SANJAY BANSAL,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Challa Nagendra Prasad

D.R. Date of hearing: 23.05.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 27.05.2022 ORDER PER BENCH : All the appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the order dated 31.07.2019 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IV, Kanpur relating to Assessment Years 2008-09 to 2013-14. 2. At the outset, Learned AR submitted that the issues involved in all the appeals

SANJAY BANSAL,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Challa Nagendra Prasad

D.R. Date of hearing: 23.05.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 27.05.2022 ORDER PER BENCH : All the appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the order dated 31.07.2019 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IV, Kanpur relating to Assessment Years 2008-09 to 2013-14. 2. At the outset, Learned AR submitted that the issues involved in all the appeals

SANJAY BANSAL,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Challa Nagendra Prasad

D.R. Date of hearing: 23.05.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 27.05.2022 ORDER PER BENCH : All the appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the order dated 31.07.2019 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IV, Kanpur relating to Assessment Years 2008-09 to 2013-14. 2. At the outset, Learned AR submitted that the issues involved in all the appeals

SANJAY BANSAL,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Challa Nagendra Prasad

D.R. Date of hearing: 23.05.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 27.05.2022 ORDER PER BENCH : All the appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the order dated 31.07.2019 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IV, Kanpur relating to Assessment Years 2008-09 to 2013-14. 2. At the outset, Learned AR submitted that the issues involved in all the appeals

G & T RESOURCES (EUROPE) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 5553/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year: 2004-05 G&T Resources (Europe) Ltd., Vs Adit, C/O F-04 & 05, Triveni Commercial International Taxation, Complex, Sheikh Sarai, Phase-I, Dehradun New Delhi-110017 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcg9877F Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. T. S. Mapwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2022 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ao U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 23.11.2006. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Revised Grounds Of Appeal: “1. That, On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Ao Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Initiating Proceedings Under Section 148 Read Together With Section 147 Of The Income 1Ax Act, 1961. 2. That In The Absence Of Any New Facts, Other Than The Ones Already On Record Based On Which The Assessment Order Was Passed, Initiating Proceedings Under Section 148 After Expiry Of Four Years Are Bad In Law & Void Abinitio. 3. That, The Learned Ao Having Considered The Facts, Applied The Spirit Of The Boards Instructions As Contained In Notification 1767 In A Speaking Assessment Order Erred In Initiating Proceedings Under Section 148 After The Expiry Of Four Years Merely Because In A Subsequent

11. With reference to the reopening, the provisions Section 147 are as under: “Income escaping assessment. 147. If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, he may, subject to the provisions of sections 148 to 153, assess or reassess such income and also any other income chargeable

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)

D E R PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM: This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Chennai (‘the Ld. CIT(A)’ for short) in Appeal No. Addl./JCIT(A)-2/Chennai/10004/2020-21 dated 30.10.2024 for Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The order

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE), DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN vs. STONEFIELD CONSTRUCTION, DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

11. Heard the contentions of both the parties at length and perused the material available on record. The AO alleged that assessee made purchases of INR 53,94,983/- from one party namely, M/s. Tripura Enterprises and not deducted tax at source @ 0.1% as per section 194Q of the Act. It was the claim of the assessee that

ITO, HARIDWAR vs. M/S. PRITY JAIN PROP., HARIDWAR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasada N D Shrim. Balaganesh

D E R PER C. N. PRASAD, J.M. 1. This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II [hereinafter referred 1 I.T.A. No. 5745/Del/2016 to CIT (Appeals)] Dehradun, dated 24.08.2016 for assessment year 2013-14. 2. The Revenue has raised the following substantive grounds of appeal:- “1