BSES YAMUNA POWER LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), NEW DEL;HI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal issues

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalbses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Dy. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Asst. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Yamuna Power Dy. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd. & Ors Vs. Acit Bses Yamuna Power Asst. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Sh. Deepesh Jain, Adv. & Sh. Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Mr. Javed Akhtar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16/04/2025 O R D E R

reassess the Income in respect of any issue, which has escaped assessment, and such issue comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, notwithstanding that the reasons for such issue have not been included in the reasons recorded under subsection (2) of section 148." 5.1.2 Hence, considering the above legal provisions before initiating action

ACIT, CIRCLE-26(2), NEW DELHI vs. VIKRAM ELECTRIC EQUIPMENT P.LTD, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as\ninfructuous

Section 148 of the Income Tax Act for reassessment.", "held": "The Tribunal held that the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act was not validly served on the assessee due to being sent to a wrong address and improper affixture. Consequently, the reassessment order passed was quashed as void ab initio. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed

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

reassess the total income of such other person, (the assessee in this case)in the manner provided in section 153A of the Act. So in this case before us, since the AO of the searched person as well as that of the other/third party/assessee foundation are the same, he/AO of assessee can issue notice u/s 153C of the Act only

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

reassess the total income of such other person, (the assessee in this case)in the manner provided in section 153A of the Act. So in this case before us, since the AO of the searched person as well as that of the other/third party/assessee foundation are the same, he/AO of assessee can issue notice u/s 153C of the Act only

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

reassess the total income of such other person, (the assessee in this case)in the manner provided in section 153A of the Act. So in this case before us, since the AO of the searched person as well as that of the other/third party/assessee foundation are the same, he/AO of assessee can issue notice u/s 153C of the Act only

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

reassess the total income of such other person, (the assessee in this case)in the manner provided in section 153A of the Act. So in this case before us, since the AO of the searched person as well as that of the other/third party/assessee foundation are the same, he/AO of assessee can issue notice u/s 153C of the Act only

SANTOSH RANI LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SH PARVEEN KALYAN,KURUKSHETRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, KARNAL, KARNAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Santosh Rani Vs Ito, Legal Heir Of Late Shri Parveen Ward-1, Karnal, Kalyan, Krishna Nagar, Gamri, Haryana-132001. Thanesar, Distt.-Kurukshetra, Haryana-136118. Pan-Awhpr4944D Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Suresh K.Gupta, Ca Respondent By Shri Dheeraj Kumar Jaiswal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 01.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19.09.2025 Order

131 (Del) places emphasis on the duty of the AO to take further steps, make further enquiries and gamer further material and if such material indicate that the income of the assessee has escaped assessment and then form a belief that the income of the assessee has escaped assessment. Reliance is also placed in Sh Rajiv Agarwal vs ACIT

RAKESH DIVEDI,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 43(6), DELHI, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalrakesh Divedi, Income Tax Officer, 87, Triveni Apartments, Ward-43(6), Delhi. Pitampura, New Delhi - Vs. 110034. Pan-Apcpd9179A (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Pranshu Singhal, Ca Assessee By & Ms. Mansi Jain, Adv. Department By Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 30/10/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09/01/2026 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ In Short) Dated 07.03.2025 In Appeal No.40/10204/2018-19 Arising Out Of The Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-40(3) U/S 143(3) Of The Act (‘The Act’ For Short) Dated 20.12.2016 For Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Is An Individual & Proprietor Of M/S Triambkay Gauri Impex. The Information Was Received By The Ao From Investigation Wing That There Were Cash Deposits In The Bank Account Of The Assesse With Icici Bank, However, Income Of The Assessee & Gross Receipt Has Not Rakesh Divedi Vs. Income Tax Officer Commensurate With The Cash So Deposited, Therefore, After Recording The Reason U/S 147, Notice U/S 148 Was Issued On 31.03.2016 After Obtaining Statutory Approval From The Pcit. Thereafter, Assessment Was Completed Vide Order Dated 20.12.2016 Wherein Total Addition Of Rs. 5,20,88,345/- Was Made U/S 68 Of The Act For Cash Deposited In The Bank Accounts By Holding The Same As Unexplained Cash Credits. 3. Against The Said Order, Assessee Has Filed An Appeal Before Ld. Cit(A) Who Vide Impugned Order Has Partly Allowed The Appeal Of The Assessee & Directed The Ao To Make Addition Of Peak Credit Of The Total Deposits In The Bank Accounts.

131. The Ld. Sr. DR placed copy of the notice so issued in the PB page 63 filed by the Revenue. Ld. Sr. DR further submits that this issue was never challenged before the AO and assesse has participated in the proceedings, therefore, in terms of section 292BB of the Act, assessee cannot raise this issue at this stage. Accordingly

WACHOVIA MARKETING PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-27(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi

sections could not have been charged and included in the computation of tax demand. 4. The order appealed against is contrary to facts, law and principles of natural justice.” 5. The case file reveals that there is a delay of 6 days in filing the appeal. Assessee has filed a letter explaining the reasons which lead to the delay

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - III

reassessment order. 2. The challenge on the part of the revenue to the order passed by the Tribunal has to be considered in light of the following facts. 3. The assessee filed its return of income on 31.03.2003 declaring an income of ` 30,18,779/-. The said return was initially accepted under Section 143(1) on 30.05.2003. However, subsequently

KUNDAN RICE MILLS LTD.,PANIPAT vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, KARNAL

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed, whereas,

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganesh

131 of the Act, as, the concerned parties were never found. Thus, she submitted, the identity of the parties remained unverifiable. She submitted, since, the survey operation was carried out along with search operation, wherein genuineness of sales made to M/s. Dee Kay Trade Centre and M/s. J.S. Enterprises could not be established, they constitute incriminating material. Therefore, the Assessing

KUNDAN RICE MILLS LTD.,PANIPAT vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, KARNAL

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed, whereas,

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganesh

131 of the Act, as, the concerned parties were never found. Thus, she submitted, the identity of the parties remained unverifiable. She submitted, since, the survey operation was carried out along with search operation, wherein genuineness of sales made to M/s. Dee Kay Trade Centre and M/s. J.S. Enterprises could not be established, they constitute incriminating material. Therefore, the Assessing

KUNDAN RICE MILLS LTD.,PANIPAT vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, KARNAL

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed, whereas,

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganesh

131 of the Act, as, the concerned parties were never found. Thus, she submitted, the identity of the parties remained unverifiable. She submitted, since, the survey operation was carried out along with search operation, wherein genuineness of sales made to M/s. Dee Kay Trade Centre and M/s. J.S. Enterprises could not be established, they constitute incriminating material. Therefore, the Assessing

KUNDAN RICE MILLS LTD.,PANIPAT vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, KARNAL

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed, whereas,

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganesh

131 of the Act, as, the concerned parties were never found. Thus, she submitted, the identity of the parties remained unverifiable. She submitted, since, the survey operation was carried out along with search operation, wherein genuineness of sales made to M/s. Dee Kay Trade Centre and M/s. J.S. Enterprises could not be established, they constitute incriminating material. Therefore, the Assessing

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANIPAT vs. KUNDAN RICE MILLS LTD., PANIPAT

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed, whereas,

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganesh

131 of the Act, as, the concerned parties were never found. Thus, she submitted, the identity of the parties remained unverifiable. She submitted, since, the survey operation was carried out along with search operation, wherein genuineness of sales made to M/s. Dee Kay Trade Centre and M/s. J.S. Enterprises could not be established, they constitute incriminating material. Therefore, the Assessing

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANIPAT vs. KUNDAN RICE MILLS LTD., PANIPAT

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed, whereas,

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganesh

131 of the Act, as, the concerned parties were never found. Thus, she submitted, the identity of the parties remained unverifiable. She submitted, since, the survey operation was carried out along with search operation, wherein genuineness of sales made to M/s. Dee Kay Trade Centre and M/s. J.S. Enterprises could not be established, they constitute incriminating material. Therefore, the Assessing

KUNDAN RICE MILLS LTD.,PANIPAT vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, KARNAL

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed, whereas,

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganesh

131 of the Act, as, the concerned parties were never found. Thus, she submitted, the identity of the parties remained unverifiable. She submitted, since, the survey operation was carried out along with search operation, wherein genuineness of sales made to M/s. Dee Kay Trade Centre and M/s. J.S. Enterprises could not be established, they constitute incriminating material. Therefore, the Assessing

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANIPAT vs. KUNDAN RICE MILLS LTD., PANIPAT

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed, whereas,

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganesh

131 of the Act, as, the concerned parties were never found. Thus, she submitted, the identity of the parties remained unverifiable. She submitted, since, the survey operation was carried out along with search operation, wherein genuineness of sales made to M/s. Dee Kay Trade Centre and M/s. J.S. Enterprises could not be established, they constitute incriminating material. Therefore, the Assessing

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANIPAT vs. KUNDAN RICE MILLS LTD., PANIPAT

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed, whereas,

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganesh

131 of the Act, as, the concerned parties were never found. Thus, she submitted, the identity of the parties remained unverifiable. She submitted, since, the survey operation was carried out along with search operation, wherein genuineness of sales made to M/s. Dee Kay Trade Centre and M/s. J.S. Enterprises could not be established, they constitute incriminating material. Therefore, the Assessing