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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

22)(e) of the Act in the hands of the assessee Shri Chetan Seth. 7. Against the said assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) vide her order dated 24.02.2015 in appeal no.421/2014-15 dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 8. Against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

22)(e) of the Act in the hands of the assessee Shri Chetan Seth. 7. Against the said assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) vide her order dated 24.02.2015 in appeal no.421/2014-15 dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 8. Against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

22)(e) of the Act in the hands of the assessee Shri Chetan Seth. 7. Against the said assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) vide her order dated 24.02.2015 in appeal no.421/2014-15 dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 8. Against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee

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.

Section 2(22)(e) in the hands of the shareholder. 3. Validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 and Section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DELHI vs. RAVINDRA SINGH, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, the Appeals of the Revenue in I

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 2456/Del/2023 (A.Y 2011-12) I.T.A. No. 2457/Del/2023 (A.Y 2012-13) I.T.A. No. 2458/Del/2023 (A.Y 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 2459/Del/2023 (A.Y 2014-15)

reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. thereby, in respect of DCIT Vs. Ravindra Singh completed/unabated assessments, no addition can be made by the AD in absence of Meaning any incriminating material found during the course of search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER , DELHI vs. RAVINDRA SINGH, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, the Appeals of the Revenue in I

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 2456/Del/2023 (A.Y 2011-12) I.T.A. No. 2457/Del/2023 (A.Y 2012-13) I.T.A. No. 2458/Del/2023 (A.Y 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 2459/Del/2023 (A.Y 2014-15)

reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. thereby, in respect of DCIT Vs. Ravindra Singh completed/unabated assessments, no addition can be made by the AD in absence of Meaning any incriminating material found during the course of search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DELHI vs. RAVINDRA SINGH, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, the Appeals of the Revenue in I

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 2456/Del/2023 (A.Y 2011-12) I.T.A. No. 2457/Del/2023 (A.Y 2012-13) I.T.A. No. 2458/Del/2023 (A.Y 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 2459/Del/2023 (A.Y 2014-15)

reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. thereby, in respect of DCIT Vs. Ravindra Singh completed/unabated assessments, no addition can be made by the AD in absence of Meaning any incriminating material found during the course of search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments

SEEMA GOEL,DELHI vs. CIT A, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

reassessment notice under Section 148 of the new regime within the time limit surviving under the Income Tax Act read with TOLA. All notices issued beyond the surviving period are time barred and liable to be set aside; 20. In the case of Communist Party of India (Marxist) vs. CIT Exmpt. reported in [2025] 174 taxmann.com 925 (Delhi

SEEMA GOEL,DELHI vs. CIT A, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

reassessment notice under Section 148 of the new regime within the time limit surviving under the Income Tax Act read with TOLA. All notices issued beyond the surviving period are time barred and liable to be set aside; 20. In the case of Communist Party of India (Marxist) vs. CIT Exmpt. reported in [2025] 174 taxmann.com 925 (Delhi

K K SPUN INDIA LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 NEW DELHI, JHANDEWALAN DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

reassessment notice under Section 148 of the new regime within the time limit surviving under the Income Tax Act read with TOLA. All notices issued beyond the surviving period are time barred and liable to be set aside; 20. In the case of Communist Party of India (Marxist) vs. CIT Exmpt. reported in [2025] 174 taxmann.com 925 (Delhi

K K SPUN INDIA LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, JHANDEWALAN DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

reassessment notice under Section 148 of the new regime within the time limit surviving under the Income Tax Act read with TOLA. All notices issued beyond the surviving period are time barred and liable to be set aside; 20. In the case of Communist Party of India (Marxist) vs. CIT Exmpt. reported in [2025] 174 taxmann.com 925 (Delhi

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, referred to in clause (a) of subsection (1), in a case where an order under sub- section (4) has been made accepting the application." 22

HARMANDER SINGH SRAN,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CC- 29, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment proceedings\nu/s 148 of the Act by issue of notice on 27.07.2016. In response,\nassessee filed the return on 16.09.2016, declaring the same income\nas was declared in the return of income filed u/s 139(1) of the Act.\nThereafter, the assessee sought the reasons recoded and filed\ndetailed objections which were disposed off by the AO and finally

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-III vs. KABUL CHAWLA

22. On the same date as it rendered the above decision, this Court also pronounced its decision in CIT v. Chetan Das Lachman Das (supra). In the latter case, again, a search was undertaken in the Assessee‟s premises under Section 132 of the Act on 13th December, 2005. The decision itself

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-III vs. KABUL CHAWLA

22. On the same date as it rendered the above decision, this Court also pronounced its decision in CIT v. Chetan Das Lachman Das (supra). In the latter case, again, a search was undertaken in the Assessee‟s premises under Section 132 of the Act on 13th December, 2005. The decision itself

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-III vs. KABUL CHAWLA

22. On the same date as it rendered the above decision, this Court also pronounced its decision in CIT v. Chetan Das Lachman Das (supra). In the latter case, again, a search was undertaken in the Assessee‟s premises under Section 132 of the Act on 13th December, 2005. The decision itself

M/S ATMA RAM PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED

22 its assessment. The income in this case has been under assessed in terms of clause (e) of explanation 2 to sec. 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961.” 4. Reassessment orders were thereafter passed making addition, under Section

CHANDRA VIDYA INVESTMENT & FINANCE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -28, DELHI, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal, Accountnat Member

reassess total income of 6 assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relating to the previous year that search was conducted/requisition made. 77. The ingredients of Section 153 C are: (i) Satisfaction of the Assessing Officer who is Assessing Officer of the section 153A noticee that money/bullion/jewellery/other valuable article or thing/books of account or documents (incriminating materials) seized/requisitioned belongs to/pertain