INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(3), DEHRADUN, AAYKAR BHAWAN, SUBHASH ROAD, DEHRADUN vs. UTTARAKHAND PURV SAINIK KALYAN NIGAM LIMITED, STATION SUB AREA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

delay of 75 days in filing the present appeal is hereby condoned. 2 Uttarakhand Purv Sainik Kalyan Nigam Ltd. 3. Brief facts of the case as mentioned in the order of the ld. CIT(A) are as under: “2. Brief facts of the case: The appellant is a company established under section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956, with

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. 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

Income Tax (Appeals)/ National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (‘NFAC ’ for short] dated 12/04/2023 for the Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. None appeared for the Assessee. Considering the issue involved in the present Appeal, we deem it fit to decide the Appeal on hearing the Ld. Department's Representative and perusing the material available on record. 2 Sh. Nitin Singhal

IRFAN AHMED,DEHRADUN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DEHRADUN

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing) Irfan Ahmed, Vs. Ito, 35/224, Mulsim Colony, Ward-1(1)(3), Dehradun Dehradun (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Bxgpa9671P Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shri A. S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09/04/2025

delay before him. The assessee had submitted that he is an old illiterate and senior citizen carrying on road side business of agricultural produces of vegetables and fruits. He used to file income tax return through a person who visits the road side business. The assessee neither has a shop to do his business and nor has any computer

NEERAJ SINGHAL,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT ACIT CEN CIR , DDN , DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing) Neeraj Singhal, Vs. Dcit/Acit, Haripur, Kalsi, Dehradun, Central Circle, Uttarakhand Dehradun (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Apzps7059D Assessee By : Shri Harshit Gupta, Ca Revenue By: Shri S. K. Chaterjee, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 19/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09/04/2025

condone the delay and admit the appeal of the assessee for adjudication. 3. The assessee is has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “1) The learned CIT (Appeals) has erred both in law and on facts by making an addition based on an image recovered from the mobile phone of a third party i.e. Sh. Anuj Kumar Singhal. This action

SH. NITIN SINGHAL,HALDWANI vs. PCIT, HALDWAMI

Appeal is dismissed for delay in latches

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 07/Ddn/2024 (A.Y 2015-16) Sh. Nitin Singhal Vs Pcit C/O Mattagarg& Co. 15, Astley Aayakr Bhawan, Chorgalia, Hall, Dehradun, Haldwani, Byepass Road, Golapur, Uttarakhand Kathgodam, Haldwani, Pan: Aqwps4877P Uttarakhand, 263126 Appellant Respondent Assessee By None Revenue By Sh. S. K. Chatterhee, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing 08/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/09/2025 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (‘Ld. Pcit’ For Short), Haldwani

Income Tax (‘Ld. PCIT’ for short), Haldwani, Uttarakhand, dated 26/02/2020 for the Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. None appeared for the Assessee. Right from filing of the appeal, neither the Assessee nor the Representative of the Assessee have appeared or made any submission. Therefore, we are compel to decide the Appeal on hearing the Ld. Department's Representative and perusing

SH. VINOD PANWAR,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, KOTDWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode] [Assessment Year : 2017-18] Shri Vinod Panwar, Vs Ito, 7, Mohanpur, Prem Nagar, Kotdwar, Dehradun, Uttarakhand-248001 Dehradun, Pan-Akppp5733Q Uttarakhand Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri S.K.Ahuja, Ar Revenue By Shri A.S.Rana, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 09.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09.07.2025 Order

condone the delay and admit the appeal of the assessee for adjudication. 5. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is an individual, having proprietorship firm namely M/s. Eureka Services and filed his return of income on 23.01.2018, declaring total income of INR 6,27,020/-. The case of assessee was selected for scrutiny and as proper details were

LOKESH KUMAR, PROP.,KOTDWAR vs. ITO, KOTDWAR

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2011-12 Lokesh Kumar, Prop. Versus Income-Tax Officer, Ramesh Kumar Verma, Adv. Kotdwar. Durgapuri, Kotdwar. Pan: Ajrpk2548R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. A.S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 22.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.06.2023 Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against Order Dated

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 3. When the matter was called out, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite notice of hearing, being issued through registered post. The basic grievance of the assessee as per the grounds raised is against ex parte disposal of his appeal by learned first appellate authority. 4. Briefly

KARAM SAFETY PRIVATE LIMITED,UDHAM SINGH NAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(5), UDHAM SINGH NAGAR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the Stay Applications are dismissed

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

Delay condoned. Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the parties. We do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned judgment(s) passed by the High Court. In view of this, we find no merit in the appeals and special leave petitions. Accordingly, the appeals and special leave petitions are dismissed.” 25. The doctrine of merger results

KARAM SAFETY PRIVATE LIMITED,SITARGANJ vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(5), UDHAM SINGH NAGAR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the Stay Applications are dismissed

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

Delay condoned. Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the parties. We do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned judgment(s) passed by the High Court. In view of this, we find no merit in the appeals and special leave petitions. Accordingly, the appeals and special leave petitions are dismissed.” 25. The doctrine of merger results

PURAN SINGH NEGI,HALDWANI vs. THE ASSIST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , NANITAL

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

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 33/Ddn/2020 (A.Y 2016-17)

business or profession". Further, section 56 of the Income-tax Act has also been amended to provide that any compensation received or receivable by any person, whether in the nature of revenue or capital, in connection with the 4 Puran Singh Negi termination or the modification of the terms and conditions of any contract relating to his employment shall

KUNWAR TOSEEN,KOTDWAR DISTT. PAURI GARHWAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , KOTDWAR

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

Bench: Shri Vimal Kumar & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

income. After recording reasons, the case was reopened by issue of notice under Section 148 of the Act on 25.03.2023 with prior approval of the DCIT, Dehradun. Despite intimation letter dated 17.08.2022, multiple notices under Sections 142(1) dated 26.09.2022, 01.11.2022, letter dated 22.12.2022 and show- cause-notices dated 29.12.2022, 15.02.2023, 27.02.2023 and 10.03.2023, no compliance was made by Assessee

KUNWAR TOSEEN,KOTDWAR DISTT. PAURI GARHWAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOTDWAR

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

Bench: Shri Vimal Kumar & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

income. After recording reasons, the case was reopened by issue of notice under Section 148 of the Act on 25.03.2023 with prior approval of the DCIT, Dehradun. Despite intimation letter dated 17.08.2022, multiple notices under Sections 142(1) dated 26.09.2022, 01.11.2022, letter dated 22.12.2022 and show- cause-notices dated 29.12.2022, 15.02.2023, 27.02.2023 and 10.03.2023, no compliance was made by Assessee

MASCOT FASTNERS PRIVATE LIMITED,UTTARAKHAND vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI, -

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara(Through Video Conferencing) M/S. Mascot Fastners Pvt. Vs. National Faceless Ltd, Assessment Centre, Plot No. B-155, Eldeco, Sidcul, Delhi Industrial Park, Sitarganj, Udham Singh Nagar, 262 403 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aabcm4504H Assessee By : Shri Atul Ninawat, Partner Revenue By: Shri A. S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 02/04/2025

Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟) dated 28.03.2022 by the Assessing Officer, NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as „ld. AO‟). 2. At the outset, there is a delay in filing of appeal by the assessee before us by 41 days. Considering the reason adduced in the condonation petition, we are inclined to condone the delay

SHRI ASHWANI GARG,HARIDWAR vs. ITO, W-1(3)(1), HARDWAR, HARDWAR

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara(Through Video Conferencing) Ashwani Garg, Vs. Ito, Plot No. 106-106A, Sector- Ward-1(3)(1), 6A, Sidcul, Haridwar, Haridwar Uttarakhand (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Alcpg7518A Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shri A. S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 02/04/2025

Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 26.12.2019 by the Assessing Officer, ITO, Ward-1(3)(1), Hardwar (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’). 2. At the outset, there is a delay in filing of appeal by the assessee before us by 227 days. Considering the reasons adduced in the condonation petition, we find that

NAINITAL DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK,HALDWANI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, HALDWANI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

condonation petition giving the reasons for the delay. This appeal has been listed for hearing on 27.07.2021, 28.09.2021, 01.12.2021, 08.02.2022, 27.04.2022, 29.06.2022, 23.08.2022, 12.10.2022, 20.02.2023, 20.06.2023, 25.07.2023, 20.09.2023 and on 19.10.2023. On none of these occasions, there was any representation from the side of the assessee nor any adjournment request has been filed. The Ld. DR also placed on record

NAINITAL DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK,HALDWANI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, HALDWANI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

condonation petition giving the reasons for the delay. This appeal has been listed for hearing on 27.07.2021, 28.09.2021, 01.12.2021, 08.02.2022, 27.04.2022, 29.06.2022, 23.08.2022, 12.10.2022, 20.02.2023, 20.06.2023, 25.07.2023, 20.09.2023 and on 19.10.2023. On none of these occasions, there was any representation from the side of the assessee nor any adjournment request has been filed. The Ld. DR also placed on record