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

BEST BULL STOCK TRADING PVT LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-18, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Sh. C.N. Prasad & Sh. M. Balaganesh

section 148 for reassessment the assessment years 1968- 69 to 1971-72 and for the year 1982-83 on the ground

BEST BULL STOCK TRADING PVT LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-18, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Sh. C.N. Prasad & Sh. M. Balaganesh

section 148 for reassessment the assessment years 1968- 69 to 1971-72 and for the year 1982-83 on the ground

ACIT, CC- 26, , NEW DELHI vs. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI, NEW DELHI

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

section 69 of the Act has been challenged on merits. 3.0 Before us, the ld. Sr. Counsel vehemently challenged the validity of the assessment order and filed detailed chart of issues summarising the legal and factual submissions on the aforesaid grounds. On the legal grounds, the ld. Sr. Counsel submitted that the impugned reassessment

SH. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

section 69 of the Act has been challenged on merits. 3.0 Before us, the ld. Sr. Counsel vehemently challenged the validity of the assessment order and filed detailed chart of issues summarising the legal and factual submissions on the aforesaid grounds. On the legal grounds, the ld. Sr. Counsel submitted that the impugned reassessment

ACIT, CC- 26, , NEW DELHI vs. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI, NEW DELHI

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

section 69 of the Act has been challenged on merits. 3.0 Before us, the ld. Sr. Counsel vehemently challenged the validity of the assessment order and filed detailed chart of issues summarising the legal and factual submissions on the aforesaid grounds. On the legal grounds, the ld. Sr. Counsel submitted that the impugned reassessment

SH. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

section 69 of the Act has been challenged on merits. 3.0 Before us, the ld. Sr. Counsel vehemently challenged the validity of the assessment order and filed detailed chart of issues summarising the legal and factual submissions on the aforesaid grounds. On the legal grounds, the ld. Sr. Counsel submitted that the impugned reassessment

ACIT, CC- 26, , NEW DELHI vs. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI, NEW DELHI

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

section 69 of the Act has been challenged on merits. 3.0 Before us, the ld. Sr. Counsel vehemently challenged the validity of the assessment order and filed detailed chart of issues summarising the legal and factual submissions on the aforesaid grounds. On the legal grounds, the ld. Sr. Counsel submitted that the impugned reassessment

SH. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

section 69 of the Act has been challenged on merits. 3.0 Before us, the ld. Sr. Counsel vehemently challenged the validity of the assessment order and filed detailed chart of issues summarising the legal and factual submissions on the aforesaid grounds. On the legal grounds, the ld. Sr. Counsel submitted that the impugned reassessment

ACIT, CC- 26, , NEW DELHI vs. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI, NEW DELHI

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

section 69 of the Act has been challenged on merits. 3.0 Before us, the ld. Sr. Counsel vehemently challenged the validity of the assessment order and filed detailed chart of issues summarising the legal and factual submissions on the aforesaid grounds. On the legal grounds, the ld. Sr. Counsel submitted that the impugned reassessment

ACIT, CC- 26, , NEW DELHI vs. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI, NEW DELHI

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

section 69 of the Act has been challenged on merits. 3.0 Before us, the ld. Sr. Counsel vehemently challenged the validity of the assessment order and filed detailed chart of issues summarising the legal and factual submissions on the aforesaid grounds. On the legal grounds, the ld. Sr. Counsel submitted that the impugned reassessment

ACIT, CC- 26, , NEW DELHI vs. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI, NEW DELHI

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

section 69 of the Act has been challenged on merits. 3.0 Before us, the ld. Sr. Counsel vehemently challenged the validity of the assessment order and filed detailed chart of issues summarising the legal and factual submissions on the aforesaid grounds. On the legal grounds, the ld. Sr. Counsel submitted that the impugned reassessment

SECURITY PRINTING AND MINTING CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 22(2), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

reassessment, an application under section 154 of the Act filed by the appellant/assessee was disposed of, vide order dated 24.10.2018, by the AO. Aggrieved with the order dated 24.10.2018 passed under section 154/147/143(3) of the Act, the appellant/assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A) challenging the quantum addition of Rs.1,69

ACE INFRACITY DEVELOPERS P.LTD,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, NOIDA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

Section 69 as is evident from the assessment order itself. By Now it is judicially settled that the CIT(A) did not have any jurisdiction to make such addition/disallowance on the issues which were never considered by the Assessing Officer. Though the powers of CIT (A) are co-terminus with the powers of the Assessing Officer yet he has jurisdiction

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

Section 153C. 59. It would be pertinent to recall that Section 153C essentially seeks to merge ongoing assessments with a search assessment which may be triggered by the discovery of material obtained in a search and which was the statutory procedure which prevailed in terms of the provisions contained in Chapter XIV B. However, and in cases where on facts

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

Section 153C. 59. It would be pertinent to recall that Section 153C essentially seeks to merge ongoing assessments with a search assessment which may be triggered by the discovery of material obtained in a search and which was the statutory procedure which prevailed in terms of the provisions contained in Chapter XIV B. However, and in cases where on facts

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

Section 153C. 59. It would be pertinent to recall that Section 153C essentially seeks to merge ongoing assessments with a search assessment which may be triggered by the discovery of material obtained in a search and which was the statutory procedure which prevailed in terms of the provisions contained in Chapter XIV B. However, and in cases where on facts