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

addition to the returned income of Rs.10,93,796/- on account of sale of spares adjustment to the returned income. 7. Aggrieved, the Appellant filed an appeal before ITAT raising the above said grounds dated 02.01.2017. 8. Heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the material available on record. Reasons recorded by the AO 9. During the year

BHOPAL SINGH CHAUDHARY,DEHRADUN vs. ITO SRINAGAR, SRINAGAR GARHWAL

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] arising out of assessment order, both dated 02.09.2021 passed u/s 147 of the Act pertaining to Assessment Year 2017-18 and penalty u/s 270A of the Act respectively. 2. Since both the appeals are related to one assessee and against the additions made in reassessment

BHOPAL SINGH CHAUDHARY,SRINAGAR GARHWAL vs. ITO SRINAGAR, SRINAGAR GARHWAL

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] arising out of assessment order, both dated 02.09.2021 passed u/s 147 of the Act pertaining to Assessment Year 2017-18 and penalty u/s 270A of the Act respectively. 2. Since both the appeals are related to one assessee and against the additions made in reassessment

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

Additional Commissioner of Income Tax which is dated 30.03.2015 and placed at Page 55 of the paper book. From the aforesaid approval, he submitted that Addl. CIT had granted the approval for passing assessment order u/s 153A(1)(b) r.w.s 143(3) of the Act in various cases listed in the table therein which included the draft assessment order

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

Additional Commissioner of Income Tax which is dated 30.03.2015 and placed at Page 55 of the paper book. From the aforesaid approval, he submitted that Addl. CIT had granted the approval for passing assessment order u/s 153A(1)(b) r.w.s 143(3) of the Act in various cases listed in the table therein which included the draft assessment order

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

Additional Commissioner of Income Tax which is dated 30.03.2015 and placed at Page 55 of the paper book. From the aforesaid approval, he submitted that Addl. CIT had granted the approval for passing assessment order u/s 153A(1)(b) r.w.s 143(3) of the Act in various cases listed in the table therein which included the draft assessment order

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

Additional Commissioner of Income Tax which is dated 30.03.2015 and placed at Page 55 of the paper book. From the aforesaid approval, he submitted that Addl. CIT had granted the approval for passing assessment order u/s 153A(1)(b) r.w.s 143(3) of the Act in various cases listed in the table therein which included the draft assessment order

ABHISHEK AGARWAL,U S NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11

addition made by the AO is beyond the scope of assessment under section 153A. However, the Ld. CIT (A) rejected the assessee’s contention holding that Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Raj Kumar Arora (2014) 52 taxmann.com 172 (Allahabad) had held that AO has power to assess and reassess the return of income

RUKMAN AGARWAL,U S NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11

addition made by the AO is beyond the scope of assessment under section 153A. However, the Ld. CIT (A) rejected the assessee’s contention holding that Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Raj Kumar Arora (2014) 52 taxmann.com 172 (Allahabad) had held that AO has power to assess and reassess the return of income

SAURABH AGARWAL,U S NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11

addition made by the AO is beyond the scope of assessment under section 153A. However, the Ld. CIT (A) rejected the assessee’s contention holding that Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Raj Kumar Arora (2014) 52 taxmann.com 172 (Allahabad) had held that AO has power to assess and reassess the return of income

SHIV KUMAR AGARWAL,U S NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11

addition made by the AO is beyond the scope of assessment under section 153A. However, the Ld. CIT (A) rejected the assessee’s contention holding that Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Raj Kumar Arora (2014) 52 taxmann.com 172 (Allahabad) had held that AO has power to assess and reassess the return of income

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

Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 2. Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused. 3. This Revenue’s appeal raises the following substantive grounds: 1. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, whether the CIT (A) was justified in holding that, the cash deposits made by the assessee in demonetised Specified

SHRI PRITPAL SINGH,DEHRADUN vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing) Shri Pritpal Singh, Vs. Acit, 71, Guru Road, Circle-2, Dehradun Dehradun (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Ahkps3632F Assessee By : Shri Savyasachi Kumar Sahai, Adv Revenue By: Shri Amar Singh Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 22/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 15/09/2023

additional income u/s 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act and paid due taxes thereon with applicable interest. Thereafter, a notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued only to regularise the said revised return filed on 29.11.2016. Ultimately in the reassessment

SHRI GANGA RAM ADWANI,RISHIKESH vs. DCIT, RISHIKESH

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaasstt. Year 2008-09

income of the assessee. 6. Before the Ld. CIT(A) apart from challenging the addition on merit, the assessee also challenged the validity of reassessment

METRO FROZEN FRUIT & VEGETABLES PVT. LTD.,ROORKEE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, HARIDWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is party allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri N. K. Choudhry[Assessment Year: 2009-10] Metro Frozen Fruits & Dcit, Vegetables Pvt. Ltd. Circle Haridwar, Plot No.22, Rajpur, Vs Uttarakhan Bhagwanpur, Roorkee, Uttrakhand Pan-Aaecm4521F Assessee Revenue Assessee By Sh. Piyush Kuchhal, Fca Revenue By Ms. Poonam Sharma Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 23.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 08.03.2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am, This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 24.01.2019 Of The Learned Cit(A), Dehradun, Relating To Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under:-

income. Subsequently, the AO initiated reassessment proceedings on the ground that the assessee had not carried forward correct WDV of some assets from AYs 2008-09 to AY 2009-10. He noted that the assessee made additions

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

addition made by learned AO on merits. In this regard, it is pertinent to note that against the order of learned CIT(A) for assessment year 2009-10, the assessee preferred an appeal before this Tribunal and this Tribunal vide its order passed in ITA No. 3070/Del/2016 dated 31.05.2021 had quashed the reassessment proceedings. Since, for assessment year

MI OVERSEAS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, DEHRADUN

In the result ITA number 5584/Del/2013 filed by the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi

additives are kept in adequate stock to meet 4 well programs. The contractor was also required to maintain sufficient inventory of mud material and chemicals at its warehouse in Bhavnagar at its cost to smoothly run the drilling work over operations at all times. It is further mentioned that contractor shall deliver the material and chemicals

MI OVERSEAS LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ADIT, DEHRADUN

In the result ITA number 5584/Del/2013 filed by the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi

additives are kept in adequate stock to meet 4 well programs. The contractor was also required to maintain sufficient inventory of mud material and chemicals at its warehouse in Bhavnagar at its cost to smoothly run the drilling work over operations at all times. It is further mentioned that contractor shall deliver the material and chemicals

ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), DEHRADUN vs. M/S. M.I, OVERSEAS LTD., MUMBAI

In the result ITA number 5584/Del/2013 filed by the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi

additives are kept in adequate stock to meet 4 well programs. The contractor was also required to maintain sufficient inventory of mud material and chemicals at its warehouse in Bhavnagar at its cost to smoothly run the drilling work over operations at all times. It is further mentioned that contractor shall deliver the material and chemicals