REENA VERMA,HARIDWAR vs. ITO, WARD-1(3)(5), ROORKEE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed as above

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

undisclosed sources. 2.4 That the learned Commissioner (Appeals) of Income has overlooked an explanation by assessee, which is prima facie Tax on reasonable, cannot be rejected on capricious or arbitrary ground or on mere suspicion or on irrelevant grounds. 3 That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred both in law and on facts in upholding the disallowance

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)

undisclosed Income by the appellant. This is an alleged violation of judicial discipline by the AO. Keeping in view that the amount of Rs 10,37,91,582 has been clearly stated as receipts from the shareholders (head office in this case as it is a project office of a foreign company registered in India) and under no provision

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

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

undisclosed expenditure u/s 69C by alleging purchases from Two parties as bogus amounting to INR 33,24,865/-; (b) Disallowance u/s 40a(ia) of INR 16,18,500/-; (c) Disallowance u/s 40A(3) of the Act INR 30,000/- 3. Besides this, AO treated the income

SAURAV MALIK,DEHRADUN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode] [Assessment Year : 2017-18] Saurav Malik Vs Ito 100/2, Bell Road Clement Town 15A, Subhash Road, Near Hilton School, Dehradun Uttarakhand Uttarakhand-248002 Pan-Bdypm6527J Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Rajiv Sahini, Ca Revenue By Shri A.S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.12.2025

undisclosed income under Section 69A. The appellant disputes this addition on the following grounds: The AO failed to bifurcate the deposited cash between old and new currency. A certificate from the bank indicates that the Specified Bank Notes (SBNs) deposited were much lower than what was added as unaccounted income. There is no evidence in the order suggesting that cash

RITU SINGHAL,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT/ACIT , CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Income Tax\nAppellate Tribunal, Dehradun Bench on 18.12.2024 in ITA No.224/DDN/2024 against\nthe order of Ld. CIT (Appeal) dated. 26.11.2024 the subject matter of the said appeal\nwas similar to the current case of the appellant, where the AO has made an addition u/s\n69A on account of amounts credited in the accounts of the employees whose\npassbooks

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

undisclosed income and no addition could be made once again in respect of the same. The Hon'ble High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Department". The case of CIT v. Vishal Exports Overseas Ltd., Tax Appeal No. 2471 of 2009 was decided by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court on 3-7-2012 wherein it was held that

ITO, WARD-1(1)(3), DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN vs. TRISHLA STEEL PVT LTD, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

income declared is less\nis not based on material or any enquiry and the appellant was not non-\nresponsive on this account and, hence the addition made in assessment\norder on this account is deleted. It is pertinent to mention that the\nappellant had also requested for an opportunity of being heard through\nvideo conference in its submissions. Therefore, opportunity

OM PRAKASH GUPTA,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Om Prakash Gupta Vs Deputy/Assistant C/O. Matta Garg & Co. Commissioner Of Income Tax, 15, Astley Hall, Dehraudn, Income Tax Office, Uttarakhand Investigation Wing, 13 A, Pan: Abipg9323M Subhash Road, Central Circle, Dehradun, Uttarakhand Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. S. K. Matta, Ca Revenue By Sh. S. K. Chatterjee, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing 12/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09/01/2026

Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) was carried out on 22/11/2023 in the group cases of Sh. Jitender Joshi and 2 Om Prakash Gupta Vs. DCIT its relative entities, the Assessee being one of the related and connected person of the group cases, the case of the Assessee was covered during the search and seizure action. Assessment proceedings came

MRS. DHOOMI DEVI,CHAMOLI vs. ITO, W-1(4)4, SRINAGAR, CHAMOLI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode] [Assessment Year : 2022-23] Mrs. Dhoomi Devi Vs Ito C/O-Hotel Udai Palace Near . Ward-1(4)4 Narsingh Temple Srignagar, Chamoli Joshimath Chamoli, Uttarakhand-246174 Uttarakhand-246443 Pan-Adkpd6984B Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Tarandeep Singh, Adv. Revenue By Shri A.S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 08.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 13.02.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 08.08.2024 By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“Nfac”), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Nfac/2021-22/10329482 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising From The Assessment Order Dated 05.03.2024 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144B Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2022-23. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Is An Individual & The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass For Reason I.E. “Large Investment In Immovable Property As Compared To The Total Income”. The Ao Than Passed The Assessment Order U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144B On 05.03.2024 At A Total Income Of Inr 2,70,31,224/- As Against The Total Income Declared At Inr 29,45,000/- In The Return Of Income Filed By The Assessee.

income received is duly declared by the assessee. The assessee had sold one property jointly owned by her son for a total sum of INR 6.00 crores out of which assessee’s share was of INR 3.00 crores. Out of the long terms capital gains from the sale of said property, assessee claimed deduction u/s 54EC for investment in NHAI