M.B. PETROLEUM SERVICES LLC,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

143(3)/144C of the Income Tax Act (''the Act''). 2. In law and on facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. AO erred in not affording a proper opportunity to the Assessee of being heard. The Assessment order passed is against the principle of natural justice. 3. Without prejudice to above and in law and in facts and circumstances

MB PETROLEUM SERVICES LLC,MUMBAI vs. DDIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshmb Petroleum Services Llc, Vs. Ddit, Kirtane & Pandit, H-16, Circle-1, Saraswati Colony, Sitaldevi International Taxation, Temple Road, Mahim, Dehradun Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaecm2604H

143 and determine the sum payable by, or refundable to, the assessee.” 22. In view of non obstante clause of section 44BB(1) of the Act, all other disallowances made by the ld AO either u/s 37(1) of the Act MB Petroleum Services LLC or section 40(a)(i) of the Act would not survive. Similarly, the adjudication

SAMSUNG HEAVY INDUSTRIES CO. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

TDS on pre- engineering and survey was belatedly made, therefore, he excluded the expenses of Rs. 35,18,206/- on the ground of application of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. It was also noticed that the AO had disallowed the said amount and the AO has calculated the income of the assessee from Inside India activity

DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), DEHRADUN vs. M/S. SAMSUNG HEAVY INDUSTRIES CO. LTD., GURGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

TDS on pre- engineering and survey was belatedly made, therefore, he excluded the expenses of Rs. 35,18,206/- on the ground of application of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. It was also noticed that the AO had disallowed the said amount and the AO has calculated the income of the assessee from Inside India activity

SMT. SAPNA GUPTA,HARIDWAR vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOEM TAX, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2009-10 Smt. Sapna Gupta, Vs The Pr. Cit, 299, Awas Vikas Colony, Dehradun. Vivek Vihar, Haridwar – 249 407, Uttarakhand. Pan: Acspg4083D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate & Ms Deepashri Rao, Ca Revenue By : Shri N.S. Jangpangi, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.06.2023 Order Per M. Balaganesh, Am: This Appeal In Ita No.16/Ddn/2021 For Ay 2009-10 Arises Out Of The Order Of The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Dehradun, [Hereinafter Referred To As „Ld. Pcit‟, In Short] In Din & Order No. Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2020- 21/1031815348(1) Dated 27.03.2021 Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S 148/147 R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As „The Act‟) Dated 26Th/28Th December, 2018 By The Ld. Assessing Officer, Ward 1(3)(3), Haridwar (Hereinafter Referred To As „Ld. Ao‟). 2. The Only Issue To Be Decided In This Appeal Is As To Whether The Ld. Pcit Was Justified In Invoking Revisionary Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Act In Respect Of Disallowance Of Purchases Of Rs 33,35,500/- In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Instant Case.

143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued to the assessee calling for details in respect of purchases made from M/s Meet Enterprises. The reasons recorded specifically stated that the entire purchases made from M/s Meet Enterprises were bogus in the sum of Rs 1,06,80,540/- by the assessee and out of this

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SUBHASH ROAD DEHADUN vs. M/S TIMES SQUARE, SAHASTRADHARA ROAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

143(3)/144B dated 21.09.2021 at a total income of INR\n1,93,42,890/ against the declared loss of INR 61,45,041/- by\nmaking various additions/disallowances.\n\n3. Against the said order, assessee filed an appeal before Ld.\nCIT(A) who vide order dated 16.01.2025, partly allowed the appeal\nof the assessee.\n\n4. Aggrieved by the order

SOLAR TURBINES INTERNATIONAL COMPANY,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 2, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, DEHRADUN

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Solar Turbines Vs. Dcit, International Company International Taxation, (Singapore Branch Of Solar Cirrcle-2, Turbines International Dehradun Company, Usa), M/S. Deloitte Haskins & Sells Deloitte Centre, Anchorage Ii, #100/2, Richmond Road, Bangalore -560025 Pan: Aajcs3585J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Sh. A.S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 30.03.2026 Order

143(3)/144C(3)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte. 2. This assessee’s appeal raises the following substantive grounds: 1. Non-rectification of mistake apparent on record a) The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals

SERCEL SA ,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2, DDN, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

143(3) r.w.s.144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereina"er called ‘the Act’) subsequent to the direc"ons of the Ld. 1 Dispute Resolu"on Panel (DRP)/TPO vide order dated 25.05.2023 for Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The brief facts of the case are, during the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (‘AO’) noticed that the assessee

ACIT, CIRCLE- 3, NAINITAL vs. KUMAON MANDAL VIKAS NIGAM LTD., NAINITAL

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed as above

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter, the ‘Act’), wherein various additions/disallowances were made. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (hereinafter, the ‘AO’) noted that the assessee had declared losses based on its tentative Profit & Loss accounts annexed with ITRs. As per the assessee, the C & AG had not appointed any auditor; therefore

ACIT, NAINITAL vs. M/S. KUMAON MANDAL VIKAS NIGAM LTD., NAINITAL

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed as above

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter, the ‘Act’), wherein various additions/disallowances were made. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (hereinafter, the ‘AO’) noted that the assessee had declared losses based on its tentative Profit & Loss accounts annexed with ITRs. As per the assessee, the C & AG had not appointed any auditor; therefore

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1)(1), DEHRADUN, RAJPUR ROAD, DEHRADUN vs. HOTEL SURBHI PALACE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, RAJPUR ROAD, DEHRADUN

In the result, the Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

143(3) r.w. Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) on 21/04/2021 by assessing the income of the Assessee at Rs. 11,17,16,165/- by disallowing a sum of Rs. 41,77,095/- u/s 35D of the Act, Rs. 34,070/- on account of interest on delayed payment of service tax and TDS

KSHIPRA DHAWAN,SAHARANPUR vs. DCIT CEN CIR DDN, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vimal Kumar & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

143(1) of the Act dated 26.08.2019 as no order u/s 201(1) of the Act was passed by the AO in her case by treating her as an assessee in default for the non-deduction of TDS in regard to interest paid to NBFC. The ld. AR submitted referring to the second proviso to section

KSHIPRA DHAWAN,SAHARANPUR vs. DCIT CEN CIR DDN, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vimal Kumar & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

143(1) of the Act dated 26.08.2019 as no order u/s 201(1) of the Act was passed by the AO in her case by treating her as an assessee in default for the non-deduction of TDS in regard to interest paid to NBFC. The ld. AR submitted referring to the second proviso to section

RAJIV KUMAR TIWARI,SAHARANPUR vs. DCIT-ACIT- CEN CIR DDN, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vimal Kumar & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2018-19 Rajiv Kumar Tiwari, Acit, Central Circle, A-7, Awas Vikas, Dehradun, Income Tax Office, 52/1, Delhi Road, Vs Rajpur Road, Dehradun Saharanpur, Uttarakhand-248001 Uttar Pradesh-247001 Pan-Adfpt9463L Appellant Respondent

143(1) of the Act dated 17.06.2019 as no order u/s 201(1) of the Act was passed by the AO in his case by treating his as an assessee in default for the non-deduction of TDS in regard to interest paid to NBFCs. The ld. AR submitted referring to the second proviso to section

SHERWATER GEOSERVICES LTD. INDIA PROJECT OFFICE,DEHRADUN vs. AICT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-2, DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The only issue involved in this case is that whether GST is includable in the gross revenue for computing profits under presumptive provisions of section 44BB of the I.T. Act, 1961 or not? 3. We have heard the rival submissions on the issue under consideration and have gone

SAEXPLORATION INC INDIA PROJECTS OFFICE,DEHRADUN vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-2, DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The only issue involved in this case is that whether GST is includable in the gross revenue for computing profits under presumptive provisions of section 44BB of the I.T. Act, 1961 or not? 3. We have heard the rival submissions on the issue under consideration and have gone

VETERINARY HOSPITAL, HAWALBAGH,ALMORA vs. ITO(TDS), HALDWANI

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for

143 & 144/DDN/2019 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19) Veterinary Hospital, vs. ITO, TDS, Dhauladevi, Haldwani. Almora – 263 601 (Uttarakhand). (PAN : MRTVO1830D) ITA Nos.145, 146 & 147/DDN/2019 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2018-19) Veterinary Hospital, vs. ITO, TDS, Hawalbagh, Haldwani. Almora – 263 601 (Uttarakhand). (PAN : MRTVO1829C) ITA Nos.148, 149, 150 & 151/DDN/2019 (ASSESSMENT YEARS

CHIEF VERERINARY HOSPITAL, ALMORA,ALMORA vs. ITO(TDS), HALDWANI

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for

143 & 144/DDN/2019 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19) Veterinary Hospital, vs. ITO, TDS, Dhauladevi, Haldwani. Almora – 263 601 (Uttarakhand). (PAN : MRTVO1830D) ITA Nos.145, 146 & 147/DDN/2019 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2018-19) Veterinary Hospital, vs. ITO, TDS, Hawalbagh, Haldwani. Almora – 263 601 (Uttarakhand). (PAN : MRTVO1829C) ITA Nos.148, 149, 150 & 151/DDN/2019 (ASSESSMENT YEARS

VETERINARY HOSPITAL, DHAULADEVI,ALMORA vs. ITO(TDS), HALDWANI

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for

143 & 144/DDN/2019 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19) Veterinary Hospital, vs. ITO, TDS, Dhauladevi, Haldwani. Almora – 263 601 (Uttarakhand). (PAN : MRTVO1830D) ITA Nos.145, 146 & 147/DDN/2019 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2018-19) Veterinary Hospital, vs. ITO, TDS, Hawalbagh, Haldwani. Almora – 263 601 (Uttarakhand). (PAN : MRTVO1829C) ITA Nos.148, 149, 150 & 151/DDN/2019 (ASSESSMENT YEARS