHI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed for

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.539 To 544/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2012-13 To 2017-18 बनाम Asha Burman Acit, 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, Vs. Circle 46(1), 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. Drum Shape Building, Ito, Pan No.Aaepb0966C New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

house property at such notional figure of Rs. 1,78,76,700/- on gross basis vide order dated 27th December 2017. 3. Before the CIT (Appeals), the assessee challenged the action of the Assessing Officer and stated that the inclusion of ALV of whole of the building on notional basis by assuming that the whole building has been given

ASHA BURMAN,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 46(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed for

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.539 To 544/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2012-13 To 2017-18 बनाम Asha Burman Acit, 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, Vs. Circle 46(1), 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. Drum Shape Building, Ito, Pan No.Aaepb0966C New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

house property at such notional figure of Rs. 1,78,76,700/- on gross basis vide order dated 27th December 2017. 3. Before the CIT (Appeals), the assessee challenged the action of the Assessing Officer and stated that the inclusion of ALV of whole of the building on notional basis by assuming that the whole building has been given

ASHA BURMAN,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 46(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed for

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.539 To 544/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2012-13 To 2017-18 बनाम Asha Burman Acit, 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, Vs. Circle 46(1), 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. Drum Shape Building, Ito, Pan No.Aaepb0966C New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

house property at such notional figure of Rs. 1,78,76,700/- on gross basis vide order dated 27th December 2017. 3. Before the CIT (Appeals), the assessee challenged the action of the Assessing Officer and stated that the inclusion of ALV of whole of the building on notional basis by assuming that the whole building has been given

SUNITA BHARDWAJ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 63(1), NEW DELHI

reassessment, making additions under Section 68 and for notional income from house property.", "held": "The Tribunal held that the reassessment

M/S. JAY BHARAT MARUTI LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2005-06 & Assessment Year: 2006-07 Acit, Vs. M/S. Jay Bharat Maruti Ltd., Circle-4(1), 601, Hemkunt Chamber, New Delhi 89-Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan :Aaacj2021K (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No.113/Del/2012 [Arising Out Of Ita No.908/Del/2012] Assessment Year: 2005-06 & C.O. No.114/Del/2012 [Arising Out Of Ita No.909/Del/2012] Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S. Jay Bharat Maruti Ltd., Vs. Acit, 601, Hemkunt Chamber, Circle-4(1), 89-Nehru Place, New Delhi New Delhi Pan :Aaacj2021K (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2005-06 M/S. Jay Bharat Maruti Ltd., Vs. Acit, Neel House, Lado Sarai, Circle-4(1), Opp. Qutab Minar, Mehrauli, New Delhi New Delhi Pan :Aaacj2021K (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessment proceeding, the Assessing Officer issued a show-cause notice to the assessee to explain, why the deduction claimed towards payment of lease rent amounting to Rs.6,68,43,636/- to State Bank of India should not be disallowed. In response to the show-cause notice, the assessee submitted that the lease rent of Rs.19,28,97,000/- debited

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. JAY BHARAT MARUTI LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2005-06 & Assessment Year: 2006-07 Acit, Vs. M/S. Jay Bharat Maruti Ltd., Circle-4(1), 601, Hemkunt Chamber, New Delhi 89-Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan :Aaacj2021K (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No.113/Del/2012 [Arising Out Of Ita No.908/Del/2012] Assessment Year: 2005-06 & C.O. No.114/Del/2012 [Arising Out Of Ita No.909/Del/2012] Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S. Jay Bharat Maruti Ltd., Vs. Acit, 601, Hemkunt Chamber, Circle-4(1), 89-Nehru Place, New Delhi New Delhi Pan :Aaacj2021K (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2005-06 M/S. Jay Bharat Maruti Ltd., Vs. Acit, Neel House, Lado Sarai, Circle-4(1), Opp. Qutab Minar, Mehrauli, New Delhi New Delhi Pan :Aaacj2021K (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessment proceeding, the Assessing Officer issued a show-cause notice to the assessee to explain, why the deduction claimed towards payment of lease rent amounting to Rs.6,68,43,636/- to State Bank of India should not be disallowed. In response to the show-cause notice, the assessee submitted that the lease rent of Rs.19,28,97,000/- debited

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. JAY BHARAT MARUTI LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2005-06 & Assessment Year: 2006-07 Acit, Vs. M/S. Jay Bharat Maruti Ltd., Circle-4(1), 601, Hemkunt Chamber, New Delhi 89-Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan :Aaacj2021K (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No.113/Del/2012 [Arising Out Of Ita No.908/Del/2012] Assessment Year: 2005-06 & C.O. No.114/Del/2012 [Arising Out Of Ita No.909/Del/2012] Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S. Jay Bharat Maruti Ltd., Vs. Acit, 601, Hemkunt Chamber, Circle-4(1), 89-Nehru Place, New Delhi New Delhi Pan :Aaacj2021K (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2005-06 M/S. Jay Bharat Maruti Ltd., Vs. Acit, Neel House, Lado Sarai, Circle-4(1), Opp. Qutab Minar, Mehrauli, New Delhi New Delhi Pan :Aaacj2021K (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessment proceeding, the Assessing Officer issued a show-cause notice to the assessee to explain, why the deduction claimed towards payment of lease rent amounting to Rs.6,68,43,636/- to State Bank of India should not be disallowed. In response to the show-cause notice, the assessee submitted that the lease rent of Rs.19,28,97,000/- debited

M/S. JAY BHARAT MARUTI LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2005-06 & Assessment Year: 2006-07 Acit, Vs. M/S. Jay Bharat Maruti Ltd., Circle-4(1), 601, Hemkunt Chamber, New Delhi 89-Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan :Aaacj2021K (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No.113/Del/2012 [Arising Out Of Ita No.908/Del/2012] Assessment Year: 2005-06 & C.O. No.114/Del/2012 [Arising Out Of Ita No.909/Del/2012] Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S. Jay Bharat Maruti Ltd., Vs. Acit, 601, Hemkunt Chamber, Circle-4(1), 89-Nehru Place, New Delhi New Delhi Pan :Aaacj2021K (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2005-06 M/S. Jay Bharat Maruti Ltd., Vs. Acit, Neel House, Lado Sarai, Circle-4(1), Opp. Qutab Minar, Mehrauli, New Delhi New Delhi Pan :Aaacj2021K (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessment proceeding, the Assessing Officer issued a show-cause notice to the assessee to explain, why the deduction claimed towards payment of lease rent amounting to Rs.6,68,43,636/- to State Bank of India should not be disallowed. In response to the show-cause notice, the assessee submitted that the lease rent of Rs.19,28,97,000/- debited

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. JAY BHARAT MARUTI LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2005-06 & Assessment Year: 2006-07 Acit, Vs. M/S. Jay Bharat Maruti Ltd., Circle-4(1), 601, Hemkunt Chamber, New Delhi 89-Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan :Aaacj2021K (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No.113/Del/2012 [Arising Out Of Ita No.908/Del/2012] Assessment Year: 2005-06 & C.O. No.114/Del/2012 [Arising Out Of Ita No.909/Del/2012] Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S. Jay Bharat Maruti Ltd., Vs. Acit, 601, Hemkunt Chamber, Circle-4(1), 89-Nehru Place, New Delhi New Delhi Pan :Aaacj2021K (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2005-06 M/S. Jay Bharat Maruti Ltd., Vs. Acit, Neel House, Lado Sarai, Circle-4(1), Opp. Qutab Minar, Mehrauli, New Delhi New Delhi Pan :Aaacj2021K (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessment proceeding, the Assessing Officer issued a show-cause notice to the assessee to explain, why the deduction claimed towards payment of lease rent amounting to Rs.6,68,43,636/- to State Bank of India should not be disallowed. In response to the show-cause notice, the assessee submitted that the lease rent of Rs.19,28,97,000/- debited

GALLERIA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION,GURGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), GURGAON, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg[Assessment Year : 2014-15] Galleria Condominium Vs Ito, Association, Galleria Building, Ward-1(3), Dlf Phase Iv, Dlf City, Gurgaon. Gurgaon, Haryana-122002. Pan-Aaaag3018P Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Rishabh Aggarwal, Ca & Ms. Jaishree, Ca Respondent By Shri Mithalesh Kumar Pandey, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 19.09.2022

reassessment proceedings are liable to be quashed. 3. Whether the Ld. AO is not justified in disallowing the claim of Interest income on the basis of concept of mutuality of Rs. 41,69,909/- under section 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. As interest income is disbursed to members who had contributed to it. 4. Further

MUKUL ROHATGI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 61(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

reassess the ALV accordingly. 21. We have heard rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We noted that the assessee has disclosed ALV of Goa Flat at ₹1.20 lakhs and this is assessed from assessment year 2011-12 and even in assessment year 2019-20, the ALV was accepted. This has been consistently declared

SUNITA BHARDWAJ,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 61(1), NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act, thus, by following the observations made therein which are mutatis mutandis applicable to the fact of the present appeal, these grounds of appeal taken by the assessee are dismissed. 13. Ground of appeal Nos. 3 & 4 taken by the assessee are with respect to the addition of notional rental income on house properties

SUNITA BHARDWAJ,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 61(1), NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act, thus, by following the observations made therein which are mutatis mutandis applicable to the fact of the present appeal, these grounds of appeal taken by the assessee are dismissed. 13. Ground of appeal Nos. 3 & 4 taken by the assessee are with respect to the addition of notional rental income on house properties

SUNITA BHARDWAJ,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 61(1), NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act, thus, by following the observations made therein which are mutatis mutandis applicable to the fact of the present appeal, these grounds of appeal taken by the assessee are dismissed. 13. Ground of appeal Nos. 3 & 4 taken by the assessee are with respect to the addition of notional rental income on house properties

PRADEEP WIG,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-5, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharma

house or flat) and owned by a ‘non- natural person’ (NNP). A non-natural person is a corporate entity, such as a company, limited liability partnership, trust or investment scheme. To be classed as a dwelling, the property must be: • Used exclusively or in part as a residence • In the process of being adapted or constructed as a residence

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(1) NEW DELHI vs. M/S C.J. INTERNATIOJAL HOTELS LTD.

Appeals are dismissed

house property‟. It is for this reason that the aforesaid show cause notice was issued. The assessee in reply to the said notice raised various objections to the aforesaid proposed move of the AO. Some of these objections included: a) The assessee was only a licensee in respect of the aforesaid premises and the actual owner was NDMC. Thus