Browse Tax Judgements
Showing 1–8 of 8 judgements · Browse by section & bench
Free to read — no signup required. Every judgement includes the facts, legal issues, outcome and related cases. Create a free account for AI chat, drafting and workspaces.
Shri Yasir Arafat vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2)(4)
The appeals filed by the assessee, Shri Yasir Arafat, were dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) either on account of non-prosecution or for non-condonation of the delay. The assessee submitted that due to continuous bereavement in the family, he was…
The Hisar Leading Bank Co-op Non-Agri Thrift & Credit Society vs ITO, Ward 1, Hisar
These four appeals by the Assessee are arising out of the respective orders of the Ld. Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi confirming the levy of penalty made by the AO u/s. 271(1)(c) amounting to Rs. 2,09,30,773/-; levy of penalty made u/s. 271F amount…
Sudhir Gandhi vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 61(1) Delhi
The assessee is engaged in consultancy services and execution of turnkey projects. Filed return of income on 30-10-2018 declaring loss, followed by a revised return declaring total income. Rectification request filed on 25-04-2019. During a…
Suresh Kumar Gupta Vs. ACIT
The Assessee filed a return of income at Rs. 2,97,100/- which was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The case was picked up for 'complete scrutiny' under the CASS system. An assessment order was passed under section…
Ms. Ruby Singh Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
The assessee, Ms. Ruby Singh, is a sole proprietor of M/s. Moonage Films. A survey under Section 133A of the Income-Tax Act was conducted on 11.09.2020 by the Investigation Wing in the case of M/s. SLG Commodities Pvt. Ltd., Kirti India Hos…
Income Tax Officer, Aaykar Bhawan, Sector-14, Hisar, Haryana-125001 vs Rajeev Kumar Mittal, H. No. 95, HBC, Ward no. 3, Sirsa Road, Hisar, Haryana-125001.
This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), New Delhi, dated 10.06.2025, arising out of the Penalty order dated 14.08.2023 passed under Section 271AAC(1) of the Income Tax Act, 196…
ANITA KUMARI SADH VS. ITO, WARD 58(4), NEW DELHI
The assessee, Anita Kumari Sadh, filed her return of income for the assessment year 2017-18 on 5th February 2018, declaring a total income of Rs. 3,36,270/-. The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 6,98,000/- to her income, citin…
Parveen vs. Income Tax Officer
The assessee, Parveen, a non-filer, had his case reopened based on information that he made cash deposits of Rs. 6,32,000/- during the relevant year, including the demonetization period. The consequential assessment treated these deposits a…