DAVINDER KUMAR MAGO,PUNJABI BAGH vs. DCIT/ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, DDN, DEHRADUN

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2019-20] Davinder Kumar Mago Vs Dcit/Acit 12/1, Punjabi Bagh, Central Circle, External Punjabi Bagh, Dehradun New Delhi-110026 Uttarakhand Pan-Ajhpm9802A Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Adv. (Vc) Respondent By Ms. Poonam Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 10.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 12.03.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order By Pr.Cit (Central), Kanpur At Meerut Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1861 (“The Act”) Dated 08.01.2026 Arising Out Of The Order Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act.

section 263 which cannot be applied in the given facts of the case. He therefore, prayed for the cancellation of the revision order so passed u/s 263 of the Act. 6. Per contra, Ld. CIT DR vehemently supported the orders of the Ld. PCIT and submits that AO has passed the assessment order without even mentioning or utter a single

SUNIL SRIVASTAVA,HALDWANI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(3), HALDWANI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Him From Time To Time

49,438/- ; F&O Loss was Rs 3,86,42,089/- resulting in net loss of Rs 47,81,382/-. On sale of shares, the assessee had earned short term capital gain at Rs 1,59,183/- and long term capital gain of Rs 12,61,857/-, which has been claimed as exempt

NIRMAL SINGH,KASHIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS, NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwal

1) dated 13.09.2021, in proceedings u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte. 3. Learned departmental representative vehemently argues during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities herein have rightly treated the assessee’s cash 2 Nirmal Singh deposits

RITU SINGHAL,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT/ACIT , CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

gains of business or profession\".\nSince the appellant's claim relates to salary payments, which are for the purpose of\nrunning the business, the disallowance does not stand. There is no evidence to suggest\nthat the expenditure was personal or capital in nature, which are the only grounds for\nthat disallowance under this section. Thus, the addition made