MUKUL RANI THAKUR,DEHRADUN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-31, DELHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Vimal Kumarshri Vimal Kumar

143(3) of the Act in question, the Ld. Counsel for the Counsel for the assessee also contended that such order being covered u/s 153B(1)(b) of the contended that such order being covered u/s 153B(1)(b) of the contended that such order being covered u/s 153B(1)(b) of the Act, the approval u/s 153D

VINOD MONGIA,WAST AZAD NAGAR, DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , VIKAS BHAWAN,DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Vinod Mongia, Vs Ito, C-40, Street No.1A, West Ward-58(7), Azad Nagar, Delhi-110005. Vikas Bhawan, Pan-Akhpm6218R Delhi Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Shivam Jain, Adv. & Shri Nitin Kanwar, Adv. Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 14.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31.07.2025

section 143(2), notice was to be issued within 6(Six) months i.e., on or before 30.09.2020 but the reassessment order was passed on 29.12.2019 without issue of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act which is an admitted fact by the Revenue. On this issue, the observations of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hotel Blue Moon

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-19, NEW DELHI vs. M/S K.R. PULP & PAPERS LTD,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri N.K. Choudhry

reassessment proceeding is not permissible. [7.0] In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the present Special Civil Application succeeds. Impugned notice dated 28.03.2016 issued under Section 143(3

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-V vs. ORIENT CRAFT LTD

reassessment proceedings even when intimation under section 143(1) had been issued. The inevitable conclusion is that the High Court has wrongly applied Adani’s case [1999] 240 ITR 224 (Guj) which has no application to the case on the facts in view of the conceptual difference between section 143(1) and section 143(3

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, DELHI vs. ANITA SINGHAL , DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2015-2016 The Dcit, Central Circle-8, Smt. Anita Singhal, Room No.333, 3Rd Floor, E-2, Ara 9-10, Saraswati Kunj, 8, Alipur Centre, Jhandewalan Extension, Vs. Road, Civil Lines, Delhi. Delhi – 110 054. Pin 110 055 Pan Aozps8474D (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961. Finally, in the search assessment order u/s. 153A/143(3) of the Act, dated 22.12.2019 the AO accepted the assessed income in the earlier scrutiny assessment order dated 26.12.2017. 5 ITA.No.2042/Del./2021 Smt. Anita Singhal, Delhi. 5.2 Further, from copy of subsequent reassessment

GOVIND RAM MAKRANIA PROP. M/S LAXMI OIL & GINNING FACTORY,BHIWANI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment order was bad in law because the Assessing Officer (AO) failed to issue a notice under Section 143(2) of the Act, which is a mandatory requirement. The Tribunal relied on Supreme Court judgments stating that this defect is not curable and invalidates the assessment proceedings.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "147", "143(3

DHARAMVIR KHOSLA ,. vs. DCIT CC-5, NEW DELHI , .

The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes and ld

reassessment, if any,\nrelating to any assessment year falling within the period of six assessment\nyears referred to in sub-section (1) is pending on the date of initiation of the\nsearch u/s. 132 of the Act shall abate. In the present case before us,\nhowever, though the second proviso to sub-section (1) of section 153A\nwould not apply

ACIT CIRCLE-59(1), NEW DELHI vs. NEERAJ KUMAR SINGHAL, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

143(3) r.w. Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY 2009-10. 2. The revised grounds of appeal raised by the revenue read as under: “1. On the facts and circumstances of case, the Ld. CIT(A)-37 has erred in facts & law in holding that the reassessment

MAHARASHTRA FEEDS P. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

section 143(1) or on assessment or reassessment or total income declared in a settlement application was the tax payer's true liability right from the beginning and it was with reference to that amount the advance tax should have been paid within the prescribed due date. Accordingly, clause (3

MAHARASHTRA FEEDS P. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

section 143(1) or on assessment or reassessment or total income declared in a settlement application was the tax payer's true liability right from the beginning and it was with reference to that amount the advance tax should have been paid within the prescribed due date. Accordingly, clause (3

INCOME TAX OFFICE WARD -1 SONEPAT, SONEPAT, HARYANA vs. OM MINIRALS, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

3) The amount of under-reported income shall be- (i) in a case where income has been assessed for the first timer- (a) if return has been furnished, the difference between the amount of income assessed and the amount of income determined under clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 143; (8) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section

RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA,DELHI vs. LD. ITO, WARD 35(1), DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2021-22] Rakesh Kumar Gupta, Income Tax Officer, Ward-35(1), B-2/38, Ground Floor, E-2, Civic Centre, Delhi-110002 Ashok Vihar, Phase-Ii, Vs Delhi-110052 Pan-Aafhr8657H Appellant Respondent

reassessment under sub-section (3) of Section 143 or Section 147, as the case may be, has been paid within

CLAAS AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 4(2), NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

reassessment cannot be read into Section 144C more\nparticularly when the provisions of Section 153 are excluded by the\nnon-obstante clause in section 144C(13) and hence the proceedings\nare not barred by limitation. Per contra, it has been contended by the\nlearned senior counsels appearing for the respondent(s)/assessees\nthat the outer time limit under Section

CIT vs. USHA INTERNATIONAL LTD

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 sub-section (2) of section 148.” 9. For reopening an assessment made under Section 143

MONTAGE ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED,MAYUR VIHAR PHASE-I, EAST DELHI vs. DCIT/ACIT CEN CIR-II, NOIDA, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, NOIDA

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2022-23 Montage Enterprises Pvt. Vs. Dcit/Acit, Ltd., Central Circle-Ii, 205, 2Nd Floor, V-4, Mayur Noida Plaza -2, Local Shopping Centre, Mayur Vihar, Phase-1, East Delhi, Delhi Pan :Aaccm8173H (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2022-23 Dcit/Acit, Vs. Montage Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-Ii, 205, 2Nd Floor, V-4, Mayur Noida Plaza -2, Local Shopping Centre, Mayur Vihar, Phase-1, East Delhi, Delhi Pan: Aaccm8173H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Rohit Kapoor, Adv. Sh. Veersen Aggarwal, Itp Department By Sh. Siddharth Bhim Singh Meena, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 08.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.12.2025

3) of the Act can be validly continued and completed after a search under section 132 has been conducted in the case of the same assessee, without following the procedure prescribed under section 148 (Explanation 2) of the Act. 13.3 In our considered opinion, the answer lies in the scheme of the Act itself. Section 143 provides the general framework

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, NOIDA, NOIDA vs. M/S MONTAGE ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2022-23 Montage Enterprises Pvt. Vs. Dcit/Acit, Ltd., Central Circle-Ii, 205, 2Nd Floor, V-4, Mayur Noida Plaza -2, Local Shopping Centre, Mayur Vihar, Phase-1, East Delhi, Delhi Pan :Aaccm8173H (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2022-23 Dcit/Acit, Vs. Montage Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-Ii, 205, 2Nd Floor, V-4, Mayur Noida Plaza -2, Local Shopping Centre, Mayur Vihar, Phase-1, East Delhi, Delhi Pan: Aaccm8173H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Rohit Kapoor, Adv. Sh. Veersen Aggarwal, Itp Department By Sh. Siddharth Bhim Singh Meena, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 08.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.12.2025

3) of the Act can be validly continued and completed after a search under section 132 has been conducted in the case of the same assessee, without following the procedure prescribed under section 148 (Explanation 2) of the Act. 13.3 In our considered opinion, the answer lies in the scheme of the Act itself. Section 143 provides the general framework

DCIT, CC-15, NEW DELHI vs. BDR BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS P. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usasstt. Year: 2012-13 Dcit, Vs. Bdr Builders & Developers P. Ltd,B- Central Circle-15, 393, Zakir Nagar So, South East Delhi, New Delhi New Delhi-1100025 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.03.2023

reassessment order BDR Builders & Developers P. Ltd dated 27.12.19 before the CIT (Appeals)" and has further directed that "the CIT (A) shall pass an order dealing with all the submissions of the petitioner including in relation to the validity of the notice under section 148 of the Act". The Assessing Officer has passed an assessment order u/s 143(3

JCIT(OSD), JHANDEWALAN vs. NARENDRA AGGARWAL, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwaljcit (Osd), Jhandewalan, Vs. Narendra Aggarwal, Delhi H.No. 467, Sector-21-A, Fardidabad, Haryana (Pan: Aagpa1441D) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr.Rakesh Gupta, Adv., Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv., Saksham Agarwal, Ca & Deepesh Garg, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.11.2025 Date Of Order : 19.12.2025 O R D E R Per Sudhir Kumar, Jm :

143(3) of the Acton 27.12 2022. Legal framework for initiation of proceeding under section 153C 6.5 Section 153C of the Act provides as under: (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148. section 149, section 151 and section 153. where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that.— (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article