ANANT RAJ LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2), NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed partly as indicated above

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

147 of the Act for this assessment year as invalid and have confirmed the cancellation of the reassessment order, the return filed cannot be considered as revised return as the entire 22 I.T.As. No.4736, 5237 & 5238/DEL/2017 proceedings are void-ab-initio and therefore, grounds of appeal raised on this score are dismissed. 38. Grounds no. 5 and 6 are general

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2), NEW DELHI vs. ANANT RAJ LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed partly as indicated above

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

147 of the Act for this assessment year as invalid and have confirmed the cancellation of the reassessment order, the return filed cannot be considered as revised return as the entire 22 I.T.As. No.4736, 5237 & 5238/DEL/2017 proceedings are void-ab-initio and therefore, grounds of appeal raised on this score are dismissed. 38. Grounds no. 5 and 6 are general

M/S. DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

reassessment proceedings, the assessee cannot turn back and say that it had not received the copy of the 143(2) notice. 18. Thereafter, the ld. CIT DR took our attention to section 292BB and contended that the said section has been introduced by Finance Act, 2008 w.e.f. 01.04.12008 and all pending proceedings including the reopening and reassessment in this case

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL LTD., DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

reassessment proceedings, the assessee cannot turn back and say that it had not received the copy of the 143(2) notice. 18. Thereafter, the ld. CIT DR took our attention to section 292BB and contended that the said section has been introduced by Finance Act, 2008 w.e.f. 01.04.12008 and all pending proceedings including the reopening and reassessment in this case

MORGAN VENTURES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CC-14, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Aakash Deep Jain & Shri N.K. Billaiyaita No. 8238/Del/2019 [A.Y 2014-15]

reassessment proceedings. 6. In reply to the notice u/s 148 of the Act, the assessee submitted that the original return filed may be treated as return filed in pursuance to the notice. 7. Reasons for reopening of the assessment read as under: “Original return in this case was filed on 28/11/2014 which was processed u/s

BSES YAMUNA POWER LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 5(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal issues

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalbses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Dy. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Asst. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Yamuna Power Dy. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd. & Ors Vs. Acit Bses Yamuna Power Asst. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Sh. Deepesh Jain, Adv. & Sh. Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Mr. Javed Akhtar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16/04/2025 O R D E R

147 / 143(3) of the Act on 26.03.2015 wherein the income of the assessee is reassessed at Rs. 36,76,28,228/- which stood rectified in terms of the rectification order passed u/s 154

BSES YAMUNA POWER LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), NEW DEL;HI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal issues

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalbses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Dy. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Asst. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Yamuna Power Dy. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd. & Ors Vs. Acit Bses Yamuna Power Asst. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Sh. Deepesh Jain, Adv. & Sh. Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Mr. Javed Akhtar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16/04/2025 O R D E R

147 / 143(3) of the Act on 26.03.2015 wherein the income of the assessee is reassessed at Rs. 36,76,28,228/- which stood rectified in terms of the rectification order passed u/s 154

M/S. RICHA INDUSTRIES LTD.,FARIDABAD vs. ACIT, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sh. Kuldip Singh & Sh.Anadee Nath Misshra

rectification u/s 154 was on the basis of ITR, information provided, computation sheet, Form 10CCB and AO's attempt of reopening this case on the same facts and factual material is based upon change of opinion. 7. It is not at all a case of failure on the part of the assessee in disclosure of material facts

SARENA PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. PCIT CENTRAL, DELHI-3, DELHI

Accordingly decided in favour of the assessee.\n\n13.\nConsequently the appeals succeed and same are allowed

rectification is sought to be taken on the assumption of the\nvalidity of the reassessment order, then the assessee has to step in and protect its interests and\nthe liberty to quest ion even the validity of the reassessment proceedings ought to be given to\nit......." (emphasis, italicised in print, supplied).\n\n8. 8. Similar view was taken in another

SUSHIL KUMAR JAIN,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the above terms

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalassessment Year : 2006-07 Sushil Kumar Jain, Vs. Acit, C-67, Neeti Bagh, Circle-37(1), August Kranti Marg, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaipj6676M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate Department By : Shri Deepak Garg, Sr. Dr

reassessment proceedings. 4. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material available on record. Page 30 of the paper book is a copy of 2 letter dated 29.10.2013 issued by the AO to the assessee intimating the reasons for reopening of assessment, which are as under:- “The assessment u/s 143(3) of the Income

MAHARASHTRA FEEDS P. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

rectification application filed by the assessee u/s 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961on the quantum of interest charged u/s 234A & 234B is hereby rejected. The assessee application on the issue of quantum of interest under section 234C is acceptable as interest under section 234C is levied on return of income filed Maharashtra Feeds P Ltd. under section

MAHARASHTRA FEEDS P. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

rectification application filed by the assessee u/s 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961on the quantum of interest charged u/s 234A & 234B is hereby rejected. The assessee application on the issue of quantum of interest under section 234C is acceptable as interest under section 234C is levied on return of income filed Maharashtra Feeds P Ltd. under section

TCG DEVELOPMENT INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee are allowed and reassessment is quashed

Bench: Smt Beena A. Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishitcg Development India Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Ito, 100, Ground Floor, Ward-16(1), Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase- New Delhi Iii, New Delhi Pan: Aaact2836J (Appellant) (Respondent)

rectification under section 154 of the act were similar to the reasons recorded by the learned assessing officer for reopening of the assessment. According to us when the learned assessing officer found that the issue is not rectifiable under section 154 of the act and the correct proceedings are required to be initiated under section 147

M/S. LIBERTY GROUP MARKETING DN,KARNAL vs. ACIT, KARNAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

rectification proceedings had earlier been initiated but dropped and hence notice issued for reassessment was not valid, and placed reliance on the decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of M/s Berger Paints India Ltd, 322 ITR 369 (Cal.). The AO considered the submissions of the assessee but the same was not found tenable. The AO noted that

ITO, HISAR vs. SH. SANT SINGH PROP., HISAR

Bench: Sh. M. Balaganesh & Sh.Anubhav Sharma

reassessment. Assessee filed objection to reopening which were dismissed by order dated 09.12.2014. The assessee gave a detailed explanation of the transaction and the exemption however, Ld. AO being unsatisfied made the addition and passed order u/s 143C/ 147 of the Act on 24.02.2015 which was challenged by the assessee before ld. CIT(A) where apart from other grounds

LNG SECURITIES SERVICES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: : Shri C.M. Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

rectification application was rejected. Aggrieved by the rejection of application u/s. 154, the assessee appealed before the first appellate authority and the first 5 ITA No.3708/Del./2013 appellate authority upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the appellant filed appeal before the ITAT. 5. During the course of hearing, the appellant submitted

BAANI LANDBASE PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5944/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम Baani Landbase Pvt Ltd., Dcit, Corporate One, Ground Floor, Vs. Circle-4(2), Plot No.5, District Center, Jasola, Central Revenue Building, Delhi. I.P. Estate, Delhi. Pan No.Aadcb0237E अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

reassessment proceedings which were initiated u/s 147 of the Act, the Assessing Officer issued notice u/s 154 to rectify the assessment order for the very same reasons for which the assessment was sought to be reopened u/s 148 of the Act. The Ld. Counsel submitted that the 154 notice is placed at pages

MANOJ TANTIA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 25, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5944/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम Baani Landbase Pvt Ltd., Dcit, Corporate One, Ground Floor, Vs. Circle-4(2), Plot No.5, District Center, Jasola, Central Revenue Building, Delhi. I.P. Estate, Delhi. Pan No.Aadcb0237E अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

reassessment proceedings which were initiated u/s 147 of the Act, the Assessing Officer issued notice u/s 154 to rectify the assessment order for the very same reasons for which the assessment was sought to be reopened u/s 148 of the Act. The Ld. Counsel submitted that the 154 notice is placed at pages