UTTARAKHAND ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION & POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD,DEHRADUN vs. ITO (E), DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

section 4 of the Water (Prevention & Control of pollution) Act, 1974, with duties and functions of prevention and control of pollution in terms of various pollution controlling acts, viz. Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, Hazardous Waste (Management & Handling) Rules, 1998, etc. 4. The assessee has applied for exemption u/s 10

UTTARAKHAND ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION & POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD,DEHRADUN vs. ITO (E), DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

section 4 of the Water (Prevention & Control of pollution) Act, 1974, with duties and functions of prevention and control of pollution in terms of various pollution controlling acts, viz. Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, Hazardous Waste (Management & Handling) Rules, 1998, etc. 4. The assessee has applied for exemption u/s 10

UTTARAKHAND ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION & POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD,DEHRADUN vs. ITO (E), DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

section 4 of the Water (Prevention & Control of pollution) Act, 1974, with duties and functions of prevention and control of pollution in terms of various pollution controlling acts, viz. Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, Hazardous Waste (Management & Handling) Rules, 1998, etc. 4. The assessee has applied for exemption u/s 10

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

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

NANDAN SINGH,PITHORAGARH vs. CIT(A), NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Vimal Kumar & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2019-20 Nandan Singh, Vs. Cit(Appeals)/National Payya Pauri, Faceless Appeal Pithoragarh Cemtre(Nfac) Assessment Uttarakhand Centre, Pan No. Bfaps4805M Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

46,307/- from State Bank of India Branch, Dharchula IFSC:SBIN0001376 A/c. No.30447713114. During relevant assessment year 2019-20, assessee had not filed return of income. The case of assessee was reopened after recording reasons. Notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued. In pursuance to notice under Section 148, return of income was filed

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

10. Heard both the parties at length and perused the material available on record. In the instant case, the sole issue is whether the AO had made proper and sufficient enquiries of the accommodation entries from the parties referred in the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment and whether the satisfaction was recorded with respect to the bogus accommodation entries

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