DCIT, CC-20, DELHI vs. RAJIV AGARWAL, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the appellant for AYs

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

reassess the income of the person to whom such assets/books belong in accordance with Section 153A of the Act. 23. In the present case, the Assessee had claimed that the assessments for the concerned assessment years were not pending on the date of recording of satisfaction by the AO and, therefore, would not abate by virtue of the second proviso

DCIT, CC-20, DELHI vs. RAJIV AGARWAL, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the appellant for AYs

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

reassess the income of the person to whom such assets/books belong in accordance with Section 153A of the Act. 23. In the present case, the Assessee had claimed that the assessments for the concerned assessment years were not pending on the date of recording of satisfaction by the AO and, therefore, would not abate by virtue of the second proviso

DCIT, CC-20, DELHI vs. RAJIV AGARWAL, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the appellant for AYs

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

reassess the income of the person to whom such assets/books belong in accordance with Section 153A of the Act. 23. In the present case, the Assessee had claimed that the assessments for the concerned assessment years were not pending on the date of recording of satisfaction by the AO and, therefore, would not abate by virtue of the second proviso

ALOK GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(3)(1) (INTERNAQTIONAL TAXATION), NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed and the Stay applications filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

money but addition has been made on account of unexplained money/undisclosed income u/s 69A of Rs.1,74,06,350/-. Since the facts of the impugned assessment year are identical to facts in ITA No.4338/Del/2019 for AY 2010-11, following our findings for AY 2010-11 where the reassessment

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, NOIDA, NOIDA vs. NAGPAL FABRICS PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Vimal Kumar[Assessment Year : 2021-22] Dcit Vs Nagpal Fabrics Pvt.Ltd. Central Circle-Ii 697 Katra Neel Chandni Noida. Chowk, New Delhi-110006. Pan-Aabcn9620F Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Amit Shukla, Sr. Dr Respondent By Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Adv. & Shri Govind Agarwal, Ca Date Of Hearing 21.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18.12.2024

money etc. (Agricultural income) - Assessment year 2010-11 During relevant year, assessee earned agricultural income which was exempt from tax Assessee filed its return declaring certain other taxable income Assessment was completed without taking assessee's return in scrutiny Subsequently, Assessing Officer issued notice seeking to reopen assessment on ground that these was a big mismatch between returned income

VIJAY KUMAR JAIN,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 2, GHAZIABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishiay: 2011-12 Sh. Vijay Kumar Jain Dcit, Circle-2 Vs. Ka-49, Kavi Nagar Ghaziabad Ghaziabad, Up

unexplained money. II. INR 68.42 lakhs received from The Ld.AO accepted the various lockers of assessee. contention that the appellant under the will has received the amount, however, held that Sh.Roshan Lal Jain has given the cash only to the tune of Rs.55 lakhs but the cash seized in the lockers are Rs.68.42. The Ld.AO refused to consider the amount

SURESH PRASAD AGGARWAL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-61(1), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2008-09

reassess as per provisions of section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.“ 2.1 Subsequently, the case was reopened and notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued on 31.03.2015 which why duly served upon the assessee. Statutory notice u/s. 143(2) was issued on 27.07.2015 of the Act and notice u/s. 142(1) was issued on 20.10.2015 and duly

ITO, WARD-18(), NEW DELHI vs. NIVIA AGENCIES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: MS. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

reassessment proceedings, notices were issued u/s 142(10 from time to time which were duly complied with and thereafter, the assessment was completed at total income of Rs.3,99,70,1900/- by making of ITO vs. Nivia Agencies Pvt. Ltd. addition of Rs.4 Cr. on account of share application money and share premium received during the year. 3. Aggrieved

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SUR BUILDCON PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeals are dismissed in favour of the

unexplained. Hence, the revenue passed the reassessment order. During appeal the appellant got the opportunity to challenge the reassessment order on facts and in law. The appellant has been allowed relief on merit. The assessment order stands merged in this order. Therefore, it cannot be said that the reassessment proceeding and the order was bad in law. In any case

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. BBN TRANSPORTATION PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeals are dismissed in favour of the

unexplained. Hence, the revenue passed the reassessment order. During appeal the appellant got the opportunity to challenge the reassessment order on facts and in law. The appellant has been allowed relief on merit. The assessment order stands merged in this order. Therefore, it cannot be said that the reassessment proceeding and the order was bad in law. In any case

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SG PORTFOLIO PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for the A

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya

unexplained share application money of Rs.1,02,70,000/- and deposits in Bank account of Rs.4,52,58,095/-. It is seen on the reasons recorded as incorporated by the A.O. in the impugned assessment order that the A.O. relied upon the observations 5 ITA.Nos.2331 to 2334/Del./2016 M/s.S.G. Portfolio Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. made

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SG PORTFOLIO PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for the A

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya

unexplained share application money of Rs.1,02,70,000/- and deposits in Bank account of Rs.4,52,58,095/-. It is seen on the reasons recorded as incorporated by the A.O. in the impugned assessment order that the A.O. relied upon the observations 5 ITA.Nos.2331 to 2334/Del./2016 M/s.S.G. Portfolio Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. made

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SG PORTFOLIO PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for the A

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya

unexplained share application money of Rs.1,02,70,000/- and deposits in Bank account of Rs.4,52,58,095/-. It is seen on the reasons recorded as incorporated by the A.O. in the impugned assessment order that the A.O. relied upon the observations 5 ITA.Nos.2331 to 2334/Del./2016 M/s.S.G. Portfolio Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. made

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SG PORTFOLIO PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for the A

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya

unexplained share application money of Rs.1,02,70,000/- and deposits in Bank account of Rs.4,52,58,095/-. It is seen on the reasons recorded as incorporated by the A.O. in the impugned assessment order that the A.O. relied upon the observations 5 ITA.Nos.2331 to 2334/Del./2016 M/s.S.G. Portfolio Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. made

SAROJ SANGWAN,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD 4(1), GURGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2428/Del/2023 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12

unexplained money and disregarded the return of income and responses filed by the Appellant. 4. The Reassessment proceedings and the impugned

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S RENU NANDA, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal number WTA 27/del/2014 for assessment year 2010 – 11 filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt Beena A. Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

money received by the assessee of Rs. 1 50, 07557/– from Mr. Suresh Nanda, addition of Rs. 4416694/– on account of unexplained investment in purchase of a car and Rs. 5 270, 000 made by the assessing officer on account of unexplained investment in jewellery. The Ld. CIT (A) deleted the above addition. Therefore, revenue is in appeal before

DCIT, VIKASH BHAWAN DELHI vs. RAJAN KUMAR, LAXMI NAGAR,DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue appeal is dismissed and the cross objection filed by the assessee is allowed in the aforesaid manner

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Smt. Renu Jauhridcit Vs Rajan Kumar Room No. 218-D Block, 31,Vijay Block Laxmi Vikash Bhawan, Nagar Delhi-110092 Delhi- 110 002 Pan: Caapk8381E

unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act made by the AO. The reasoning and findings of the Ld. NFAC, while granting relief is on the proper appreciation of law expounded by the judicial dicta. We do not find any reasons to interfere with the findings of the NFAC. The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Assesse’s Cross objection

SUNITA BHARDWAJ,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 61(1), NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

unexplained money u/s 69A is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case and the same is not sustainable on various legal and factual grounds. 5. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the action

SUNITA BHARDWAJ,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 61(1), NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

unexplained money u/s 69A is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case and the same is not sustainable on various legal and factual grounds. 5. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the action