M/S. HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.(HUDCO),NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

natural justice cannot be read in abstract and the assessee, being a limited company, having wide network in various financial services, should definitely be precluded from raising such a plea at this belated stage. 17. Thus, for the above reasons, Substantial Questions of law Nos. 1 and 2 are answered against the assessee and in favour of the revenue

HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

natural justice cannot be read in abstract and the assessee, being a limited company, having wide network in various financial services, should definitely be precluded from raising such a plea at this belated stage. 17. Thus, for the above reasons, Substantial Questions of law Nos. 1 and 2 are answered against the assessee and in favour of the revenue

M/S. HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.(HUDCO),NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

natural justice cannot be read in abstract and the assessee, being a limited company, having wide network in various financial services, should definitely be precluded from raising such a plea at this belated stage. 17. Thus, for the above reasons, Substantial Questions of law Nos. 1 and 2 are answered against the assessee and in favour of the revenue

RAGHAV SOFTECH PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 20(4), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Raghav Softech Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ito Vardhman Grand Plaza, Manglam Ward-20(4) Place, Sector-3, Rohini, New Delhi New Delhi Aaecr2527G Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 18.01.2022

natural justice. 2. No one appeared on behalf of the assessee. The notice sent through “Speed Post” with acknowledgment due is returned by the postal authorities. It is seen from the record that on earlier occasions also, the notices were returned by the postal authority. The assessee has not provided any new address to the Registry. Therefore, the appeal

RITU SINGAL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 3, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

natural justice.‖  CIT Vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta (2008) 303 ITR 95 (Del): Held as under: ―Initiation of reassessment proceedings on the basis

UMA SINGAL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRL CIRCLE-3, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

natural justice.‖  CIT Vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta (2008) 303 ITR 95 (Del): Held as under: ―Initiation of reassessment proceedings on the basis

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SUR BUILDCON PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeals are dismissed in favour of the

Natural Justice in which the assessees contend that the enquires made by the Department to make the impugned additions in the hands of the assessees were never confronted to the assessees at any stage of the reassessment

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. BBN TRANSPORTATION PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeals are dismissed in favour of the

Natural Justice in which the assessees contend that the enquires made by the Department to make the impugned additions in the hands of the assessees were never confronted to the assessees at any stage of the reassessment

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SUNCITY PROJECTS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm

natural justice is bad in law and liable to be quashed on this account. Cross Examination - Not provided to the assessee - Assessment Bad In law Your honour the Id. AO has solely relied on the report of the investigation wing on the basis of which he has made various allegation on the assessee. He has only and only considered

RACHNA GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-29, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

natural justice thereby rendering the impugned reassessment void and illegal vide this Hon’ble Tribunal ruling in the case of Vinesh

RACHNA GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 29, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

natural justice thereby rendering the impugned reassessment void and illegal vide this Hon’ble Tribunal ruling in the case of Vinesh

LASCO CHEMIE PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-15(2), NEW DELHI, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarlasco Chemie Private Vs. Income Tax Officer, Limited, Ward-15(2), Delhi 10489 Kalptaru, Sadar Thana Road Motia Khan, New Delhi 110055 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcl 3502 E Appellant .. Respondent

natural justice, The contention of assessee is not acceptable that reassessment proceedings were completed in gross violation of principle of natural

M/S UNITECH LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeals is allowed and revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Unitech Ltd., Vs. Additional Cit, 6-Community Centre, Range-18, Saket, New Delhi-1100 17 New Delhi. (Pan: Aaacu1482H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Additional Cit, Vs. M/S. Unitech Ltd., Range-18, 6-Community Centre, New Delhi. Saket, New Delhi (Pan: Aaacu1482H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: S/Shri Salil Aggarwal, Adv., Gautam And, Ca & Shjalesh Gupta, Ca Department By: S/Shri Dilip Shivpuri & Ruchir Bhatia, Government Standing Counsels Date Of Hearing : 12 .01.2016 Date Of Pronouncement: 08 :04.2016 Order Per I.C. Sudhir:These Cross Appeals Preferred By Assessee & Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Of Learned Cit(A)-Xxi, New Delhi Dated 16.8.2013 & Relate To Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Appellant-Assessee Is A Public Limited Company Engaged In The Business Of Construction & Development Of Real Estate Projects. For The Assessment Year Under Consideration, It Filed A Return Declaring An Income Of Rs. 922,30,17,671/- On 29.9.2009, Which Came To Be Assessed At An Income Of Rs. 3361,18,87,560/- In An Order Dated 1.8.2012 Under Section 143(3) Of The Act. On Appeal, Learned Cit(A) Granted Part Relief To The Appellant & Hence The Appeals Before Us.

Natural Justice. 17 In rejoinder submission the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that ITAT is duly competent to look into the aspect whether special audit u/s 142(2A) of the Act was being ordered correctly or not and on this proposition the learned counsel relied on the judgments in the cases of Sahara India Firm

DELICATE REALTORS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No. 3185/Del/2015 (A.Y .2011-12)

Natural Justice various materials are used without confronting the same to the assessee, which needs to be expunged as highlighted by Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in case of Kishanchand Chellaram vs. CIT (125 ITR 713). Only show cause notice and assesses reply thereto should be considered, without considering any other extraneous material. The material seized from third party premises

PAVITRA REALCON PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No. 3185/Del/2015 (A.Y .2011-12)

Natural Justice various materials are used without confronting the same to the assessee, which needs to be expunged as highlighted by Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in case of Kishanchand Chellaram vs. CIT (125 ITR 713). Only show cause notice and assesses reply thereto should be considered, without considering any other extraneous material. The material seized from third party premises

JSP PROJECTS (P) LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE - 13, DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA number 3646/Del/2025 and

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member

natural justice, is bad in law and is liable to be deleted. 11. That on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld CIT(A) erred in sustaining the action of the Ld AO without appreciating that no show cause notice was issued during the course of the assessment proceedings in terms of CBDT Instruction No 20/2015 (Para

JSP PROJECTS (P) LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE - 13, DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA number 3646/Del/2025 and

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member

natural justice, is bad in law and is liable to be deleted. 11. That on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld CIT(A) erred in sustaining the action of the Ld AO without appreciating that no show cause notice was issued during the course of the assessment proceedings in terms of CBDT Instruction No 20/2015 (Para

JSP PROJECTS (P) LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -13, DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA number 3646/Del/2025 and

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member

natural justice, is bad in law and is liable to be deleted. 11. That on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld CIT(A) erred in sustaining the action of the Ld AO without appreciating that no show cause notice was issued during the course of the assessment proceedings in terms of CBDT Instruction No 20/2015 (Para