PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, DELHI vs PRADEEP WIG

Judgment text excerpt

$~2 to 15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on: 24th April, 2026 + ITA 681/2025 + ITA 725/2025 + ITA 726/2025 + ITA 727/2025 + ITA 697/2025 + ITA 698/2025 + ITA 700/2025 + ITA 701/2025 + ITA 702/2025 + ITA 703/2025 + ITA 708/2025 + ITA 709/2025 + ITA 710/2025 + ITA 712/2025 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, DELHI .....Appellant Through: Mr. Puneet Rai, SSC with Mr. Ashvini Kr. & Mr. Rishabh Nangia, JSCs & Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. versus PRADEEP WIG NEERA WIG .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sachit Jolly, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Shreya Jain, Mr. Gaurav Tanwar & Mr. Abhyudaya Shankar Bajpai, Mr. Sohum Dua, Advs CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR JUDGMENT Per DINESH MEHTA, J. (ORAL) 1. The captioned appeals have been filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-1, against a common judgment and order dated Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed ITA 681/2025 & other connected matters Page 1 of 13 By:NAVEEN KUMAR Signing Date:28.04.2026 11:43:27 29.04.2025 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi, Bench-„E‟, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the „Tribunal‟) with respect to 14 appeals decided by the Tribunal, which were filed by the respondents- assessees for Assessment Year 2011-12 to 2017-18. 2. The basic question which is involved in these appeals is, as to whether the Assessing Officer (AO) was legally justified in taxing the rental income and capital gain arising out of properties owned by the company in which respondents were the shareholders. 3. Shorn of unwanted details, the facts relevant for the present purposes are that on 02.03.2017, a search was conducted at the residence of the respondents, who are husband and wife. During the course of search, the officers of the Department found cert