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

reassessment or re-computation exceeds the tax on the total income determined under sub-section (1) of section 143 or on the basis of the regular assessment aforesaid. (4) Where, as a result of an order under section 154 or section 155 or section 250 or section 254 or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section

RAJAN GUPTA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is allowed as aforesaid

245D is received by the Commissioner under sub-section (2) of that section, xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx shall be excluded: Provided that where immediately after the 2010:DHC:3270-DB limitation referred to in sub-sections (1), [(1A), (1B),] [(2), (2A) and (4)] available to the Assessing Officer for making an order of assessment, reassessment

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-14, NEW DELHI vs. SH. VIJAY KUMAR SONI, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Sudhir Kumarita No. 1883/Del/2023 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Bijay Kumar Soni, Vs Dcit, C/O Anil Jain Dd & Co., Central Circle-14, 611, Surya Kiran Building, 19, New Delhi-110055 K. G. Marg, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aolps5917H Ita No. 2144/Del/2023 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Dcit, Vs Bijay Kumar Soni, Central Circle-14, 61/14, Block No. 61, Ram Jas, New Delhi-110055 Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aolps5917H Assessee By : Sh. Anil Jain, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Monika Dhami, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.09.2023 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:

245D is received by the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner under sub-section (2) of that section; or (viii) the period commencing from the date on which an application is made before the Authority for Advance Rulings 55[or before the Board for Advance Rulings] under sub-section (1) of section 245Q and ending with the date on which the order

BIJAY KUMAR SONI,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-14, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Sudhir Kumarita No. 1883/Del/2023 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Bijay Kumar Soni, Vs Dcit, C/O Anil Jain Dd & Co., Central Circle-14, 611, Surya Kiran Building, 19, New Delhi-110055 K. G. Marg, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aolps5917H Ita No. 2144/Del/2023 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Dcit, Vs Bijay Kumar Soni, Central Circle-14, 61/14, Block No. 61, Ram Jas, New Delhi-110055 Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aolps5917H Assessee By : Sh. Anil Jain, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Monika Dhami, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.09.2023 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:

245D is received by the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner under sub-section (2) of that section; or (viii) the period commencing from the date on which an application is made before the Authority for Advance Rulings 55[or before the Board for Advance Rulings] under sub-section (1) of section 245Q and ending with the date on which the order

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 18, NEW DELHI vs. NKG INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jain, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 7101/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 7102/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 7103/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Dcit, Vs Nkg Infrastructure Ltd., Central Circle-18, 6, Todermal Lane, Ground Floor, New Delhi Near Bengali Market, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccn1659D Assessee By : Sh. Akshit Jain, Ca & Sh. Rajat Jain, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Sarita Kumari, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.03.2022

reassessment made before the 1st day of June, 2016. Explanation.—In computing the period of limitation under this section— xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx (v) in a case where an application made before the Income-tax Settlement Commission is rejected by it or is not allowed to be proceeded with by it, the period commencing from the date

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 18, NEW DELHI vs. NKG INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jain, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 7101/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 7102/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 7103/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Dcit, Vs Nkg Infrastructure Ltd., Central Circle-18, 6, Todermal Lane, Ground Floor, New Delhi Near Bengali Market, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccn1659D Assessee By : Sh. Akshit Jain, Ca & Sh. Rajat Jain, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Sarita Kumari, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.03.2022

reassessment made before the 1st day of June, 2016. Explanation.—In computing the period of limitation under this section— xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx (v) in a case where an application made before the Income-tax Settlement Commission is rejected by it or is not allowed to be proceeded with by it, the period commencing from the date

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 18, NEW DELHI vs. NKG INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jain, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 7101/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 7102/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 7103/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Dcit, Vs Nkg Infrastructure Ltd., Central Circle-18, 6, Todermal Lane, Ground Floor, New Delhi Near Bengali Market, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccn1659D Assessee By : Sh. Akshit Jain, Ca & Sh. Rajat Jain, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Sarita Kumari, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.03.2022

reassessment made before the 1st day of June, 2016. Explanation.—In computing the period of limitation under this section— xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx (v) in a case where an application made before the Income-tax Settlement Commission is rejected by it or is not allowed to be proceeded with by it, the period commencing from the date

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S SNW SMITH CONSULTANTS PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue being ITA

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. SNW SMITH CONSULTANTS PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue being ITA

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S SNW SMITH CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue being ITA

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. ADAM SMITH CONSULTANCY PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue being ITA

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

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

UDAI KARAN DALAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-31 , NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1673/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 बनाम Deep Karan Dalal Dcit, 21, Mla Flats, Sector 3, Vs. Central Circle-31, Chandigarh - 160010 New Delhi. (Formerly Ito, Ward 1(3), Chandigarh) Pan No. Ajypd2534K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1674/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 बनाम Udai Karan Dalal Dcit, 21, Mla Flats, Sector 3, Vs. Central Circle-31, Chandigarh - 160010 New Delhi.

Section 153A of the Act. In the course of reassessment proceedings the Assessing Officer has issued several notices and questionnaires requiring the assessee to explain the source of investments made by Assessees in Angad & Sons Pvt. Ltd. and Angad & Sons Realcon Pvt. Ltd. towards share capital/share premium during the AY 2010-11. The assessees failed to comply with the notices

DEEP KARAN DALAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 31, ARA CENTRAL E-2 JHANDEWALAN EXTN., NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1673/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 बनाम Deep Karan Dalal Dcit, 21, Mla Flats, Sector 3, Vs. Central Circle-31, Chandigarh - 160010 New Delhi. (Formerly Ito, Ward 1(3), Chandigarh) Pan No. Ajypd2534K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1674/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 बनाम Udai Karan Dalal Dcit, 21, Mla Flats, Sector 3, Vs. Central Circle-31, Chandigarh - 160010 New Delhi.

Section 153A of the Act. In the course of reassessment proceedings the Assessing Officer has issued several notices and questionnaires requiring the assessee to explain the source of investments made by Assessees in Angad & Sons Pvt. Ltd. and Angad & Sons Realcon Pvt. Ltd. towards share capital/share premium during the AY 2010-11. The assessees failed to comply with the notices

DCIT, CC-31, NEW DELHI vs. HARJEET SINGH, FARIDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.1684/Del/2021 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Dy. Cit, Shri Harjeet Singh Central Circle-31, House No.22, Mandkola Teh. New Delhi. Vs. Hathin, Faridabad Haryana-121001. Pan: Bpips2997Q (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.153/Del/2022 Arising Out Of Ita No.153/Del/2021 Assessment Year 2013-14 C.O. No.154/Del/2022 Arising Out Of Ita No.154/Del/2021 Assessment Year 2014-15 Shri Harjeet Singh Dy. Cit, House No.22, Central Circle-31, Mandkola Teh. Hathin, Vs. New Delhi. Faridabad Haryana-121001. Pan: Bpips2997Q (Cross Objector) (Respondent)

245D(3) of the Act and a report dated 07/01/2021 was submitted to the Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC), which also forms part of the remand report. As per the said remand report, the AO has reproduced the relevant part of the verification done by him in respect of the impugned page wherein Mr Subhash Chaudhary has stated that

DCIT, CC-31, NEW DELHI vs. HARJEET SINGH, FARIDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.1684/Del/2021 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Dy. Cit, Shri Harjeet Singh Central Circle-31, House No.22, Mandkola Teh. New Delhi. Vs. Hathin, Faridabad Haryana-121001. Pan: Bpips2997Q (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.153/Del/2022 Arising Out Of Ita No.153/Del/2021 Assessment Year 2013-14 C.O. No.154/Del/2022 Arising Out Of Ita No.154/Del/2021 Assessment Year 2014-15 Shri Harjeet Singh Dy. Cit, House No.22, Central Circle-31, Mandkola Teh. Hathin, Vs. New Delhi. Faridabad Haryana-121001. Pan: Bpips2997Q (Cross Objector) (Respondent)

245D(3) of the Act and a report dated 07/01/2021 was submitted to the Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC), which also forms part of the remand report. As per the said remand report, the AO has reproduced the relevant part of the verification done by him in respect of the impugned page wherein Mr Subhash Chaudhary has stated that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI vs. JOGINDER SINGH, HARYANA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.1684/Del/2021 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Dy. Cit, Shri Harjeet Singh Central Circle-31, House No.22, Mandkola Teh. New Delhi. Vs. Hathin, Faridabad Haryana-121001. Pan: Bpips2997Q (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.153/Del/2022 Arising Out Of Ita No.153/Del/2021 Assessment Year 2013-14 C.O. No.154/Del/2022 Arising Out Of Ita No.154/Del/2021 Assessment Year 2014-15 Shri Harjeet Singh Dy. Cit, House No.22, Central Circle-31, Mandkola Teh. Hathin, Vs. New Delhi. Faridabad Haryana-121001. Pan: Bpips2997Q (Cross Objector) (Respondent)

245D(3) of the Act and a report dated 07/01/2021 was submitted to the Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC), which also forms part of the remand report. As per the said remand report, the AO has reproduced the relevant part of the verification done by him in respect of the impugned page wherein Mr Subhash Chaudhary has stated that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JHANDEWALAN NEW DELHI vs. SH. JOGINDER SINGH, HARYANA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.1684/Del/2021 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Dy. Cit, Shri Harjeet Singh Central Circle-31, House No.22, Mandkola Teh. New Delhi. Vs. Hathin, Faridabad Haryana-121001. Pan: Bpips2997Q (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.153/Del/2022 Arising Out Of Ita No.153/Del/2021 Assessment Year 2013-14 C.O. No.154/Del/2022 Arising Out Of Ita No.154/Del/2021 Assessment Year 2014-15 Shri Harjeet Singh Dy. Cit, House No.22, Central Circle-31, Mandkola Teh. Hathin, Vs. New Delhi. Faridabad Haryana-121001. Pan: Bpips2997Q (Cross Objector) (Respondent)

245D(3) of the Act and a report dated 07/01/2021 was submitted to the Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC), which also forms part of the remand report. As per the said remand report, the AO has reproduced the relevant part of the verification done by him in respect of the impugned page wherein Mr Subhash Chaudhary has stated that

ACIT, CIRCLE- 19(1), NEW DELHI vs. ORACLE INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.1684/Del/2021 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Dy. Cit, Shri Harjeet Singh Central Circle-31, House No.22, Mandkola Teh. New Delhi. Vs. Hathin, Faridabad Haryana-121001. Pan: Bpips2997Q (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.153/Del/2022 Arising Out Of Ita No.153/Del/2021 Assessment Year 2013-14 C.O. No.154/Del/2022 Arising Out Of Ita No.154/Del/2021 Assessment Year 2014-15 Shri Harjeet Singh Dy. Cit, House No.22, Central Circle-31, Mandkola Teh. Hathin, Vs. New Delhi. Faridabad Haryana-121001. Pan: Bpips2997Q (Cross Objector) (Respondent)

245D(3) of the Act and a report dated 07/01/2021 was submitted to the Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC), which also forms part of the remand report. As per the said remand report, the AO has reproduced the relevant part of the verification done by him in respect of the impugned page wherein Mr Subhash Chaudhary has stated that

ASHISH KALRA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2008-09 in ITA

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.4309/Del/2019 (Assessment Year 2009-10) Mr. Ashish Kalra Acit, C-3/313, Mig Flats, Janakpuri, Central Circle-4, New Delhi-110058. Vs. New Delhi. Pan-Aippk0526N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Tarandeep Singh, Adv. Department By Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14/10/2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-23, New Delhi [Cit(A), In Short] Dated 28.01.2019 In Appeal No. 159/2016-17 & 3/2017-18 For Asst. Years 2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively, Both Arising Out Of Order Passed U/S 147 R.W.S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As ‘The Act’). 2. Since, Both The Appeals Are Having Identical Issues, Therefore, They Are Adjudicated By A Common Order. First We Take Up The Appeal For Assessment Year 2008-09 In Ita No.4308/Del/2019. Ashish Kalra Vs. Acit

reassessment proceedings u/s 147 even if the proceedings u/s 153C could be initiated. Therefore, in the light of above judgment, we hereby held that the action of the AO in reopening the assessment u/s 147 on the basis of the documents found from the possession of the 3rd person cannot be held as bad in law and, accordingly, the ground