NARENDER KUMAR JAIN,RISHIKESH vs. THE INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(4)(1), RISHIKESH

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Assessment Year: 2015-16

Income Tax (Appeals), Dehradun dated 19/09/2020 and 21/09/2020 for the Assessment Years 2015- 16 & 2016-17 respectively. Narendra Kumar Jain Vs. DY. CIT 2. In the instant appeal, the assessment order has been passed on 28/12/2017 by making an addition of Rs. 48,92,040/-. As against the assessment order, the assessee has instituted an appeal before

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN vs. SWARNGANGA CONSTRUCTION P.LTD, BHILWARA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri V.P. Rao

condonation of delay afresh by speaking order. 6. Ground No. 4 to 14 are relating to admission of additional evidence by the ld. CIT(A) and deletion of additions made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained investment in land, unexplained cash credits and unexplained investment on account of loans and advances. 7. There was a search and seizure

RAJESH AGGARWAL ,DEHRADUN vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OFFICER, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

condone the delay and admit the appeals of the assessee for adjudication. 2. As identical issues are involved in all these appeals, they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience. AY: 2011-12 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: That the Order passed

SH. SANJAY KUMAR,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, WARD-1(2)(3), DEHRADUN

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Sanjay Kumar Vs Income Tax Officer, 34 34Shankerpurhukumatpur Ward 1(2)(3), Dehradun, 248197, Uttarakhand, Uttarakhand Pan: Aaubpk4159P Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Rajiv Sahini, Ca Revenue By Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Jcit, Dr Date Of Hearing 11/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23/12/2025

delay of 167 days in filing the present appeal is hereby condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 15/12/2018 under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making an addition

MUKUL GARG,HARIDWAR vs. ITO, ROORKEE

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 32/Ddn/2025 (A.Y 2021-22) Mukul Garg, Vs. Income Tax Officer 383/1, Jadugar Road, Civil Roorkee Lines, Roorkee H. O., Uttarakhand Haridwar, Uttarakhand, India, 247667 Pan: Afdpg7612J Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Rajiv Sahni, Ca Revenue By Sh. A. S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 07/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 13/08/2025

condonation of delay filed before the Ld. CIT(A) assigned following reason:- ‘we had accepted addition for Rs. 36190/- and had deposited due tax on it along with disapproving the demand on balance addition for Rs. 1617447.00. We were waiting for a fresh order, which never came against 3 Mukul Garg Vs. ITO the demand on the income

KARAN VIR SINGH,DEHRADUN vs. VEENA RANI, INCOME TAX OFFICER, GURGAON

In the result, the Appeal of the Appellant is partly allowed for

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Sanjay Awasthikaran Vir Singh Vs Veena, Rani, Income Tax D-79, Secdtor-4, Defence Officer, Ward 2(3), Income Tax Colony, Dehradun, Department, Gurgaon, Uttarakhand Haryana Pan: Ahzps8477K (Respondent) (Applicant) Appellant By Sh. Vimal Kishore, Ca Respondent By Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06.04.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 15.04.2026 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.

condone the delay of 367 days in filing the present Appeal. 3 Karan Vir Singh Vs. ITO 6. An assessment order came to be passed on 19/12/2018 u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions

PRAVEEN SINGH RANA ,UTTARKASHI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), DELHI (NFAC)

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Sanjay Awasthipraveen Singh Rana Vs Commissioner Of Income Tax Nagar Palika Complex, (Appeals)/ National Faceless Neartiloth Pul, Barahat Appeal Centre, Range, Uttarakash Delhi Collectorate, Uttarakhand (Respondent) Pan: Aoopr7186N (Applicant) Appellant By Sh. Pankaj Tiwari, Adv Respondent By Sh. Akash Barnwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09.04.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 15.04.2026 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.

Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions. Aggrieved by the assessment order, Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 425 days in filing the First Appeal. The Ld. CIT(A) vide order impugned dated 26/12/2025, dismissed the First 2 Praveen Singh Rana vs. CIT(A) Appeal without condoning

JASPAL SINGH,DEHRADUN vs. ITO WARD1(1)(2) DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions. Jaspal Singh Vs. ITO Consequent to the assessment order an order of penalty also came to be passed on 26/08/2024 u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Aggrieved by the assessment order and order of penalty, Assessee preferred two Appeals before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay

JASPAL SINGH,DEHRADUN vs. ITO WARD 1(1)(2), DEHRADUN

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions. Jaspal Singh Vs. ITO Consequent to the assessment order an order of penalty also came to be passed on 26/08/2024 u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Aggrieved by the assessment order and order of penalty, Assessee preferred two Appeals before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay

ABHISHEK AGARWAL,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, W01(1)(1), DEHRADUN

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.104/Ddn/2025 (Assessment Year 2015-16) Abhishek Agarwal, Income Tax Officer, Near Town Area Office, Ward-1(1)(1), Doiwala, Distt Dehradun, Vs. Dehradun. Uttarakhand-248140. Pan-Alzpa7733L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rajiv Sahni, Ca Department By Shri A.S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 08/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12/09/2025

Income Tax Act, 1961.” 3. After considering the facts and the prayer of the assessee, we find that there was bonafide and sufficient reason regarding delay in filing the appeal. Under these circumstance and by respectfully following the judgement of hon’ble supreme court relied upon by the assessee, the delay is condoned and appeal of assessee is admitted

HASEEN,HARIDWAR vs. I T O ,WARD 1(3)(1),, HARIDWAR

In the result, the Appeal of the Appellant is partly allowed for

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Sanjay Awasthihaseen Vs Ito 38, Gadowali, Bahadarpur Jat, Ward 1(3)(1), Income Tax Haridwar-249404 Office, Yogi Bhawan, Industrial Pan: Aodph1131G Area, Haridwar, Uttarakhand (Applicant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Pankaj Goel, Adv Respondent By Sh. Akash Barnwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 07.04.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 15 .04.2026 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.

condone the delay of 201 days in filing the present Appeal. 3 Haseen vs. ITO 6. Brief facts of the case are on merit are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 22/03/2022 u/s 147 r.w. S 144 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making additions

SLO AUTOMOBILES PVT. LTD.,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Slo Automobiles Private Dy. Cit, Limited, Circle-2, Dehradun. 108-Haridwar Road, Vs. Dehradun-248001. Pan-Aancs8160M (Appellant) (Respondent)

condone the delay of 197 days in filing the present Appeal. SLO Automobiles Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT 5. Brief facts of the case are that, the Assessee filed return of income declaring income of Rs. 6,46,975/- after adjusting the loans of earlier years, NIL taxable income has been reported. During the course of survey conducted by the Commercial

SH. ARVIND SINGH ,RISHIKESH vs. ITO, RISHIKESH, RISHIKESH

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for

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

delay of 88 days in filing the present Appeal is hereby condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 24/03/2023under Section 147 r.w. Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by computing the income of the Assessee at Rs. 78,68,110/- as against the returned income

MOHD SHAZAD,HARIDWAR vs. ITO, ROORKEE

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for

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

delay of 340 days in filing the Appeal is hereby condoned. 3. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 20/12/2018 by computing the income of the Assessee at Rs. 1,32,97,981/-, as against the returned income of Rs. 8,30,910/- by making certain addition

RAJESH AGGARWAL,DEHRADUN vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing) Rajesh Aggarwal, Vs. Dcit, B-4, New Sabzi Mandi, Vikash Central Circle, Nagar, Distti. Dehradun Dehradun (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aanpa7592E Assessee By : Shri Rajiv Sahni, Ca Revenue By: Shri A. S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 24/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 15/09/2023

addition of surrendered income during the course of search operations in this Assessment Year whereas the Appellant has distributed the income surrendered in Ass. Years 2011-12 to 2017-18, thereby the same income has been taxed twice. Rajesh Aggarwal 4. The appellant, therefore, pray that the appeal may be admitted and orders may be passed rendering justice

SH. NITIN SINGHAL,U.S.NAGAR vs. ITO, U.S.NAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 08/Ddn/2024 (A.Y 2015-16) Sh. Nitin Singhal Vs. Ito Matta Garg & Co. Chartered U.S. Nagar Accountants, 15, Astley Hall, Ward-2(2)(4), Bajpur, Dehradun, Uttarakhand Udhamsingh Nagar, Pan: Aqwps4877P Uttarakhand, 262401

condone the delay of 777 days in filing the present Appeal. 7. Brief facts of the case are that, return of income was filed declaring total income of Rs. 5,37,830/-. An addition

SH. AJAY KUMAR ,ROORKEE vs. CIT(A), 2-, ROORKEE, ROORKEE

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for

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

Income Tax (Appeals)- Noida-3 (‘Ld. CIT(A)’ for short), Delhi dated 27/08/2024for the Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on29/03/2022 by making certain additions. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 29/03/2022, the Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay

MR. RAKESH SHARMA,DELHI vs. ACIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

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

condoned the delay in filing the appeals and taken them for adjudication. 5. Before us, the Ld. AR of the assessee requested that the Appeal No.39/DDN/2024 for Assessment Year 2013-14 be taken as a lead case as it contained entire argument put fourth by both the parties before the lower authorities, therefore, we first take up the appeal