SHREEVAAS INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CC, , DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2014-15

set off the current year’s business loss. Firstly, the Assessing Officer held that while crediting the additional income to the profit and loss account, the assessee has claimed expenses, which is not allowable. Accordingly, he again made addition of Rs.98,00,000/-. Having held so, he also disallowed

SAHKUMBARI ASSOCIATES,DEHRADUN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.261/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 बनाम Sahkumbari Associates, Acit Vs. C/O Matta Garg & Co., Circle-2, 15, Astley Hall, Dehradun. Dehradun, Uttarakhand. Pan No. Aagas1127F अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

disallowance of set off of capital loss of Rs.7,61,581/-.” 9. Similar view has been taken by the coordinate

ACIT, CIRCLE- 3, NAINITAL vs. KUMAON MANDAL VIKAS NIGAM LTD., NAINITAL

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed as above

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

set aside the impugned order and delete the disallowance of interest of Rs.1,12,80,692/- made in both years. 8.1 We are of the considered view that this issue is squarely covered by our decision in the assessee’s own case in the ITA No. 61 & 57/DDN/2023. We therefore, following the reasoning given therein (ITA No. 61 & 57/DDN/2023

ACIT, NAINITAL vs. M/S. KUMAON MANDAL VIKAS NIGAM LTD., NAINITAL

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed as above

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

set aside the impugned order and delete the disallowance of interest of Rs.1,12,80,692/- made in both years. 8.1 We are of the considered view that this issue is squarely covered by our decision in the assessee’s own case in the ITA No. 61 & 57/DDN/2023. We therefore, following the reasoning given therein (ITA No. 61 & 57/DDN/2023

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

loss of Rs.23,33,939/-. No other disallowance has been made in regard to inside India activities. Neither there is any rejection of books of account nor any discussion regarding 'percentage completion method' adopted by the assessee in the assessment order of A.Y 2007-2008. 5.8 In any case, the AO is bound to follow the direction

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

loss of Rs.23,33,939/-. No other disallowance has been made in regard to inside India activities. Neither there is any rejection of books of account nor any discussion regarding 'percentage completion method' adopted by the assessee in the assessment order of A.Y 2007-2008. 5.8 In any case, the AO is bound to follow the direction

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

set off of business loss as the return filed by the assessee under section153A has to be treated as a return filed under section 139(1). The same principle has been followed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai G-Bench in the case of DCIT vs. Ms. Eversmile Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd.in ITA No.4238/Mum/2010 dated

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

set aside the issues for further inquiries to be conducted by the AO. As regards the first issue is concerned, we note that out of total provision of Rs. 1114.68 lacs, a sum of Rs. 7,60,76,105/- was suo moto added back in the computation of income and a further sum of Rs. 73,46,160- was disallowed

DCIT, RISHIKESH vs. M/S UTTRANCHAL IRON & ISPAT LTD.,, KOTDWAR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee (ITA No

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

set aside and that of the AO be restored.” 3.1 The assessee has raised following grounds in the AY 2013-14: - “1. That, the assessment order passed U/s 143(3) and the addition made are illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction. The CIT(A) erred in upholding the same. Uttranchal Iron & Ispat Ltd. 2. That the impugned Assessment Order

UTTRANCHAL IRON & ISPAT LTD.,KOTDWAR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(4)(1), RISHIKESH

In the result, this appeal of the assessee (ITA No

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

set aside and that of the AO be restored.” 3.1 The assessee has raised following grounds in the AY 2013-14: - “1. That, the assessment order passed U/s 143(3) and the addition made are illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction. The CIT(A) erred in upholding the same. Uttranchal Iron & Ispat Ltd. 2. That the impugned Assessment Order

ASSITANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , DEHRADUN vs. POWER MACHINES, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal preferred by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

setting up of hydro-electric power generating facilities. During the year under consideration, the status of each project/ contract viz a viz their revenue/ status of operation is as under: Sr. No. Project Contract Number Site Revenue Name Status 1 Balimela OHPC- Completed No income during LMZ/01/2003 subject year 2 Sipat Bid Document Completed No income during

M/S KUMAON MANDAL VIKASH NIGAM LIMIED.,NAINITAL vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3, NAINITAL

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Loss Account of the assessee in both years were on accrual basis.It was contended that the appellant assessee hadpassed only accounting entries in its books of account in consonance with the accounting method followed consistently over the years.It was submitted that the U. P. Government had never changed the nature of loan and waived of the interest amount payable thereon

M/S KUMAON MANDAL VIKASH NIGAM LIMITED,NAINITAL vs. ACIT, NAINITAL

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Loss Account of the assessee in both years were on accrual basis.It was contended that the appellant assessee hadpassed only accounting entries in its books of account in consonance with the accounting method followed consistently over the years.It was submitted that the U. P. Government had never changed the nature of loan and waived of the interest amount payable thereon

SH.SUDESH VERMA,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, W-1(2)(4), DEHRADUN

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

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

loss, etc, since an appeal is nothing but the claim of the appellant that he has been unduly/unjustifiably taxed/penalized, it is for the appellant to prove its case. The appellant has not availed any opportunity to do so. 5.5 It is, thus, evident that the appellant has no evidence to substantiate the grounds taken and it has not even once

DCIT, CIRCLE- 2, DEHRADUN vs. V K AGARWAL & CO., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: The Ao During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.34,00,000/- Made On Account Of Unsecured Loan U/S 68 Of The I.T. Act, 1961 As The Assessee Could Not Furnish/Produce The Confirmation Of Unsecured Loan From M/S Tirupati Investment. 3. The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Be Set-A-Side & The Order Of The Ao Be Restored.

set-a-side and the order of the AO be restored. 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of civil contract. The return of income for the assessment year 2014-15 was filed on 30.11.2014 declaring total income of Rs.1

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

disallowed and added back to its total income.” 4. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 30.03.2017, Assessee preferred an Appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 27.01.2024,allowed the appeal of the assessee.As against the order of the ld. CIT(A), Assessee preferred the present appeal. 5. The ld. DR submitted that

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN vs. CHAKRATA FIRST AND ASSOCIATES, JAIPUR

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Acit, Vs. Chakrata First & Circle-1(1)(1), Associates, C/O- Amit Tak 41 Dehradun Sanjay Marg, Hathori Fort, Jaipur, Rajasthan Pan: Aalfc2896B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. S.K. Ahuja, Ar Department By Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Sr. Dr

set aside the order passed by Ld CIT(A) on this issue and direct the AO to delete the impugned disallowance." 7.8. In view of the facts of the case, it is evident that the appellant has duly substantiated its claim from the documentary evidences and also with the facts which the AO has not taken on record

SAHKUMBARI ASSOCIATES,DEHRADUN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for

Bench: Hearing Of Appeal.”

Loss Account of the business of the appellant. 2. The order passed is arbitrary, against the provisions of law and facts of the case. 3. Any other ground arising at the time or before hearing of appeal.” 3. The only issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in confirming