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

15 SA Nos. 01 & 04/DDN/2022 Karam Safety Pvt. Ltd. to amalgamation. When two companies are merged and are so joined, as to form a third company or one is absorbed into one or blended with another, the amalgamating company loses its entity.” (iv) Fourthly, upon the amalgamating company ceasing to exist, it cannot be regarded as a person under Section

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

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

MADHUR SHARMA,DEHRADUN vs. ITO WARD 1(5), DEHRADUN

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

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi

2 8085083/-, he levied the penalty of Rs. 1 40425/–. The order under section 271B was passed on 28/9/2016. The assessee was aggrieved with the order of the learned assessing officer preferred an appeal before the learned CIT – A who dismissed the appeal of the assessee holding that that the penalty was levied by the learned assessing officer by order

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.

15 .04.2026 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 29/05/2025 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. There is a delay of 201 days in filing the present Appeal

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

2. That an Appeal Order was passed by the NFAC on 26.6.2024 dismissing my Appeal and upholding the Assessment Order passed by Assessing Officer. 3. That I did not receive the Appeal Order on my registered email ID " abhishekagg28@gmail.com" but it was sent to another email ID. 4. That I received a telephonic call from the Inspector

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 & 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

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

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

15, Astley Hall, Ward-2(2)(4), Bajpur, Dehradun, Uttarakhand UdhamSingh Nagar, PAN: AQWPS4877P Uttarakhand, 262401 Appellant Respondent Assessee by None Revenue by Sh. A. S. Rana, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 04/08/2025 Date of Pronouncement 08/08/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income

FAMILY WELFARE CENTRE,DEHRADUN vs. ACIT, CPC(TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

2 Family Welfare Centre 4. That on the facts and in circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) Rs. 35,256 erred in upholding the interest charged to the tune of Rs. 35,256/ under section 201(1A) of the Act.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed appeal before the first appellate authority 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

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 condoned. This special leave petition is misconceived and is completely contrary to the law pertaining to Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The notice under Section 148 of the 1961 Act referred to two reasons. The first reason was with regard to non-declaration of the account in ING Vysya Bank with a credit of Rs.70