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

reassessment, tax shall be calculated on the aggregate of the total income as assessed in the earlier proceeding for assessment under section 143 or section 144 or section 147 and the income disclosed in the application as if such aggregate were the total income. FORM NO. 34B [See rules 44C and 44CA] Form of application for settlement of case under

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

147, for the very same year is nothing but rowing and fishing enquiries, which is impermissible. 7. That on the facts & circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) did not appreciate that the information based on which order u/s. 153A/143(3) of the Act was concluded, was already available with the Income-tax Department. Inter-alia, Assessing

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

147, for the very same year is nothing but rowing and fishing enquiries, which is impermissible. 7. That on the facts & circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) did not appreciate that the information based on which order u/s. 153A/143(3) of the Act was concluded, was already available with the Income-tax Department. Inter-alia, Assessing

PROFORM INTERIORS PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT CC-20, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals for Assessment Years 2013-14 to 2022-23 in ITA

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalita Nos. 4153 & 4008/Del/2025 (Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2018-19) Dcit, Proform Interiors Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-20, Ground Floor, Jmd Regent Room No. 269A, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Plaza, Mg Road, Gurgaon, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Haryana-122001. Extn., Delhi-110055. Pan-Aahcs5999J

reassessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 148 which is special mechanism for bringing to tax the income discovered in consequence of a search. Although Sec.148 (inserted w.e.f. 01.04.2021) does not begin with a non- obstante clause similar to the erstwhile section 153A, its context and Explanation- 2 makes it clear that where a search is initiated, the jurisdiction thereafter must flow through

EBRO INDIA PVT.LTD. ,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-7(1), DELHI

In the result, the ground no 4 raised by the assessee is allowed

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

section 1448 of IT Act, the case was duly transferred to the jurisdiction AO, who has no previous idea about the assessment proceedings in the case. However it is pointed out, that, even during the DRP stage and even after providing opportunity by AO, the assessee could not submit any evidence with respect to bank statement of assessee and also

DHARAMVIR KHOSLA ,. vs. DCIT CC-5, NEW DELHI , .

The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes and ld

144 of the Act). Assessee, against the intimation under section 143(1) of\nthe Act, has filed a rectification application under section 154 of the Act (vide\napplication dated 16.06.2020) and the same is pending disposal. The CIT(A) in the\nimpugned order has directed the AO to dispose off the said rectification\napplication dated 16.06.2020. Moreover, if assessee

SEEMA GOEL,DELHI vs. CIT A, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

1) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the action of the AO despite the fact that the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act, notice under section 148 of the Act and the consequent reassessment order under section 147 r.w.s. 144

SEEMA GOEL,DELHI vs. CIT A, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

1) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the action of the AO despite the fact that the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act, notice under section 148 of the Act and the consequent reassessment order under section 147 r.w.s. 144

K K SPUN INDIA LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, JHANDEWALAN DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

1) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the action of the AO despite the fact that the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act, notice under section 148 of the Act and the consequent reassessment order under section 147 r.w.s. 144

K K SPUN INDIA LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 NEW DELHI, JHANDEWALAN DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

1) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the action of the AO despite the fact that the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act, notice under section 148 of the Act and the consequent reassessment order under section 147 r.w.s. 144

PROFORM INTERIORS PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT CC-20, DELHI

reassessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 148 which is\nspecial mechanism for bringing to tax the income discovered in consequence of a\nsearch. Although Sec.148 (inserted w.e.f. 01.04.2021) does not begin with a non-\nobstante clause similar to the erstwhile section 153A, its context and Explanation-\n2 makes it clear that where a search is initiated, the jurisdiction thereafter must\nflow through

KULDIP KUMAR GOEL,DELHI vs. ACIT(1)(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in above\nterms for statistical purposes

U/s 271(1)(c) of the\nIncome Tax Act,1961 for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income\nwithin the meaning of explanation1 to the sub-section (1) of the section\n271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are initiated.\nAddition: Rs. 44,05,518/-\nThe issue on merits at the heart of the matter is allowability of the cost

ACIT, CIRCLE-26(2), NEW DELHI vs. VIKRAM ELECTRIC EQUIPMENT P.LTD, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as\ninfructuous

147 of the Act and failure to serve\nnotice before completion of the assessment renders the order\ninvalid. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble\nJurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Chetan Gupta\n(supra), wherein the Hon'ble High Court held that reassessment\nproceedings finalized by the Assessing Officer without affecting\nproper service

PROFORM INTERIORS PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT CC-20, NEW DELHI

reassessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 148 which is\nspecial mechanism for bringing to tax the income discovered in consequence of a\nsearch. Although Sec.148 (inserted w.e.f. 01.04.2021) does not begin with a non-\nobstante clause similar to the erstwhile section 153A, its context and Explanation-\n2 makes it clear that where a search is initiated, the jurisdiction thereafter must\nflow through

AMOL AWASTHI,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M Balaganesh

144(3) of the Act. The ld. counsel submitted that as per the scheme of the Act, the AO can only assume jurisdiction to initiate assessment proceedings in consequence to a search and seizure operation in the cases of another person under Section 153C of the Act. However, the substantive provision to make an assessment is Section

AMOL AWASTHI,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, C.C.1, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M Balaganesh

144(3) of the Act. The ld. counsel submitted that as per the scheme of the Act, the AO can only assume jurisdiction to initiate assessment proceedings in consequence to a search and seizure operation in the cases of another person under Section 153C of the Act. However, the substantive provision to make an assessment is Section

AMOL AWASTHI,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, C.C.1, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M Balaganesh

144(3) of the Act. The ld. counsel submitted that as per the scheme of the Act, the AO can only assume jurisdiction to initiate assessment proceedings in consequence to a search and seizure operation in the cases of another person under Section 153C of the Act. However, the substantive provision to make an assessment is Section

AMOL AWASTHI,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, C.C.1, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M Balaganesh

144(3) of the Act. The ld. counsel submitted that as per the scheme of the Act, the AO can only assume jurisdiction to initiate assessment proceedings in consequence to a search and seizure operation in the cases of another person under Section 153C of the Act. However, the substantive provision to make an assessment is Section

AMOL AWASTHI,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M Balaganesh

144(3) of the Act. The ld. counsel submitted that as per the scheme of the Act, the AO can only assume jurisdiction to initiate assessment proceedings in consequence to a search and seizure operation in the cases of another person under Section 153C of the Act. However, the substantive provision to make an assessment is Section