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)

35 and written submissions dated 28.10.2024 and case laws relied upon by the appellant. 3. That ADDL/JCIT has erred in law and facts in sustaining the addition for Rs. 1,82,59,837/- made by assessing officer (AO) at CPC u/s 143(1)(ii) through automated process u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act 1961 without appreciating the fact

LAKSAR CO OPERATIVE CANE DEV. UNION LTD.,LAKSAR vs. ITO, W- 1(3)(4), ROORKEE, ROORKEE

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

35 e-filed) and also the specific ground no. (ii) of an application dt. 04.04.2024 e-filed u/s 250(5) before him on 04.04.2024 as well as the written submission made in para no. 2 of the written submission dt. 05.04.2024 е-filed on 05.04.2024 r/w a supplementary written submission dt. 05.04.2024 (e-filed on 05.04.2024) r/w a second supplementary

DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), DEHRADUN vs. M/S. SAMSUNG HEAVY INDUSTRIES CO. LTD., GURGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

35,18,206/- on the ground of application of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. It was also noticed that the AO had disallowed the said amount and the AO has calculated the income of the assessee from Inside India activity at a loss of Rs. 23,33,939/- in the following manner. Thus, the contention is that

SAMSUNG HEAVY INDUSTRIES CO. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

35,18,206/- on the ground of application of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. It was also noticed that the AO had disallowed the said amount and the AO has calculated the income of the assessee from Inside India activity at a loss of Rs. 23,33,939/- in the following manner. Thus, the contention is that