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

SANJAY KUMAR ANAND ,DEHRADUN vs. DDIT/ADIT (INTL) , DEHRADUN

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Delay of 33 days in filing the asseessee’s instant appeal is condoned in larger interest of justice and in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC). 3. We notice during the course of hearing that the assessee/appellant has raised his sole substantive grievance challenging correctness of both the learned lower authorities’ action

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

33,150/-. 13. Thus, the AO / National Faceless Assessment Centre (“NFAC”) while issuing the final assessment order, has completely erred in law by issuing the assessment order in the name of the non-existent partnership firm. 14. The other facts pertaining to intimation of the conversion of the assessee from partnership firm to private limited company to the revenue

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

33,150/-. 13. Thus, the AO / National Faceless Assessment Centre (“NFAC”) while issuing the final assessment order, has completely erred in law by issuing the assessment order in the name of the non-existent partnership firm. 14. The other facts pertaining to intimation of the conversion of the assessee from partnership firm to private limited company to the revenue