CIT vs. GOETZE INDIA LTD

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

115J elucidates that reference to the date 1'^ April, 1988 is not with reference to the date on which reserve or provision was created but with reference to the date on ^ which an amount was withdrawn from reserves created or provision '-0- .made. Thus, amount withdrawn from the reserves created or provision made after day of April

CIT vs. FEDERAL MOGUL GOETZE INDIA LTD

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

115J elucidates that reference to the date 1'^ April, 1988 is not with reference to the date on which reserve or provision was created but with reference to the date on ^ which an amount was withdrawn from reserves created or provision '-0- .made. Thus, amount withdrawn from the reserves created or provision made after day of April

CIT vs. FEDERAL-LOGUL GOETZE (INDIA) LTD

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

115J elucidates that reference to the date 1'^ April, 1988 is not with reference to the date on which reserve or provision was created but with reference to the date on ^ which an amount was withdrawn from reserves created or provision '-0- .made. Thus, amount withdrawn from the reserves created or provision made after day of April

CIT vs. FEDERAL MOGUL GOETZE INDIA LTD

115J elucidates that reference to the date 1'^ April, 1988 is not with reference to the date on which reserve or provision was created but with reference to the date on ^ which an amount was withdrawn from reserves created or provision '-0- .made. Thus, amount withdrawn from the reserves created or provision made after day of April

CIT vs. FEDERAL-LOGUL GOETZE (INDIA) LTD

115J elucidates that reference to the date 1'^ April, 1988 is not with reference to the date on which reserve or provision was created but with reference to the date on ^ which an amount was withdrawn from reserves created or provision '-0- .made. Thus, amount withdrawn from the reserves created or provision made after day of April

WIMCO SEEDING LTD. vs. JCIT, SPL. RANGE-22,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee for all these three years are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

115J of the I.T. Act. 11. That the perusal of the order of the CIT(A) shows the order was made without application of mind and was thus an arbitrary order. 12. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has also erred in upholding the interest charged u/s 234B in the notice of demand which had not been validly

WIMCO SEEDING LTD. vs. JCIT, SPL. RANGE-22,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee for all these three years are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

115J of the I.T. Act. 11. That the perusal of the order of the CIT(A) shows the order was made without application of mind and was thus an arbitrary order. 12. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has also erred in upholding the interest charged u/s 234B in the notice of demand which had not been validly

WIMCO SEEDING LTD. vs. JCIT, SPL. RANGE-22,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee for all these three years are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

115J of the I.T. Act. 11. That the perusal of the order of the CIT(A) shows the order was made without application of mind and was thus an arbitrary order. 12. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has also erred in upholding the interest charged u/s 234B in the notice of demand which had not been validly

M/S GUJARAT GUARDIAN LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT,, NEW DELHI

reassessment. In our view intimation passed u/s 143(1) of the Act are also equivalent to the order of assessment for certain provisions for example, powers u/s 263 of the Act can be initiated against the intimation passed by the assessing officer, as it stood at relevant times. Recently, coordinate bench of the Delhi ITAT in the case of Jindal

SAJAN KUMAR JAIN,DELHI vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person [for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous

SATISH DEV JAIN,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person [for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous

ANAND KUMAR JAIN,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person [for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous

ANAND JAIN HUF,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person [for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous

ANAND KUMAR JAIN,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person [for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous

ANAND JAIN HUF,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person [for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous

ANAND KUMAR JAIN,FARIDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person [for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. NITIN MAHAJAN,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the cross-objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawal, Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawal, G.D. Agrawal, Vice G.D. Agrawal, Vice & And & Shri Kuldip Singh Shri Kuldip Singhshri Kuldip Singh Shri Kuldip Singh

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person [for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT. RINKU MAHAJAN, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the cross-objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawal, Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawal, G.D. Agrawal, Vice G.D. Agrawal, Vice & And & Shri Kuldip Singh Shri Kuldip Singhshri Kuldip Singh Shri Kuldip Singh

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person [for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous