SRI GURU SINGH SABHA,NAINITAL vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), DEHRADUN

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing)

154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). ITA Nos.208 & 209/DDN/2024 2. It transpires during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from both the parties that learned lower authorities have held the assessee as not entitled for claiming section 11 exemption for having not filed its prescribed tax audit report in Form

SRI GURU SINGH SABHA,NAINITAL vs. ITO(EXEM), DEHRADUN

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing)

154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). ITA Nos.208 & 209/DDN/2024 2. It transpires during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from both the parties that learned lower authorities have held the assessee as not entitled for claiming section 11 exemption for having not filed its prescribed tax audit report in Form

ANAND FOODS,DEHRADUN vs. ITO WARD 2(2)(1), KASHIPUR

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwalita No. 141/Ddn/2025 : Asstt. Year: 2021-22 Anand Foods, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/O Matta Garg & Co., Ward-2(2)(1), 15, Astley Hall, Dehradun, Kashipur, Uttarakhand-248001 Uttarakhand-244713 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ablfa3643B Assessee By : Sh. S. K. Matta, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.01.2026 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2021-22, Arises Against The Addl./Jcit(A), Mysore’S Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2025-26/1077083626(1) Dated 10.06.2025, In Proceedings U/S 154 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Heard Both The Parties At Length. Case File Perused.

154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused. 3. Coming to the assessee’s sole substantive grievance that both the learned lower authorities erred in law and on facts in disallowing it’s section

ADARSH BAL NIKETAN ,ROORKEE vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), DEHRADUN

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri V.P. Raoassessment Years: 2015-16

section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act. Aggrieved by the adjustment made by the CPC while processing the return of income u/s. 143(1), the assessee filed petition u/s. 154 of the Act with the Income-tax Officer (Exemption) whereby the Assessing Officer made an addition on account of short fall of application of income to the tune of Rs.12

BG INTERNATIONAL LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DDIT/ADIT(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-1, DEHRADUN

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and stay application filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleasstt. Year 2017-18

disallowed expenses on the reason that the 6 Stay No. 14/DDN/2020 assessee has not been able to produce the evidence regarding the incurrence of expenses and rendering of services to BGEPIL by relying on decision of 'the Dispute Resolution Panel/ Tribunal for earlier years The AO also rejected the contention of the assessee that all the services provided to BGEPIL

HIMANSHU SHUKLA,RUDRAPUR vs. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX , BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 08/06/2020 by the ld. Asst. Director of Income Tax, CPC (hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld. AO’). 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. Since the issue is already settled by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, we proceed to dispose of this appeal