JAGDISH PARSHAD JAIN,PANIPAT vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE KARNAL, KARNAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Inamul Haq S/O Sh. Mohd. Vs. Income Tax Officer, Yamin, Vill.Megh Chhappar, Ward-2. Ambalaa Road, Saharanpur (U.P) Saharanpur Pan: Aaiph2840K (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 54F. In view of the above submission, it is clear that all the allegation made by the (A) are fully covered, in the favor of the assessee by the decision of Hon'ble art, hence, the exemption claimed by the assessee U/s 54F need to be allowed”. 9. Learned Authorized Representative for the Department of Revenue submitted that

SATYAMURTI RAMASUNDAR,GURGAON vs. ACIT CIRCLE-4(1), GURGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13 Satyamurti Ramasunder, Acit, D-502, Ivy Complex, Circle 4(1), Vs. Sushant Lok, 1-Blocka, Gurgaon Gurgaon (Haryana). (Pan: Aaapr0741H) (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassess the income was bad in law, for proviso to section 147 of the Act was applicable in the present case, inasmuch as, the original assessment was made under 3 SatyamurtiRamasundar A.Y. 2012-13 Section 143(3) and the notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued after the expiry of four years from the end of the assessment

MANJULA SETHI,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 4(2), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Smt. Renu Jauhrimanjula Sethi Vs. Addl./Joint/Deputy/Assistant L-42A Lajpat Nagar-Ii Commissioner Of Income New Delhi- 110024 Tax/Ito,National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aatps7572E Appellant .. Respondent

54F of the Act, the assessee could not be granted the relief and hence proceeded against the assessee by reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Act. Notice under Section 148, therefore, was issued to the assessee dated 30.03.2021. The said reassessment

SHYAM SUNDER ,GURURGAM vs. ITO ( CIRCLE 4(1) , GURGRAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

reassessment proceedings were validly initiated under section 147 of the Act after due recording of reasons and obtaining the requisite approval. The notices under sections 148 and 143(2) were duly served and the assessee participated in the proceedings. Hence, the allegation of violation of principles of natural justice is without merit. 9.2 On merits, the assessee failed to substantiate

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, NEW DELHI vs. HARPREET KOCHAR, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Dcit Vs. Harpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4656N New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurmeet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4654Q New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aizpk6763F New Delhi Appellant Respondent C.O No. 46/Del/2023 In Ita No. 938/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Harpreetkochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4656N Appellant Respondent C.O No. 49/Del/2023 In Ita No. 939/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Gurmeet Kochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4654Q Appellant Respondent C.O Nos. 46, 47 & 49/Del/2020 Dcit Vs. Harpreetkochar

reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. Meaning thereby, in respect of completed/unabated assessments, 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 132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, NEW DELHI vs. GURPREET KOCHAR, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Dcit Vs. Harpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4656N New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurmeet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4654Q New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aizpk6763F New Delhi Appellant Respondent C.O No. 46/Del/2023 In Ita No. 938/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Harpreetkochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4656N Appellant Respondent C.O No. 49/Del/2023 In Ita No. 939/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Gurmeet Kochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4654Q Appellant Respondent C.O Nos. 46, 47 & 49/Del/2020 Dcit Vs. Harpreetkochar

reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. Meaning thereby, in respect of completed/unabated assessments, 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 132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, NEW DELHI vs. GURMEET KOCHAR, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Dcit Vs. Harpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4656N New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurmeet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4654Q New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aizpk6763F New Delhi Appellant Respondent C.O No. 46/Del/2023 In Ita No. 938/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Harpreetkochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4656N Appellant Respondent C.O No. 49/Del/2023 In Ita No. 939/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Gurmeet Kochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4654Q Appellant Respondent C.O Nos. 46, 47 & 49/Del/2020 Dcit Vs. Harpreetkochar

reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. Meaning thereby, in respect of completed/unabated assessments, 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 132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened

KUSUM LATA,NOIDA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE , NOIDA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

section 54F cannot be ascertained. Further, he proceeded to disallow the claim made u/s 54F of the Act to the extent of Rs.4,07,906/-. Further, the Assessing Officer observed that certain investments made by the assessee in the following companies: (i) Chhahat Technology -Rs.33,000/- (ii) Quick Infotech P. Ltd. -Rs.33,000/- (iii) K.S. Ultratech

KUSUM LATA,NOIDA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE , NOIDA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

section 54F cannot be ascertained. Further, he proceeded to disallow the claim made u/s 54F of the Act to the extent of Rs.4,07,906/-. Further, the Assessing Officer observed that certain investments made by the assessee in the following companies: (i) Chhahat Technology -Rs.33,000/- (ii) Quick Infotech P. Ltd. -Rs.33,000/- (iii) K.S. Ultratech

KUSUM LATA,NOIDA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE , NOIDA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

section 54F cannot be ascertained. Further, he proceeded to disallow the claim made u/s 54F of the Act to the extent of Rs.4,07,906/-. Further, the Assessing Officer observed that certain investments made by the assessee in the following companies: (i) Chhahat Technology -Rs.33,000/- (ii) Quick Infotech P. Ltd. -Rs.33,000/- (iii) K.S. Ultratech

KUSUM LATA,NOIDA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE , NOIDA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

section 54F cannot be ascertained. Further, he proceeded to disallow the claim made u/s 54F of the Act to the extent of Rs.4,07,906/-. Further, the Assessing Officer observed that certain investments made by the assessee in the following companies: (i) Chhahat Technology -Rs.33,000/- (ii) Quick Infotech P. Ltd. -Rs.33,000/- (iii) K.S. Ultratech

KUSUM LATA,NOIDA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE , NOIDA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

section 54F cannot be ascertained. Further, he proceeded to disallow the claim made u/s 54F of the Act to the extent of Rs.4,07,906/-. Further, the Assessing Officer observed that certain investments made by the assessee in the following companies: (i) Chhahat Technology -Rs.33,000/- (ii) Quick Infotech P. Ltd. -Rs.33,000/- (iii) K.S. Ultratech

PARVEJ,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri C.M. Gargassessment Year: 2009-10 Parvej, Vs. Ito, C/O M/S Sanjeev Anand & Ward-2(1), Associates, Ghaziabad. 77-Navyug Market, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. Pan: Dkkpp4804A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Somil Agarwal & Shri Deepesh Garg, Advocates Revenue By : Shri Mithalesh Km. Pandey, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.10.2022 Order

section 54B and 54F is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing and all the above grounds are without prejudice to each other.” 3. The ld. Counsel of the assessee, drawing

PARTAP SINGH,FARIDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, FARIDABAD

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2012-13

section 54F(1) has to be understood in the sense that the building should be of residential nature and “a” should not be understood to indicate a singular number. Thus, even in case of purchases of two residential flats assessee is entitled to exemption u/s 54F. Reliance in this regard can be placed on the following judgments: - Judgment

SUKH DARSHAN SINGH,DELHI vs. ITO WARD.43(2) , DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

54F and made adjustments to the income declared by the assessee in his return of income. He proceeded to make the addition of Rs.40,96,805/- u/s 68 of the Act. Sukh Darshan Singh vs. ITO 5. Aggrieved with the above order, the assessee preferred an appeal before NFAC, Delhi and filed following grounds of appeal: “1. On Facts & Circumstances

SAVITA BANSAL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD-35(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

54F of the Act. The Assessing Officer while making the aforesaid additions also initiated penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act alleging that the assessee has concealed the particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. In purusance of such satisfaction formed in the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer imposed penalty of Rs.17

JAIPAL,GURGAON vs. ITO, WARD- 2(5), GURGAON

The Appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Naveen Chandrajaipal V Ito C/O. Kunal Aggarwal & S Ward 2(5) Associates, 226, Jmd Megapolis, Gurgaon. Haryana 2Nd Floor, Sector-48, Sohna Road, Gurgaon. Haryana Pan: Alapj3014C Appellant Respondent Assessee By None Revenue By Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14/01/2026 Order

section 148 of the Act. The provision nowhere postulates or contemplates that the Assessing Officer cannot make any additions on any other ground unless some addition is made on the ground on which reussessment had been initiated. Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 13028 of 2011 against this decision was dismissed on August 19, 2011. The reassessment proceedings, thus

AKASH JAIN LEGAL HEIR SMT. RAJ RANI CHIMPIWARA,DEOBAND vs. ITO WARD-3(3)(4) , DEOBAND

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar[Assessment Year: 2014-15

reassessment order passed U/s 147/14A~by the assessing 1 officer, which is illegal, bad in law and without ] jurisdiction 3. That, the NFAC has erred in not passing appellant order on the deceased person, which is illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction 4. 3. That, the NFAC has erred in not deciding all the Ground of appeal raised