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

246A of the Act provides for an appeal against an assessment order passed under Section 153A of the Act and not under Section 153C of the Act. He further submitted when the AO proceeds under Section 153C r.w. Section 153A of the Act, there is no need for him to make an assessment under 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

246A of the Act provides for an appeal against an assessment order passed under Section 153A of the Act and not under Section 153C of the Act. He further submitted when the AO proceeds under Section 153C r.w. Section 153A of the Act, there is no need for him to make an assessment under 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

246A of the Act provides for an appeal against an assessment order passed under Section 153A of the Act and not under Section 153C of the Act. He further submitted when the AO proceeds under Section 153C r.w. Section 153A of the Act, there is no need for him to make an assessment under 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

246A of the Act provides for an appeal against an assessment order passed under Section 153A of the Act and not under Section 153C of the Act. He further submitted when the AO proceeds under Section 153C r.w. Section 153A of the Act, there is no need for him to make an assessment under Section

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

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M Balaganesh

246A of the Act provides for an appeal against an assessment order passed under Section 153A of the Act and not under Section 153C of the Act. He further submitted when the AO proceeds under Section 153C r.w. Section 153A of the Act, there is no need for him to make an assessment under 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

246A of the Act provides for an appeal against an assessment order passed under Section 153A of the Act and not under Section 153C of the Act. He further submitted when the AO proceeds under Section 153C r.w. Section 153A of the Act, there is no need for him to make an assessment under 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

246A of the Act provides for an appeal against an assessment order passed under Section 153A of the Act and not under Section 153C of the Act. He further submitted when the AO proceeds under Section 153C r.w. Section 153A of the Act, there is no need for him to make an assessment under Section

JET LITE (INDIA) LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6 (NOW CC-1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmajet Lite (India) Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 13, Community Central Circle-6, Centre, Yusuf Sarai, (Now Cc-1), New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aadcs4480L

68 of the Act by the ld AO got deleted by the ld CIT(A). The order of the ld CIT(A) was upheld by this Jet Lite (India) Ltd Tribunal. Further, on revenue appeal, the Hon‟ble High court reversed the order of ITAT and restored the assessment order. 5. We find that the ld CIT(A) had adjudicated

POONAM SABHARWAL,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-28(5), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

68, 1st Floor, Poorvi Marg, Ward -28 (5) Vasant Vihar-1, New Delhi New Delhi PAN No.AWLPS2760A Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Sunil Agarwal, CA Revenue by Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 13.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 28.11.2025 ORDER PER C.N. PRASAD, JM, These appeals are filed by the assessee against different orders of the learned Commissioner

POONAM SABHARWAL,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-28(5), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

68, 1st Floor, Poorvi Marg, Ward -28 (5) Vasant Vihar-1, New Delhi New Delhi PAN No.AWLPS2760A Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Sunil Agarwal, CA Revenue by Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 13.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 28.11.2025 ORDER PER C.N. PRASAD, JM, These appeals are filed by the assessee against different orders of the learned Commissioner

SURENDER KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-39(2), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuay: 2014-15 Surender Kumar, Vs. Ito, Ward 39(2), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Afxpm2941L (Appellant) (Respondent)

246A and section 254 of the Act which empowers complete review on facts and law by CIT(A) and ITAT unlike high court who can only admit appeals u/s 260A on substantial question of law. 5. On the contrary, Ld. DR has argued that no where assessee has been able to establish his/her case successfully and merely taking shield

OM PRAKASH JAKHOTIA,TELANGNA vs. ACIT, CC-26, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

246A of the Act, separate appeal is provided for the assessment made under section 144 of the Act. In the case of a best judgment assessment, as per the provision of section 142(3), there is no requirement of any opportunity of being heard to the assessee in respect of the material gathered by the Assessing Officer whereas

OM PRAKASH JAKHOTIA,TELANGNA vs. ACIT, CC-26, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

246A of the Act, separate appeal is provided for the assessment made under section 144 of the Act. In the case of a best judgment assessment, as per the provision of section 142(3), there is no requirement of any opportunity of being heard to the assessee in respect of the material gathered by the Assessing Officer whereas

OM PRAKASH JAKHOTIA,TELANGNA vs. ACIT, CC-26, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

246A of the Act, separate appeal is provided for the assessment made under section 144 of the Act. In the case of a best judgment assessment, as per the provision of section 142(3), there is no requirement of any opportunity of being heard to the assessee in respect of the material gathered by the Assessing Officer whereas

OM PRAKASH JAKHOTIA,TELANGNA vs. ACIT, CC-26, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

246A of the Act, separate appeal is provided for the assessment made under section 144 of the Act. In the case of a best judgment assessment, as per the provision of section 142(3), there is no requirement of any opportunity of being heard to the assessee in respect of the material gathered by the Assessing Officer whereas

CIT vs. ANIL KUMAR BHATIA

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

246A and 276CC to give reference to section 153A in these sections. 65.12 These amendments will take effect from June 1, 2003.” 18. A perusal of Section 153A shows that it starts with a non obstante clause relating to normal assessment procedure which is covered by Sections 139, 147, 148, 149, 151 and 153 in respect

CIT vs. ANIL KUMAR BHATIA

246A and 276CC to give reference to section 153A in these sections. 65.12 These amendments will take effect from June 1, 2003.” 18. A perusal of Section 153A shows that it starts with a non obstante clause relating to normal assessment procedure which is covered by Sections 139, 147, 148, 149, 151 and 153 in respect

PAWAN KUMAR SINGHAL,GHAZIABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 2, GHAZIABAD

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

68 read with section Rs. 2,91,49,846/- 115BE 2. Addition U/s 69C Rs. 8,47,496/- 3. Assessed total income Rs. 3,27,56,502/- Page 2 of 15 ITA No. 1005/Del/2019. Pawan Kumar Singhal. (3) The Assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). We find from the perusal of record, that the following grounds

DILEEP K GUPTA,DELHI vs. DCIT CC-31, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

246A where also he is heard. There is no need therefore for the Joint Commissioner, to give a hearing before giving previous approval under section 158BG. Firstly, the statute ITA Nos. 148 to 153/Del/2025 Dileep K. Gupta does not provide for such a hearing; secondly, principles of natural justice also do not require such a hearing having regard