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

reassessment proceedings were initiated under section 147 of the Act without having any fresh material on record and using section 147 as a substitute to section 143(2) of the Act and without having any valid „reason to believe‟ that income of the Appellant has escaped assessment. Taxability of revenues from offshore supply of imported material 2. The learned

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

reassessment proceedings were initiated under section 147 of the Act without having any fresh material on record and using section 147 as a substitute to section 143(2) of the Act and without having any valid „reason to believe‟ that income of the Appellant has escaped assessment. Taxability of revenues from offshore supply of imported material 2. The learned

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

reassessment proceedings were initiated under section 147 of the Act without having any fresh material on record and using section 147 as a substitute to section 143(2) of the Act and without having any valid „reason to believe‟ that income of the Appellant has escaped assessment. Taxability of revenues from offshore supply of imported material 2. The learned

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

reassessment proceedings were initiated under section 147 of the Act without having any fresh material on record and using section 147 as a substitute to section 143(2) of the Act and without having any valid „reason to believe‟ that income of the Appellant has escaped assessment. Taxability of revenues from offshore supply of imported material 2. The learned

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

reassessment proceedings were initiated under section 147 of the Act without having any fresh material on record and using section 147 as a substitute to section 143(2) of the Act and without having any valid „reason to believe‟ that income of the Appellant has escaped assessment. Taxability of revenues from offshore supply of imported material 2. The learned

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment proceedings were\ninitiated in the case of assessee and re-assessment order was passed\nu/s 147 on 25.01.2024, making an addition of INR 40,91,770/- to the\nassessee's total return income.\n3. Against the said order, assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A)\nwho vide order dated 30.01.2025, partly allowed the appeal of the\nassessee

SHRI RAMESH BATTA,DEHRADUN vs. ACIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the Assessee in both the cases are allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue in both the cases are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalacit, Shri Ramesh Batta Central Circle, 81/210, Kaulagarh Road, Vs. Dehradun. Rajendra Nagar, Dehradun-248001. Pan-Abgpb1527N (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Ramesh Batta Dy. Cit, 81/210, Kaulagarh Central Circle, Vs. Road, Dehradun. Rajendra Nagar, Dehradun-248001. Pan-Abgpb1527N (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Shri Ramesh Batta, Central Circle, As Agent Of Smt. Kavita Vs. Dehradun. Ahuja, 81/210, Kaulagarh Road, Rajendra Nagar, Dehradun-248001. Pan-Abgpb1527N (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the [Principal Commissioner or Commissioner] under sub-section (12) of Section 144-BA." 11. A plain reading of the aforesaid provision evinces an uncontrived position of law that the approval under Section 153D

DCIT, DEHRADUN vs. SHRI RAMESH BATTA, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the Assessee in both the cases are allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue in both the cases are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalacit, Shri Ramesh Batta Central Circle, 81/210, Kaulagarh Road, Vs. Dehradun. Rajendra Nagar, Dehradun-248001. Pan-Abgpb1527N (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Ramesh Batta Dy. Cit, 81/210, Kaulagarh Central Circle, Vs. Road, Dehradun. Rajendra Nagar, Dehradun-248001. Pan-Abgpb1527N (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Shri Ramesh Batta, Central Circle, As Agent Of Smt. Kavita Vs. Dehradun. Ahuja, 81/210, Kaulagarh Road, Rajendra Nagar, Dehradun-248001. Pan-Abgpb1527N (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the [Principal Commissioner or Commissioner] under sub-section (12) of Section 144-BA." 11. A plain reading of the aforesaid provision evinces an uncontrived position of law that the approval under Section 153D

DCIT, DEHRADUN vs. SH. RAMESH BATTA AS AGENT OF SMT. KAVITA AHUJA, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the Assessee in both the cases are allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue in both the cases are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalacit, Shri Ramesh Batta Central Circle, 81/210, Kaulagarh Road, Vs. Dehradun. Rajendra Nagar, Dehradun-248001. Pan-Abgpb1527N (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Ramesh Batta Dy. Cit, 81/210, Kaulagarh Central Circle, Vs. Road, Dehradun. Rajendra Nagar, Dehradun-248001. Pan-Abgpb1527N (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Shri Ramesh Batta, Central Circle, As Agent Of Smt. Kavita Vs. Dehradun. Ahuja, 81/210, Kaulagarh Road, Rajendra Nagar, Dehradun-248001. Pan-Abgpb1527N (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the [Principal Commissioner or Commissioner] under sub-section (12) of Section 144-BA." 11. A plain reading of the aforesaid provision evinces an uncontrived position of law that the approval under Section 153D

SHRI RAMESH BATTA,DEHRADUN vs. ACIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the Assessee in both the cases are allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue in both the cases are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalacit, Shri Ramesh Batta Central Circle, 81/210, Kaulagarh Road, Vs. Dehradun. Rajendra Nagar, Dehradun-248001. Pan-Abgpb1527N (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Ramesh Batta Dy. Cit, 81/210, Kaulagarh Central Circle, Vs. Road, Dehradun. Rajendra Nagar, Dehradun-248001. Pan-Abgpb1527N (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Shri Ramesh Batta, Central Circle, As Agent Of Smt. Kavita Vs. Dehradun. Ahuja, 81/210, Kaulagarh Road, Rajendra Nagar, Dehradun-248001. Pan-Abgpb1527N (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the [Principal Commissioner or Commissioner] under sub-section (12) of Section 144-BA." 11. A plain reading of the aforesaid provision evinces an uncontrived position of law that the approval under Section 153D

RAJU VERMA,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the [Principal Commissioner or Commissioner] under sub-section (12) of Section 144-BA." Raju Verma vs. DCIT 11. A plain reading of the aforesaid provision evinces an uncontrived position of law that the approval under Section 153D

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN, CROSS ROAD vs. RAJU VERMA, CURZON ROAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the [Principal Commissioner or Commissioner) under sub-section (12) of Section 144-BA." 11 A plain reading of the aforesaid provision evinces an uncontrived position of law that the approval under Section 153D

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN, CROSS ROAD vs. RAJU VERMA, CURZON ROAD, DALANWALA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the [Principal Commissioner or Commissioner) under sub-section (12) of Section 144-BA." 11 A plain reading of the aforesaid provision evinces an uncontrived position of law that the approval under Section 153D

RAJU VERMA,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 1798/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 1999-00 Ita No. 1799/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2000-01 Ita No. 1800/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2001-02 Ita No. 1801/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2002-03 Ita No. 1802/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Ita No. 1803/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 1804/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Raju Verma, Vs Dcit, 17/1, Curzon Road, Central Circle, Dehradun-248001 Dehradun (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abipv8176F Assessee By : Sh. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. N. C. Upadhyaya, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.07.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.10.2021

Reassessment for 1998-99 could not be reopened beyond 31.03.2005 in terms of provisions of Section 149 of the Act as applicable at the relevant time. The petitioner’s return for assessment year 1998-99 became barred by limitation on 31.03.2005. The question of revival of the period of limitation for reopening assessment for AY 1998-99 by taking recourse

RAJU VERMA,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 1798/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 1999-00 Ita No. 1799/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2000-01 Ita No. 1800/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2001-02 Ita No. 1801/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2002-03 Ita No. 1802/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Ita No. 1803/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 1804/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Raju Verma, Vs Dcit, 17/1, Curzon Road, Central Circle, Dehradun-248001 Dehradun (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abipv8176F Assessee By : Sh. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. N. C. Upadhyaya, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.07.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.10.2021

Reassessment for 1998-99 could not be reopened beyond 31.03.2005 in terms of provisions of Section 149 of the Act as applicable at the relevant time. The petitioner’s return for assessment year 1998-99 became barred by limitation on 31.03.2005. The question of revival of the period of limitation for reopening assessment for AY 1998-99 by taking recourse

RAJU VERMA,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 1798/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 1999-00 Ita No. 1799/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2000-01 Ita No. 1800/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2001-02 Ita No. 1801/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2002-03 Ita No. 1802/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Ita No. 1803/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 1804/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Raju Verma, Vs Dcit, 17/1, Curzon Road, Central Circle, Dehradun-248001 Dehradun (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abipv8176F Assessee By : Sh. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. N. C. Upadhyaya, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.07.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.10.2021

Reassessment for 1998-99 could not be reopened beyond 31.03.2005 in terms of provisions of Section 149 of the Act as applicable at the relevant time. The petitioner’s return for assessment year 1998-99 became barred by limitation on 31.03.2005. The question of revival of the period of limitation for reopening assessment for AY 1998-99 by taking recourse

RAJU VERMA,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 1798/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 1999-00 Ita No. 1799/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2000-01 Ita No. 1800/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2001-02 Ita No. 1801/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2002-03 Ita No. 1802/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Ita No. 1803/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 1804/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Raju Verma, Vs Dcit, 17/1, Curzon Road, Central Circle, Dehradun-248001 Dehradun (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abipv8176F Assessee By : Sh. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. N. C. Upadhyaya, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.07.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.10.2021

Reassessment for 1998-99 could not be reopened beyond 31.03.2005 in terms of provisions of Section 149 of the Act as applicable at the relevant time. The petitioner’s return for assessment year 1998-99 became barred by limitation on 31.03.2005. The question of revival of the period of limitation for reopening assessment for AY 1998-99 by taking recourse

RAJU VERMA,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 1798/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 1999-00 Ita No. 1799/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2000-01 Ita No. 1800/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2001-02 Ita No. 1801/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2002-03 Ita No. 1802/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Ita No. 1803/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 1804/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Raju Verma, Vs Dcit, 17/1, Curzon Road, Central Circle, Dehradun-248001 Dehradun (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abipv8176F Assessee By : Sh. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. N. C. Upadhyaya, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.07.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.10.2021

Reassessment for 1998-99 could not be reopened beyond 31.03.2005 in terms of provisions of Section 149 of the Act as applicable at the relevant time. The petitioner’s return for assessment year 1998-99 became barred by limitation on 31.03.2005. The question of revival of the period of limitation for reopening assessment for AY 1998-99 by taking recourse