HARISH KUMAR,DELHI vs. NFAC, DELHI

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manish Agarwal, Hon’Bleasstt. Year : 2015-16 Harish Kumar Vs. Nfac, Delhi 5/21, Shanti Niketan, Chankaya Puri, South West Delhi, New Delhi – 21 (Pan: Aaipk9783G) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Acit, Vs. Harish Kumar, Room No. 1505, 15Th Floor, E-2 1/7, West Patel Nagar Tower, Dr. Sp Mukherjee New Delhi – 8 Civic Centre, New Delhi – 2 (Pan: Aaipk9783G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Sanjay Agarwal, Ca & Sh. Sumaksh Mahajan, Ca Respondent By : Shri Surender Pal, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 20.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18.06.2025 Order Per Mahavir Singh, Vp : These Are Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Against The Order Dated 06.8.2024 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi

reassessment proceedings culminating in the order under section 147 r.w.s. Section 144B of the Act are rendered void ab initio, having been initiated beyond the prescribed statutory period and lacking legal sustainability. 1.2. Reliance is placed in case of Ibibo Group Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 10-1 W.P.(C) 17639/2022 (a copy of the judgment

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIVIC CENTRE, NEW DELHI vs. HARISH KUMAR, DELHI

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manish Agarwal, Hon’Bleasstt. Year : 2015-16 Harish Kumar Vs. Nfac, Delhi 5/21, Shanti Niketan, Chankaya Puri, South West Delhi, New Delhi – 21 (Pan: Aaipk9783G) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Acit, Vs. Harish Kumar, Room No. 1505, 15Th Floor, E-2 1/7, West Patel Nagar Tower, Dr. Sp Mukherjee New Delhi – 8 Civic Centre, New Delhi – 2 (Pan: Aaipk9783G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Sanjay Agarwal, Ca & Sh. Sumaksh Mahajan, Ca Respondent By : Shri Surender Pal, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 20.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18.06.2025 Order Per Mahavir Singh, Vp : These Are Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Against The Order Dated 06.8.2024 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi

reassessment proceedings culminating in the order under section 147 r.w.s. Section 144B of the Act are rendered void ab initio, having been initiated beyond the prescribed statutory period and lacking legal sustainability. 1.2. Reliance is placed in case of Ibibo Group Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 10-1 W.P.(C) 17639/2022 (a copy of the judgment

ITO, WARD-1(4), FARIDABAD vs. KESHAV MEDICHEM P.LTD, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

70 lakhs through RTGS on 31.01.2010 to M/s White Lotus Securities and Rs. 10 lakhs to Blue Spire Health Care Pvt Ltd on 22.06.2010. 11. These demonstrative facts clearly show that the Assessing Officer has reopened the assessment based upon wrong facts, wrong appreciation of facts and without any application of any mind, in as much as, the assessee

AP GOYAL CHARITABLE TRUST,EAST DELHI, DELHI INDIA vs. ITO, CIVIC CENTRE,NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

reassessment proceedings, which began on 01.06.2021, to issue a notice under Section 148 of the Act. The said notice was required to be accompanied by an order under Section 148A(d) of the Act. Thus, the AO was required to pass an order under Section 148A(d) of the Act within the said twenty-nine days notwithstanding the time stipulated

KRISHAN KUMAR MAKRANIA PRO. M/S. MAKRANIA OIL MILL,,BHIWANI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-I, GURGAON

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2011-12)

reassessment proceedings under the Act to further streamline them and facilitate their conduct and completion in a seamless manner. It has been proposed that the section 148 of the Act may be amended to provide that a return in response to a notice under section 148 of the Act shall be furnished within three months from

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(2)(1), GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD vs. VIKAS SHARMA, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in AY 2013-14 is dismissed

Bench: SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

section 148 of the new regime expired on 22 June 2022. Therefore, the Impugned notice u/s 148 of The Act dated 29.06.2022 is barred by limitation in view of the Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Union of India vs Rajeev Bansal (Supra). Hence, the reassessment order is quashed and the Ground No. 5 is Allowed

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(2)(1), GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD vs. VIKAS SHARMA, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in AY 2013-14 is dismissed

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

section 148 of the new regime expired on 22 June 2022. Therefore, the Impugned notice u/s 148 of The Act dated 29.06.2022 is barred by limitation in view of the Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Union of India vs Rajeev Bansal (Supra). Hence, the reassessment order is quashed and the Ground No. 5 is Allowed

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

70,496 on account of deemed dividend under Section 2 (22) (e) of the Act corresponding to the additions made on protective basis in the hands of Business Park Overseas Pvt. Ltd. (BPOPL), Countrywide Promoters & 2015:DHC:7044-DB ITA Nos. 707, 709 and 713 of 2014 Page 4 of 26 Developers Pvt. Ltd. (CPDPL) and Poonam Promoters & Developers

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

70,496 on account of deemed dividend under Section 2 (22) (e) of the Act corresponding to the additions made on protective basis in the hands of Business Park Overseas Pvt. Ltd. (BPOPL), Countrywide Promoters & 2015:DHC:7044-DB ITA Nos. 707, 709 and 713 of 2014 Page 4 of 26 Developers Pvt. Ltd. (CPDPL) and Poonam Promoters & Developers

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

70,496 on account of deemed dividend under Section 2 (22) (e) of the Act corresponding to the additions made on protective basis in the hands of Business Park Overseas Pvt. Ltd. (BPOPL), Countrywide Promoters & 2015:DHC:7044-DB ITA Nos. 707, 709 and 713 of 2014 Page 4 of 26 Developers Pvt. Ltd. (CPDPL) and Poonam Promoters & Developers

M/S. INDIA EXPOSITION MART LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

70,590 and the case was assessed under section\n143(3) at an income of Rs.27,44,850. On perusal of the return, it was noticed\nthat the assessee was allowed deduction of Rs.70.70 lakhs under section 80-IA\nand the same was not deducted from the profit of the business for the purpose of\ncalculating deduction under section 80HHC

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)

70,17,697/- u/s 54 of the Act, 1961." (page 52)” 5. In respect of the jurisdictional issue of reassessment proceedings under Section

ORANGE BUSINESS SERVICES INDIA SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

70,33,614/-. 14. With reference to the reopening, the provisions Section 147 are as under: “Income escaping assessment. 147. If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, he may, subject to the provisions of sections 148 to 153, assess or reassess

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-20(3), DELHI, NEW DELHI vs. RMP HOLDINGS PVT LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Ito, Vs. Rmp Holdings Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi 138-C, Block -B Group -4 Dilshad Garden New Delhi Pan No.Aaacr5533N (Appellant) (Respondent)

70,000/-during the year under consideration to convert its undisclosed cash into normal transactions during the demonization period. A search and seizure operation conducted u/s.132 of the Act on 25.03.2017 in the case of Sh. Pankaj Goyal on the basis of the unexplained cash amount of Rs.25 lacs. Sh. Deepak Goyal managing and controlling the company of Asian Bulls

THE HISAR LEADING BANK CO-OP NON-AGRI THRIFT & CREDIT SOCIETY,HISAR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, HISAR, HISAR

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

70 (SC)], the reassessment proceedings initiated under\nthe old or un-amended provisions of section 148, read with the\nextensions

RAJ RANI GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD 35(1), DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON'BLE (Vice President)

reassessment proceedings culminating in the order under section 147 r.w.s. Section 144B of the Act are rendered void ab initio, having been initiated beyond the prescribed statutory period and lacking legal sustainability. 5.1 I draw my support from the decision in the case of Ibibo Group Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 10-1 W.P.(C) 17639/2022

ANIL CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

70,379 iv) 2017-18 1,14,76,672 3,33,64,357 3,27,00,000 88,04,411

ANIL CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

70,379 iv) 2017-18 1,14,76,672 3,33,64,357 3,27,00,000 88,04,411