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.

Income Tax (Inv.) Unit-I , Dehradun and examination of the said information, it was gathered that the assessee had made purchases of Rs 1,06,80,540/- from M/s Meet Enterprises and had made payments to the tune of Rs 73,45,040/- thereon. In the opinion of the ld. AO, this purchase from M/s Meet Enterprises was bogus

AMRIT VARSHA UDYOG LTD,KOTDWAR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, DEHRADUN

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

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

Addition on account of purchase from M/s Delhi Steel Trading Co. and M/s New India Traders: 7.3 In this case AO received information from DDIT(Inv)-1, New CGO Complex, NH-IV, Faridabad, Haryana – 121001 that Sri. lrfan Malik and Sri. lrshad Malik, who were the proprietors of around 22 bogus entities including Shri Ganpati Enterprises, M/s Delhi Steel Trading

M/S. KVN AUTO ENGINEERING (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO- 1(2), HALDWANI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआअसं.6446/िद"ी/2016(िन.व. 2012-13) Kvn Auto Engineering (P). Ltd., Plot No. 62, Ramji Vihar, Near Transport Nagar, Haldwani, Uttarakhand ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aadck-9080-A बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer-1(2), ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Haldwani, Uttarakhand अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate "ितवादी"ारा/Respondent By : Shri Amar Pal Singh, Sr. Dr (Through Vc) सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 11/02/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 21/02/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Haldwani (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Cit(A)') Dated 26.10.2016, For Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Assessee In Appeal Has Raised As Many As Eight Grounds. The Gist Of Grounds Raised In Appeal Is Ad Under:

Income Tax Act,1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) (ii) Ground no. 3 and 4 of appeal are in respect of addition of Rs.61,00,000/- u/s. 69A of the Act on account of cash deposits in cash credit loan account. (iii) Ground no. 5 of appeal, the assessee has assailed addition of Rs.40,000/- on account of alleged

SHRI VIBHU GROVER,KOTDWARA vs. PCIT, DEHRADUN

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalvibhu Grover, Pcit, M/S Grover Sales Corporation, Dehradun. Garage Road, Kotdwara, Vs. Pauri-246169 Pan:Agdpg5842R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Anil Jain, Adv. Department By Shri S.K. Chaterjee, Cit-Dr

bogus purchases was made with these persons. 12. Now ld. PCIT alleged that the AO has not made sufficient enquiries on the basis of so called information supplied by Investigation Wing which contained details of transactions with Sh. Ganpati Enterprises. It is seen that the same is not borne out from the reason recorded and therefore

M/S A-ONE ENTERPRISES,DEHRADUN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DEHRADUN

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

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalm/S A-One Enterprises, Income Tax Officer, 135/61 East Patel Nagar, Dehradun. Dehradun, Uttarakhand-248001. Vs. Pan-Aanfa5222D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Saurabh Gupta, Ca Department By Shri A. S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18.02.2026 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Cit(A)’ In Short], Dated 25.08.2025 In Appeal No. Cit(A)/Dehradun/10654/2019-20 Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act, 1961 (The Act’ In Short) Dated 16.12.2029 For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Had Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring Total Income At Rs.3,08,939/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & Assessment Was Completed Vide Order Dated 16.12.2019 At A Total Income Of Rs.51,79,869/- By Making Additions Of Rs.48,49,500/- U/S 68 Of The Act & Rs.21,430/- U/S 41(1) Of The Act. A-One Enterprises Vs. Ito 3. Aggrieved By The Said Order, The Assessee Preferred An Appeal Before The Ld. Cit(A) Who Partly Allowed The Appeal By Allowing The Additions Of Rs.4,49,500/- After Verification By The Ao & Confirmed The Remaining Additions Of Rs. 44.00 Lacs Made U/S 68 Of The Act & Rs. 21,430/- Towards Bogus Liability.

Income Tax (Appeals) erred in sustaining the addition without conducting any independent verification of the alleged sources from where capital was infused, and in complete disregard of the corroborative documentary evidences filed. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of ₹21,430/- on account of alleged bogus liability in the name of M/s Hindu Brothers

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN vs. CHAKRATA FIRST AND ASSOCIATES, JAIPUR

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Acit, Vs. Chakrata First & Circle-1(1)(1), Associates, C/O- Amit Tak 41 Dehradun Sanjay Marg, Hathori Fort, Jaipur, Rajasthan Pan: Aalfc2896B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. S.K. Ahuja, Ar Department By Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Sr. Dr

bogus. He denied benefit u/s 80HHC of the Act. Further, he made addition of Rs. 70 lacs in the income u/s 68 of the Act. It was held that once the assessee has already included the amount of sale of Rs. 70 lacs in Profit and Loss Account and determined the income on that basis no further addition could

DEPUTY COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN vs. KAMAL JEWELLERS, DEHRADUN

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Sh. Yogesh Kumar Us & Sh. Manish Agarwal

bogus shall not stand the test of law. Also, the AO has accepted the purchases, expenditure and trading results of the assessee as the books of accounts have not been rejected. As regards, the addition of Rs. 6,55,12,717/- u/s 68 and invoking the provision of Section 115BBE is concerned, the order of the AO and the detailed

MOHAN PAL,HALDWANI, NAINITAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI, ACIT - DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI

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

additions are liable to be made based upon the material recovered is an aspect which would merit consideration in the course of the assessment proceedings, under Section 153C, the AO would have to be prima facie satisfied that the documents, data or asset recovered is likely to "have a bearing on the determination of the total income". It is only

MOHAN PAL,HALDWANI, NAINITAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI, ACIT-DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI

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

additions are liable to be made based upon the material recovered is an aspect which would merit consideration in the course of the assessment proceedings, under Section 153C, the AO would have to be prima facie satisfied that the documents, data or asset recovered is likely to "have a bearing on the determination of the total income". It is only

MOHAN PAL,HALDWANI, NAINITAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI, ACIT - DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI

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

additions are liable to be made based upon the material recovered is an aspect which would merit consideration in the course of the assessment proceedings, under Section 153C, the AO would have to be prima facie satisfied that the documents, data or asset recovered is likely to "have a bearing on the determination of the total income". It is only

PAL MINERAL INDUSTRIES (P) LIMITED,HALDWANI vs. DC/ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI, HALDWANI

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

additions are liable to be made based upon the material recovered is an aspect which would merit consideration in the course of the assessment proceedings, under Section 153C, the AO would have to be prima facie satisfied that the documents, data or asset recovered is likely to "have a bearing on the determination of the total income". It is only

PAL MINERAL INDUSTRIES (P) LIMITED,HALDWANI vs. DC/ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI, HALDWANI

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

additions are liable to be made based upon the material recovered is an aspect which would merit consideration in the course of the assessment proceedings, under Section 153C, the AO would have to be prima facie satisfied that the documents, data or asset recovered is likely to "have a bearing on the determination of the total income". It is only

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN vs. OM PRAKASH GUPTA, DEHRADUN

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwalita No. 160/Ddn/2025 : Asstt. Year: 2023-24 Dcit, Vs Om Prakash Gupta, Central Circle, 19/A, Raj Vihar, Dehradun-2488001 Dehradun-248001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abipg9323M Assessee By : Sh. S. K. Matta, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Poonam Sharma, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 13.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.01.2026 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2023-24, Arises Against The Cit(A)-3, Noida’S Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/M/250/2025-26/1076723333(1) Dated 04.06.2025, In Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Heard Both The Parties At Length. Case File Perused.

Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused. 3. Coming to the Revenue’s former substantive ground seeking to revive the assessee’s alleged bogus purchase expenses of Rs.19,50,000/-; we note that the learned CIT(A)’s detailed discussion deleting the same against the department reads as under: 2 Om Prakash Gupta

AJAY GARG,DEHRADUN vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

bogus purchases. It is also seen that\nassessee in reply to the said notice had filed a detailed reply on 24th\nMarch, 2020 which was sent through email to the AO, however, such reply\nwas not considered and the order was passed u/s 148A(d) recording the\nsatisfaction that it is a fit case for issue of notice

RAJU VERMA,DEHRADUN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE, CENTRAL CIRCLE

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vimal Kumar & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2011-12 Raju Verma, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 17/1 Curzon Road, Kotdwar Dehradun (Uttrakhand) (Uttrakhand) Pin 248 001 Pan No. Abipv8176F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, the penalty proceedings based on the assessment order may please be treated as no-nest and liable to be cancelled. 5. Learned departmental representative relied on impugned order. 2 6. From examination of record in the light of aforesaid rival submissions, it is crystal clear that ITAT, Dehradun Bench in ITA No.94/DDN/2023 dated 09.04.2025 had quashed

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

additional grounds of appeal, we find that the core issue to be decided in this appeal is whether the income of the assessee could be subjected to tax in terms of section 44BB of the Act. 6. M/s. MB Petroleum Services LLC is a non-resident company incorporated under the laws of Oman, engaged in the business of providing services

DCIT, RISHIKESH vs. M/S UTTRANCHAL IRON & ISPAT LTD.,, KOTDWAR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee (ITA No

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Income Tax Act, 1961 as discrepancies found in the books and the book results shown by the assessee was not amenable to verification. 2. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting addition of Rs. 11,54,74,533/ out of Rs. 13,76,29,909/ made on account of bogus liabilities, holding that

UTTRANCHAL IRON & ISPAT LTD.,KOTDWAR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(4)(1), RISHIKESH

In the result, this appeal of the assessee (ITA No

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Income Tax Act, 1961 as discrepancies found in the books and the book results shown by the assessee was not amenable to verification. 2. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting addition of Rs. 11,54,74,533/ out of Rs. 13,76,29,909/ made on account of bogus liabilities, holding that

ADIT, DEHRADUN vs. M/S. DAELIM INDUSTRIAL CO. LTD., DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasada N D Shri M. Balaganesh

purchase of 4 I.T.A. No. 803/Del/2012 equipments and materials and their subsequent utilization. Merely on the basis of a blanket statement that the expenditure on material is almost equal to the receipts hence the same is dubious or bogus, is not enough to arrive at a conclusion that the entire expenditure is worthy of being disallowed. Furthermore, no enquiries were