OMWATI,DEHRADUN vs. PR.CIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshsmt. Omwati Pr. Cit W/O Sh. Dariyav Singh Dehradun 171/1, Vasant Vihar, Vs. Dehradun Pan-Aanpw 6438K (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessment order was passed without complying with the mandatory conditions of section 147 to 151 of Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. That in any case and in any view of the matter, Ld. Pr. CIT has erred in law in assuming jurisdiction and passing the impugned order u/s 263

SMT. SAPNA GUPTA,HARIDWAR vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOEM TAX, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2009-10 Smt. Sapna Gupta, Vs The Pr. Cit, 299, Awas Vikas Colony, Dehradun. Vivek Vihar, Haridwar – 249 407, Uttarakhand. Pan: Acspg4083D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate & Ms Deepashri Rao, Ca Revenue By : Shri N.S. Jangpangi, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.06.2023 Order Per M. Balaganesh, Am: This Appeal In Ita No.16/Ddn/2021 For Ay 2009-10 Arises Out Of The Order Of The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Dehradun, [Hereinafter Referred To As „Ld. Pcit‟, In Short] In Din & Order No. Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2020- 21/1031815348(1) Dated 27.03.2021 Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S 148/147 R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As „The Act‟) Dated 26Th/28Th December, 2018 By The Ld. Assessing Officer, Ward 1(3)(3), Haridwar (Hereinafter Referred To As „Ld. Ao‟). 2. The Only Issue To Be Decided In This Appeal Is As To Whether The Ld. Pcit Was Justified In Invoking Revisionary Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Act In Respect Of Disallowance Of Purchases Of Rs 33,35,500/- In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Instant Case.

section 263(2) of the Act; (b) initiated to cancel/set-aside reassessment order which had attained finality under the Direct Tax Vivad

DARIYAV SINGH,DEHRADUN vs. PR. CIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshsh. Sanjay Kumar Pr. Cit 170, Vasant Vihar-1 Dehradun Dehradun Vs. Pan-Akkpk 1007F (Appellant) (Respondent) Sh. Dariyav Singh Pr. Cit 28-Chakrata Road, Dehradun Dehradun Vs. Pan-Awkps 6026L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Dr. Rakesh Gupta & Mr. Sherey Jain, Advocates Respondent By Mr. N.S.Jangpangi, Cit-Dr

2. The identical issues are involved in both these appeals and hence, they are taken up together and disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience. 3. The only effective issue to be decided in these appeals is as to whether the Ld. PCIT was justified in assuming revision jurisdiction u/s 263

SANJAY KUMAR,DEHRADUN vs. PRCIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshsh. Sanjay Kumar Pr. Cit 170, Vasant Vihar-1 Dehradun Dehradun Vs. Pan-Akkpk 1007F (Appellant) (Respondent) Sh. Dariyav Singh Pr. Cit 28-Chakrata Road, Dehradun Dehradun Vs. Pan-Awkps 6026L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Dr. Rakesh Gupta & Mr. Sherey Jain, Advocates Respondent By Mr. N.S.Jangpangi, Cit-Dr

2. The identical issues are involved in both these appeals and hence, they are taken up together and disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience. 3. The only effective issue to be decided in these appeals is as to whether the Ld. PCIT was justified in assuming revision jurisdiction u/s 263

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

263 of the income tax act dated 28th of March 2011 for the same assessment year before the coordinate bench which is reported in 22 taxmann.com 227 (Delhi) and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed. He submitted that though the appeal was dismissed holding that there is an order which is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest

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

263 of the income tax act dated 28th of March 2011 for the same assessment year before the coordinate bench which is reported in 22 taxmann.com 227 (Delhi) and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed. He submitted that though the appeal was dismissed holding that there is an order which is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest

ADIT, DEHRADUN vs. M/S. M.I. OVERSEAS LTD., NOIDA

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

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi

263 of the income tax act dated 28th of March 2011 for the same assessment year before the coordinate bench which is reported in 22 taxmann.com 227 (Delhi) and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed. He submitted that though the appeal was dismissed holding that there is an order which is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest

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

263 of the income tax act dated 28th of March 2011 for the same assessment year before the coordinate bench which is reported in 22 taxmann.com 227 (Delhi) and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed. He submitted that though the appeal was dismissed holding that there is an order which is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest

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

263 of the income tax act dated 28th of March 2011 for the same assessment year before the coordinate bench which is reported in 22 taxmann.com 227 (Delhi) and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed. He submitted that though the appeal was dismissed holding that there is an order which is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest

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

263 of the income tax act dated 28th of March 2011 for the same assessment year before the coordinate bench which is reported in 22 taxmann.com 227 (Delhi) and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed. He submitted that though the appeal was dismissed holding that there is an order which is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest

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

263 of the income tax act dated 28th of March 2011 for the same assessment year before the coordinate bench which is reported in 22 taxmann.com 227 (Delhi) and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed. He submitted that though the appeal was dismissed holding that there is an order which is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest

SHRI ABHISHEK JOSHI,DEHRADUN vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshshri Abhishek Joshi, Vs. The Pr. Cit, C/O. Parimal Patet, Gk Patet & Dehradun Co, 14 Abhishek Tower, Subhash Road, Dehradun (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Ajopj4300M Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv Shri Somil Aggarwal, Adv Revenue By: Shri N. S. Jangpangi, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 26/07/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 15/09/2023

section [u/s] 263 for A.Y. 2015-16 dated 26.03.2021 against the order of reassessment passed u/s 143(3) rws 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟) dated 30.10.2018 by the Assessing Officer, ITO, Ward-1(1), Dehradun (hereinafter referred to as „ld. AO‟). 2

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

263 153 PAN ABXPA3880C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Rakesh Sehgal, CA Department by : Shri Naveen Chand Upadhyay, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 29/01/2021 Date of 18/03/2021 pronouncement O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, J.M.: The aforesaid appeals have been filed by the above mentioned assessees against separate impugned orders dated, 20.3.2019 in the case of Ms. Rukman Aggarwal

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

263 153 PAN ABXPA3880C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Rakesh Sehgal, CA Department by : Shri Naveen Chand Upadhyay, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 29/01/2021 Date of 18/03/2021 pronouncement O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, J.M.: The aforesaid appeals have been filed by the above mentioned assessees against separate impugned orders dated, 20.3.2019 in the case of Ms. Rukman Aggarwal

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

263 153 PAN ABXPA3880C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Rakesh Sehgal, CA Department by : Shri Naveen Chand Upadhyay, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 29/01/2021 Date of 18/03/2021 pronouncement O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, J.M.: The aforesaid appeals have been filed by the above mentioned assessees against separate impugned orders dated, 20.3.2019 in the case of Ms. Rukman Aggarwal

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

263 153 PAN ABXPA3880C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Rakesh Sehgal, CA Department by : Shri Naveen Chand Upadhyay, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 29/01/2021 Date of 18/03/2021 pronouncement O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, J.M.: The aforesaid appeals have been filed by the above mentioned assessees against separate impugned orders dated, 20.3.2019 in the case of Ms. Rukman Aggarwal

KAMAL BATRA,ROORKEE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE HARIDWAR, HARIDWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

2 AY: 2010-11 the business of trading of bidis. Accordingly, a notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 31.03.2017. In the reassessment proceedings, based on the survey statement, the learned Assessing Officer proceeded to club the business profit disclosed by Sh. Sonia Batra in her individual Income Tax Return filed