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

12. Once it is found that assessment is framed in the name of non-existing entity, it does not remain a procedural irregularity of the nature which could be cured by invoking the provisions of Section 292B of the Act.” Following the decision in Spice Entertainment, the Delhi High Court quashed assessment orders which were framed in the name

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

12. Once it is found that assessment is framed in the name of non-existing entity, it does not remain a procedural irregularity of the nature which could be cured by invoking the provisions of Section 292B of the Act.” Following the decision in Spice Entertainment, the Delhi High Court quashed assessment orders which were framed in the name

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

section 144 and penalty order u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act respectively for the assessment year 2012-13. 2. In the quantum appeal, the assessee raised following grounds : “1. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in condoning the delay of more than 2 years merely on ground that the erstwhile

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

MEENAKSHI KUMAR,DEHRADUN vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DEHRADUN

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat[Through Video Conferencing] [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Meenakshi Kumar, Vs Pr.Cit, C/O-Matta Garg & Co., Dehradun. 15, Astley Hall, Dehradun, Uttarakhand-248001. Pan-Agipk3345G Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Shri N.S.Jangpangi, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 27.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 27.07.2023 Order Per Kul Bharat, Jm : The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2015-16 Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Pr. Cit-1, Dehradun Dated 09.03.2020. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

delay in filing the appeal is hereby, condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing. 7. Facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the assessee e-filed his return of income on 03.02.2016 declaring total income of INR 2,44,310/-. The case was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) accepting

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

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

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

SSGR HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE PRIVATE LIMITED,HALDWANI vs. DCIT/ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI, HALDWANI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos

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

delay of 18 days in filing the Appeals are hereby condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case are that, a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) was carried out at M/s SSGR Hospital and Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. "Group of cases", Haldwani and other premises

SSGR HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE PRIVATE LIMITED,HALDWANI vs. DCIT/ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI, HALDWANI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos

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

delay of 18 days in filing the Appeals are hereby condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case are that, a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) was carried out at M/s SSGR Hospital and Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. "Group of cases", Haldwani and other premises

SSGR HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CENTRE PRIVATE LIMITED,HALDWANI vs. DC/ACIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE, HALDWANI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos

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

delay of 18 days in filing the Appeals are hereby condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case are that, a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) was carried out at M/s SSGR Hospital and Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. "Group of cases", Haldwani and other premises

SSGR HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE PRIVATE LIMITED,HALDWANI vs. DCIT/ACIT, CENTAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI, HALDWANI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos

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

delay of 18 days in filing the Appeals are hereby condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case are that, a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) was carried out at M/s SSGR Hospital and Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. "Group of cases", Haldwani and other premises

SSGR HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE PRIVATE LIMITED ,HALDWANI vs. DCIT/ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,HALDWANI, HALDWANI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos

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

delay of 18 days in filing the Appeals are hereby condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case are that, a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) was carried out at M/s SSGR Hospital and Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. "Group of cases", Haldwani and other premises

GYANENDRA PANWAR,DEHRADUN vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC BENGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar Us & Shr Sanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.238/Ddn/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2017-18 बनाम Gyanendra Panwar, Assistant Director Of Income Nanda Devi Enclave, Badripur, Vs. Tax, Cpc,Ito,Ward 1(3)(4), Dehradun-248005, Uttarakhand. Aaykar Bhawan, 16, Civil Lines, Pan No.Adipp2853R Near Iit Roorkee, Uttarakhand. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

12. That in the interest of justice and to allow me an opportunity to beheard on merits, it is respectfully prayed that the Hon’ble Tribunal maykindly condone the delay in filing the appeal and accept the same. 13. That an application for condonation of delay, along with the memorandum of appeal in Form 36, is being filed herewith

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

K L D A V COLLEGE,ROORKEE, HARIDWAR vs. ITO WARD 1(3)(4), ROORKEE, HARIDWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

condoning the delay caused in filing of Form 10B. Accordingly, ld. AR requested to allow the exemption u/s 12A to the assessee. 5. On the other hand, Ld. DR vehemently supported the orders of the lower authorities and requested to confirm the same as the assessee has failed to file the audit report as prescribed under the Act within

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

delay in filing the appeal, therefore, the same is hereby condoned and appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits. 4. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is an individual and case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 in terms of the reason recorded which are available at PB page 21 & 22. According to the same, assessee took

CHIEF EDUCATION OFFICER,DEHRADUN vs. CIT(A), DEHRADUN

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra(Through Video Conferencing)

2. The learned counsel appearing on either side would submit that the Judgment of this Court reported in 2023 (10) TMI 1141 [ M/s. True Blue Voice India Private Ltd., and another Vs. the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax - TDS, Chennai and others] would squarely apply to the facts of the present case. 3. The relevant portion of the said Judgment