THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -CENTRAL -1 vs. LATA GOEL

Bench: The Learned

reassessment proceedings were initiated pursuant to a notice dated 30.03.2017 issued under Section 148 of the Act. The AO had reopened the assessment on the basis that the records of South Delhi Municipal Corporation [SDMC] indicated that the Assessee owned more than one residential property on the date of the transfer of the shares of FIITJEE Ltd. [the original asset

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -CENTRAL -1 vs. LATA GOEL

Bench: The Learned

reassessment proceedings were initiated pursuant to a notice dated 30.03.2017 issued under Section 148 of the Act. The AO had reopened the assessment on the basis that the records of South Delhi Municipal Corporation [SDMC] indicated that the Assessee owned more than one residential property on the date of the transfer of the shares of FIITJEE Ltd. [the original asset

KAMAL KISHORE JAISWAL,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2007-08 Shri Kamal Kishore Vs. Dcit, Jaiswal, Central Circle, Dehradun 23/25, Pritam Road, Dehradun. Pan :Acdpk1166C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Tarandeep Singh, Ca Respondent By Shri J.K. Mishra, Cit(Dr)

54F of the Act in the return of income filed under section 153A of the Act on 31/08/2012, which was not claimed in the return filed under section 139 of the Act on 31/03/2008. The Ld. CIT(A) has referred to the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Charchit Agrwal (supra), wherein the Tribunal has followed the decision

SMT. HARMINDER KAUR,,NEW DELHI vs. ITO,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing]

reassessment completed on 25/03/2015 in the case of the assessee, the Assessing Officer disallowed the claim of deduction under section 54 of the Act amounting to ₹ 78,80,819/-. On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) also upheld the finding of the Assessing Officer. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the grounds as reproduced above

SHRI INAMUL HAQ,SAHARANPUR vs. ITO, SAHARANPUR

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

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

JAGJIT SINGH,PANIPAT vs. PR.CIT, KARNAL

In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

reassessment proceedings under section 148/143(3) accepting the return of income of the assessee. The Ld. Pr. CIT on perusal of the assessment 3 ITA.No.2777/Del./2018 Shri Jagjit Singh, Panipat. record and relevant material on record found certain apparent discrepancies and errors. Accordingly, show cause notice under section 263 of the Income-Tax Act was issued to the assessee

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. 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

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

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. MS. DOLLY NANDA, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiito, Vs. Dolly Nanda, Ward-22(2), H-10, Maharni Bagh, New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaapn0833C (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 54EC of the income tax act. Therefore, according to the Ld. CIT appeal the capital gain chargeable to income tax after granting deduction of 54F the chargeable capital gain is nil. In view of this, he allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT (A), revenue is in appeal before

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. MS. SITA NANDA, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 1 of the appeal of the revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri H S Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit Sita Nanda Circle 22(1) H -10 Maharani Bagh Vs. New Delhi New Delhi 110065 (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 54F of Rs. 5020386/–. All the said been done by the Ld. CIT(A) by admitting the additional evidences which is in violation of rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. He vehemently contested that the facts stated in para No. 3.1 of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is incorrect. The assessee has given adequate opportunity

SACHIN KATARIA,NOIDA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-36(1), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year : 2008-09 Sachin Kataria, Acit, Circle- 36(1), C-65, Sector- 50, Noida, New Delhi. Vs. Uttar Pradesh.

section 54F should be construed liberally and it is also held in various decisions that where substantial amount of the capital gain has been invested for construction of the house property, exemption u/s 54F may be allowed notwithstanding that the property is not fully complete or that the house is not in habitable condition. However, in the instant case

MR. ABHISAR SHARMA,NOIDA vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2005-06 Mr. Abhisar Sharma, Vs Dcit, B-602, Plot No.F-2, Circle-64(1), The Crescent, B-Block, Room No.314, Sector-50, Pratyakshkar Bhawan, Noida. Civic Centre, New Delhi. Pan: Aigps3840N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate & Shri Lalit Mohan, Ca Revenue By : Shri J.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr. Date Of Hearing : 12.01.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.01.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30Th March, 2015 Passed U/S 263 Of The It Act By The Pcit-22, Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2005-06. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed His Return Of Income On 22Nd July, 2005 Declaring Income Of Rs.9,00,355/-. The Assessee In The Return Of Income Had Declared Income From Salary At Rs.9,81,964/- & Loss From House Property At Rs.81,609/-. The Return Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Act On 4Th July, 2006 At The Same Income. Subsequently, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened By Issue Of Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Dated 27Th March, 2012 After Obtaining Prior Approval Of The Addl. Cit, Range-7, New Delhi, Vide His Letter No.526 Dated 27Th March, 2012. The Ao Completed The Assessment U/S 147/143(3) On 28Th March, 2013, Determining The Income Of The Assessee At Rs.11,03,270/- As Against The Returned Income Of Rs.9,00,355/- Wherein He Made The Following Additions:-

reassessment proceedings were started. In the questionnaire, the assessee was required to submit the following information: "A) AS Per Tax Evasion Petition filed in your case it has been alleged that you have incurred unaccounted expenditure to the tune oj Rs. 3 crores on such foreign travels. In this connection you are hereby asked to submit a detailed reply

MRS. SHUMANA SEN,NOIDA vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

reassessment proceedings were started. In the questionnaire, the assessee was required to submit the following information: "A) AS Per Tax Evasion Petition filed in your case it has been alleged that you have incurred unaccounted expenditure to the tune oj Rs. 3 crores on such foreign travels. In this connection you are hereby asked to submit a detailed reply