PROFORM INTERIORS PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT CC-20, DELHI

b) of sub-section (1) of section 153B, except with the prior approval\nof the Joint Commissioner:\n28. From the perusal of the provisions as contained in Section 153D and 148B,\nwe find that both sections 148B and 153D are pari-materia. The intent of both the\nprovisions is to protect the interest of assessee so that the concluded assessments

PROFORM INTERIORS PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT CC-20, NEW DELHI

b) of sub-\nsection (1) of section 153A. The proviso to section 153A further provides for\nassessment of the total income in respect of each assessment year falling within\nsuch six assessment years (and for the relevant assessment year or years).\n18. The careful and conjoint reading of section 153A(1) and section 153D leave\nno room for doubt that

BIMLA,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-38(5), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareekbimla, Vs. Ito, Ward 38 (5), H.No.143, Village Hamidpur, New Delhi. Delhi – 110 036. (Pan : Bpdpb9344B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate Shri Ankit Kumar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.09.2024 Date Of Order : 26.11.2024 Order Per S.Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Appeals-13, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To ‘Ld. Cit (A)’) Dated 23.07.2019 For Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee Filed Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of Rs.2,23,030/- On 14.08.2014. The Return Of Income Was Processed Under Section 143 (1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’). The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Through Cass & Notices

reassess the income of the assessee for the AY 2013-14 after due application of mind independently 5. Ld. CIT (A) observed the purchase amount at Rs.1,63,50,103/- on the basis of circle rate on which stamp duty was paid in the light of section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) of the Act and directed the difference

PROFORM INTERIORS PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT CC-20, NEW DELHI

b) of sub-section (1) of section 153B, except with the prior approval\nof the Joint Commissioner:\n28. From the perusal of the provisions as contained in Section 153D and 148B,\nwe find that both sections 148B and 153D are pari-materia. The intent of both the\nprovisions is to protect the interest of assessee so that the concluded assessments

PROFORM INTERIORS PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT CC-20, DELHI

In the result, all the appeals for

b) of sub-\nsection (1) of section 153A. The proviso to section 153A further provides for\nassessment of the total income in respect of each assessment year falling within\nsuch six assessment years (and for the relevant assessment year or years).\n18. The careful and conjoint reading of section 153A(1) and section 153D leave\nno room for doubt that

PROFORM INTERIORS PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT CC-20, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals for

b) of sub-\nsection (1) of section 153A. The proviso to section 153A further provides for\nassessment of the total income in respect of each assessment year falling within\nsuch six assessment years (and for the relevant assessment year or years).\n18. The careful and conjoint reading of section 153A(1) and section 153D leave\nno room for doubt that

PROFORM INTERIORS PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT CC-20, NEW DELHI

b) of sub-\nsection (1) of section 153A. The proviso to section 153A further provides for\nassessment of the total income in respect of each assessment year falling within\nsuch six assessment years (and for the relevant assessment year or years).\n18. The careful and conjoint reading of section 153A(1) and section 153D leave\nno room for doubt that

PROFORM INTERIORS PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT CC-20, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals for

b) of sub-\nsection (1) of section 153A. The proviso to section 153A further provides for\nassessment of the total income in respect of each assessment year falling within\nsuch six assessment years (and for the relevant assessment year or years).\n18. The careful and conjoint reading of section 153A(1) and section 153D leave\nno room for doubt that

CHETAN SETH,NEW DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-15(3), DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

119 of the IT Act by taxing dividend in the hands of the recipient of loan. Illegal addition contrary to CBDT guidelines be deleted. iv. That the appellant had neither received any payment from such company nor any payment was made on his behalf or for the individual benefit of the appellant, no dividend u/s 2(22)(e) is taxable

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

119 of the IT Act by taxing dividend in the hands of the recipient of loan. Illegal addition contrary to CBDT guidelines be deleted. iv. That the appellant had neither received any payment from such company nor any payment was made on his behalf or for the individual benefit of the appellant, no dividend u/s 2(22)(e) is taxable

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

119 of the IT Act by taxing dividend in the hands of the recipient of loan. Illegal addition contrary to CBDT guidelines be deleted. iv. That the appellant had neither received any payment from such company nor any payment was made on his behalf or for the individual benefit of the appellant, no dividend u/s 2(22)(e) is taxable

PUNIT KUMAR AGGARWAL,DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-36(2), DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

119 of the IT Act by taxing dividend in the hands of the recipient of loan. Illegal addition contrary to CBDT guidelines be deleted. iv. That the appellant had neither received any payment from such company nor any payment was made on his behalf or for the individual benefit of the appellant, no dividend u/s 2(22)(e) is taxable

ISWAR CHAND DUBEY,DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-68 (1), DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

119 of the IT Act by taxing dividend in the hands of the recipient of loan. Illegal addition contrary to CBDT guidelines be deleted. iv. That the appellant had neither received any payment from such company nor any payment was made on his behalf or for the individual benefit of the appellant, no dividend u/s 2(22)(e) is taxable

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.

reassessment\nfrom AY 2004-05 to 2007-08 and additions in all amounting to Rs.\n18,94,69,803/- were made u/s 2 (22) (e), which were confirmed by CIT\n(Appeal) - 7 in February 2015 in all four cases.\n5. All four following appeals of the Appellant were represented by the same\nprevious counsel, who had represented the appeals

PROFORM INTERIORS PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT CC-20, NEW DELHI

b) of the Act. The said issue is squarely covered by the earlier\ndecisions of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Dinesh Jindal v. Assistant\nCommissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 20, Delhi & Others [2024] 164\ntaxmonn.com 746 (Delhi) as well as in The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-\nCentral- 1 v. Offus Medicare Pvt. Limited

DILEEP K GUPTA,DELHI vs. DCIT, CC-31 , DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

reassessment passed under clause (b) of section 153A in respect of each assessment year falling within six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search is conducted under section 132 or requisition is made under section 1324. The provision has also been made applicable to orders of assessment passed under clause (b

DILEEP K GUPTA,DELHI vs. DCIT CC-31 , DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

reassessment passed under clause (b) of section 153A in respect of each assessment year falling within six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search is conducted under section 132 or requisition is made under section 1324. The provision has also been made applicable to orders of assessment passed under clause (b

DILEEP K GUPTA,DELHI vs. DCIT, CC-31, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

reassessment passed under clause (b) of section 153A in respect of each assessment year falling within six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search is conducted under section 132 or requisition is made under section 1324. The provision has also been made applicable to orders of assessment passed under clause (b

DILEEP K GUPTA,DELHI vs. DCIT CC-31, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

reassessment passed under clause (b) of section 153A in respect of each assessment year falling within six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search is conducted under section 132 or requisition is made under section 1324. The provision has also been made applicable to orders of assessment passed under clause (b