MAHAVIR SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-8(2), NEW DELHI

Bench: SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON'BLE (Vice President), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

Reassessment order can he by a different officer)." 19. We would reiterate that sub-section (1) to ,Section 124 states

KULDIP KUMAR GOEL,DELHI vs. ACIT(1)(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in above\nterms for statistical purposes

reassessment proceedings were rightly initiated. The issue regarding the disallowance of the cost of improvement was not decided by the CIT(A) in a speaking order. Therefore, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": [ "Section 143(3)", "Section 144", "Section 147", "Section 148", "Section 250", "Section 271(1)(c)", "Section 124

TIRUPATI JEWELS ,KAILASH COLONNY NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 30(6), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Tirupati Jewels Vs Ito Tirupati Jewels K-12, Kailash Ward- 30 (6) Colony New Delhi-110048, Delhi New Delhi Pan No.Aajft4161A (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 124(3)(a) are as under: (i) Within one month from the date of service of notice or; (ii) After completion of assessment - whichever is earlier. 6. In the present case, there is no dispute that the reassessment

Smt. Meera Kapoor vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax

reassessment, was wrongly issued. The Appellant also contended that reliance placed on the provisions of Section 124(3) to uphold

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III vs. SHRI SHYAM SUNDER INFRASTRUCTURE (P) LTD

The appeal is allowed in above terms

Section 124(3)(a) are as under: (i) Within one month from the date of service of notice or; 2015:DHC:1118-DB ITA 236/2014 Page | 5 (ii) After completion of assessment – whichever is earlier. 6. In the present case, there is no dispute that the reassessment

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 46(1), NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs. MAM RAJ CHUNNI LAL EXIM, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. Sudhir Kumar & Sh. Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2016-17 Income Tax Officer, Vs Mam Raj Chunni Lal Exim Ward- 46 (1) Shop No. 5183, Ground New Delhi Floor, Lahori Gate, Naya Bazar, Delhi -110006 Pan No.Aaxfm0533B (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessment or re-computation under Section 147; or 2. issuance of notice under Section 148; or 3. conducting of inquiry or issuance of show cause notice or passing of order under Section 148A; or 4. sanction for issuance of notice under Section 151 5.10 The CBDT also amended section 130 of the I.T. Act, 1961 vide Taxation and Other Laws

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. I SERVICES INVESTMENT LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed and consequently the appeals of the revenue are liable to be dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

124 to section 127 of Income Tax Act. Accordingly the assessment order passed by the learned assessing officer is liable to be quashed. 2a. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the initiation of assessment proceedings and issue / service of notices are not in accordance with the provisions of law and accordingly the assessment order passed

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. I SERVICES INVESTMENT LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed and consequently the appeals of the revenue are liable to be dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

124 to section 127 of Income Tax Act. Accordingly the assessment order passed by the learned assessing officer is liable to be quashed. 2a. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the initiation of assessment proceedings and issue / service of notices are not in accordance with the provisions of law and accordingly the assessment order passed

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. ISERVICES INVESTMENTS LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed and consequently the appeals of the revenue are liable to be dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

124 to section 127 of Income Tax Act. Accordingly the assessment order passed by the learned assessing officer is liable to be quashed. 2a. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the initiation of assessment proceedings and issue / service of notices are not in accordance with the provisions of law and accordingly the assessment order passed

AGS DEVELOPERS PVT LTD ,JASOLA DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 (4), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2008-09] Ags Developers Pvt.Ltd., Vs Ito, H.No.47, Pocket Ii, Ward -1(4), Near Appollo Hospital, Jasola, New Delhi. New Delhi-110076. Pan-Aafca1795G Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Sandeep Goel, Adv. Respondent By Shri Siddharth B.S. Meena, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 04.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18.10.2024

Section 124(3) (a) are as under: (i) Within one month from the date of service of notice or; (ii) After completion of assessment-whichever is earlier. "6. In the present case, there is no dispute that the reassessment

ANIL CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search and seizure - Assessment year 1994-95 - During course of search operation, assessee first stated that he had no undisclosed income and thereafter he surrendered a sum of Rs. 7 lakhs as his undisclosed income - Out of said amount Rs. 4 lakhs was stated to have been invested as stock

ANIL CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search and seizure - Assessment year 1994-95 - During course of search operation, assessee first stated that he had no undisclosed income and thereafter he surrendered a sum of Rs. 7 lakhs as his undisclosed income - Out of said amount Rs. 4 lakhs was stated to have been invested as stock

ANIL CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search and seizure - Assessment year 1994-95 - During course of search operation, assessee first stated that he had no undisclosed income and thereafter he surrendered a sum of Rs. 7 lakhs as his undisclosed income - Out of said amount Rs. 4 lakhs was stated to have been invested as stock

ANIL CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search and seizure - Assessment year 1994-95 - During course of search operation, assessee first stated that he had no undisclosed income and thereafter he surrendered a sum of Rs. 7 lakhs as his undisclosed income - Out of said amount Rs. 4 lakhs was stated to have been invested as stock

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S WICKWOOD DEVELOPMENT LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed and consequently the appeals of the revenue are liable to be dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

124 to 127 of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, the assessment order passed is void ab initio and liable to be quashed. 3.(i) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the proceedings initiated by learned A.O. under Section 153C are bad in law and against the statutory provisions. 3.(ii) That without prejudice to the above

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S WICKWOOD DEVELOPMENT LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed and consequently the appeals of the revenue are liable to be dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

124 to 127 of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, the assessment order passed is void ab initio and liable to be quashed. 3.(i) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the proceedings initiated by learned A.O. under Section 153C are bad in law and against the statutory provisions. 3.(ii) That without prejudice to the above

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. ROLLAND ENTERPRISES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed and consequently the appeals of the revenue are liable to be dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No.3348/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year: 2007-08 Ita No.3353/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Dcit, Vs Rolland Enterprises Ltd., Central Circle-19, C/O Mr. Sandeep Chilana, Adv. New Delhi C-56, Lfg, Jangpura Extension, New Delhi – 110 014. Co No.352/Del/2015 (In Ita No.3348/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year: 2007-08) Co No.357/Del/2015 (In Ita No.3353/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13) Rolland Enterprises Ltd., Vs Dcit, C/O Mr. Sandeep Chilana, Adv. Central Circle-19, C-56, Lfg, Jangpura Extension, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 014. Pan : Aaccr7403D Assessees By : Sh. Amit Goel, Ca, Pranav Yadav, Adv., Nippun Mittal, Ca & Ms Anjali Jain, Adv. Revenue By : Sh.Vizay B. Vasanta, Cit-Dr & Sanjay Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 26.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.12.2023 Order Per Bench: The Present Appeals By The Revenue & The Cross Objections By The Assessee Have Been Filed Against The Orders Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xxvii, New Delhi.

124 to 127 of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, the assessment order passed is void ab initio and liable to be quashed. 3.(i) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the proceedings initiated by learned A.O. under Section 153C are bad in law and against the statutory provisions. 3.(ii) That without prejudice to the above

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. ROLLAND ENTERPRISES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed and consequently the appeals of the revenue are liable to be dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No.3348/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year: 2007-08 Ita No.3353/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Dcit, Vs Rolland Enterprises Ltd., Central Circle-19, C/O Mr. Sandeep Chilana, Adv. New Delhi C-56, Lfg, Jangpura Extension, New Delhi – 110 014. Co No.352/Del/2015 (In Ita No.3348/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year: 2007-08) Co No.357/Del/2015 (In Ita No.3353/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13) Rolland Enterprises Ltd., Vs Dcit, C/O Mr. Sandeep Chilana, Adv. Central Circle-19, C-56, Lfg, Jangpura Extension, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 014. Pan : Aaccr7403D Assessees By : Sh. Amit Goel, Ca, Pranav Yadav, Adv., Nippun Mittal, Ca & Ms Anjali Jain, Adv. Revenue By : Sh.Vizay B. Vasanta, Cit-Dr & Sanjay Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 26.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.12.2023 Order Per Bench: The Present Appeals By The Revenue & The Cross Objections By The Assessee Have Been Filed Against The Orders Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xxvii, New Delhi.

124 to 127 of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, the assessment order passed is void ab initio and liable to be quashed. 3.(i) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the proceedings initiated by learned A.O. under Section 153C are bad in law and against the statutory provisions. 3.(ii) That without prejudice to the above