MOHAN PAL,HALDWANI, NAINITAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI, ACIT-DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

52. The decisions which hold that an assessment is liable to be revised only if incriminating material be found, even if rendered in the context of Section 153A, would clearly govern the question that stands posited even in the context of Section 153C. It would be relevant to recall that the Division Bench in Kabul Chawla had observed that

MOHAN PAL,HALDWANI, NAINITAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI, ACIT - DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

52. The decisions which hold that an assessment is liable to be revised only if incriminating material be found, even if rendered in the context of Section 153A, would clearly govern the question that stands posited even in the context of Section 153C. It would be relevant to recall that the Division Bench in Kabul Chawla had observed that

MOHAN PAL,HALDWANI, NAINITAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI, ACIT - DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

52. The decisions which hold that an assessment is liable to be revised only if incriminating material be found, even if rendered in the context of Section 153A, would clearly govern the question that stands posited even in the context of Section 153C. It would be relevant to recall that the Division Bench in Kabul Chawla had observed that

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, no arguments were advanced before us, therefore this ground of appeal is dismissed. 37. Ground number 2 – 5 is with respect to the taxability of revenue from offshore supply of imported material. The parties submitted that facts are identical to ground number 2 of the appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2006 – 07 and their arguments

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

reassessment proceedings, no arguments were advanced before us, therefore this ground of appeal is dismissed. 37. Ground number 2 – 5 is with respect to the taxability of revenue from offshore supply of imported material. The parties submitted that facts are identical to ground number 2 of the appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2006 – 07 and their arguments

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

reassessment proceedings, no arguments were advanced before us, therefore this ground of appeal is dismissed. 37. Ground number 2 – 5 is with respect to the taxability of revenue from offshore supply of imported material. The parties submitted that facts are identical to ground number 2 of the appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2006 – 07 and their arguments

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, no arguments were advanced before us, therefore this ground of appeal is dismissed. 37. Ground number 2 – 5 is with respect to the taxability of revenue from offshore supply of imported material. The parties submitted that facts are identical to ground number 2 of the appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2006 – 07 and their arguments

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, no arguments were advanced before us, therefore this ground of appeal is dismissed. 37. Ground number 2 – 5 is with respect to the taxability of revenue from offshore supply of imported material. The parties submitted that facts are identical to ground number 2 of the appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2006 – 07 and their arguments

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, no arguments were advanced before us, therefore this ground of appeal is dismissed. 37. Ground number 2 – 5 is with respect to the taxability of revenue from offshore supply of imported material. The parties submitted that facts are identical to ground number 2 of the appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2006 – 07 and their arguments

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, no arguments were advanced before us, therefore this ground of appeal is dismissed. 37. Ground number 2 – 5 is with respect to the taxability of revenue from offshore supply of imported material. The parties submitted that facts are identical to ground number 2 of the appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2006 – 07 and their arguments

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.

reassessment order. The appellant craves leave to add, to amend or vary the above grounds of appeal on or before the date of hearing.” 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The assessee is an individual and proprietrix of M/s Hindustan Asbestos & Ferro Alloys , Haridwar, engaged in the business of supplying industrial ferro

M/S. UTTARAKHAND PURV SAINIK KALYAN NIGAM LTD.,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, DEHRADUN

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

52,829/- for the Assessment Year 2011-12 in terms of the said Section. 4. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the order U/s 143(3)/147 dated 25/02/2015 is merely change in opinion'. The action of the Ld. Assessing Officer u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was wholly unreasonable, uncalled

M/S. UTTARAKHAND PURV SAINIK KALYAN NIGAM LTD.,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, DEHRADUN

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

52,829/- for the Assessment Year 2011-12 in terms of the said Section. 4. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the order U/s 143(3)/147 dated 25/02/2015 is merely change in opinion'. The action of the Ld. Assessing Officer u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was wholly unreasonable, uncalled

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

52(1), reported in (2018) 97 taxmann.com 150. On the issue of decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Brahm Datt (supra), the ld. Counsel submitted that in the said case the account was not held in the personal capacity and it was held as settler of the trust and facts of present case being

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

52(1), reported in (2018) 97 taxmann.com 150. On the issue of decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Brahm Datt (supra), the ld. Counsel submitted that in the said case the account was not held in the personal capacity and it was held as settler of the trust and facts of present case being

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

52(1), reported in (2018) 97 taxmann.com 150. On the issue of decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Brahm Datt (supra), the ld. Counsel submitted that in the said case the account was not held in the personal capacity and it was held as settler of the trust and facts of present case being

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

52(1), reported in (2018) 97 taxmann.com 150. On the issue of decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Brahm Datt (supra), the ld. Counsel submitted that in the said case the account was not held in the personal capacity and it was held as settler of the trust and facts of present case being

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

52(1), reported in (2018) 97 taxmann.com 150. On the issue of decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Brahm Datt (supra), the ld. Counsel submitted that in the said case the account was not held in the personal capacity and it was held as settler of the trust and facts of present case being