ITO, WARD-1(1), FARIDABAD, FARIDABAD vs. CHAMAN, FARIDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Chaman, Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), H. No. 437, Sector-9, Faridabad Faridabad Pan: Bfapd6698P (Appellant) (Respondent) With C.O. No.103/Del/2024 [Arising Out Of Ita No.2774/Del/2024] Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Chaman, H. No. 437, Sector-9, Ward-1(1), Faridabad, Haryana Faridabad Pan: Bfapd6698P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Gaurav, Adv. Department By Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25.06.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm This Revenue’S Appeal Ita No. 2774/Del/2024 & Assessee’S Cross Objection C.O. No. 103/Del/2024 For Assessment Year 2017- 18, Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [In Short, The

reassessment proceedings only when her bank account was frozen/ attached by the Income Tax Department. 2.2 As the appellant could not filed return of income as re-assessment proceedings took place ex-parte, a return of income was filed by the appellant on 15-01-2024 before Jurisdictional AO as well as before your goodself. In the said return

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S PUNJAB & SIND BANK, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 2 of the appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, Vs. Punjab & Sind Bank, Circle-20(1), Ho Accounts & Audit New Delhi Department, Bank House 21, Rajendra Place, New Delhi Pan:Aaacp1206G (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessment order u/s 147/143(3) by not appreciating explanation 1 to Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld CIT (A) has erred in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 10.43 crores made by the AO on account of change in accounting policy failing to appreciating

SH. DEV RAJ KATARIA,PANIPAT vs. DCIT, PANIPAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands disposed off accordingly

Bench: Shri R. S. Syal & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

reassessment on basis that conditions for allowance were not fulfilled- Valid-Within jurisdiction of Assessing Officer-Income-Tax Act, 1961; ss, 36(1)(vii), (2), 1.43(1 )(a), 147, 148." 4.07 In view of the factual and legal position discussed above, the plea of the appellant is not tenable and in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional

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

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

reassessment proceedings u/s 147 for AY 2004-05 were quashed by Hon‘ble ITAT vide its order dated 8th January 2016 on ground that there was no tangible/incriminating material and as such on parity of reasoning and principle laid down, there is no legal basis for assuming jurisdiction u/s 153 A of I.T. Act, 1961. (iii) That scope of proceedings