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

147. If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, he may, subject to the provisions of sections 148 to 153, assess or reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course

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

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

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:-

u/s 147 of the Act are illegal and liable to be quashed. 3 7. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law, in ignoring the fact that the initiation of reassessment proceedings are bad in law as the same amounts to change of opinion of AO only

SANJAY RAWAT,DEHRADUN vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode] Ita Nos.90, 95 & 104/Ddn/2024 [Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2013-14 & 2013-14] Sanjay Rawat Vs Acit 18S Ats Colony, Central Circle Sahastradhara Road, Dehradun, Dehradun, Uttarakhand-248001 Uttarakhand Pan-Ahopr5244E Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Adv. Shri Shivam Garg, Adv. & Shri Raghav Sharma, Ca Revenue By Ms. Poonam Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 08.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 11.02.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am :

Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessment order as affirmed by the CIT(A) is illegal and void-ab-initio as the approval granted u/s 151 is illegal and mechanical in nature. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred both in law as well

SH.SANJAY RAWAT,,DEHRADUN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode] Ita Nos.90, 95 & 104/Ddn/2024 [Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2013-14 & 2013-14] Sanjay Rawat Vs Acit 18S Ats Colony, Central Circle Sahastradhara Road, Dehradun, Dehradun, Uttarakhand-248001 Uttarakhand Pan-Ahopr5244E Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Adv. Shri Shivam Garg, Adv. & Shri Raghav Sharma, Ca Revenue By Ms. Poonam Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 08.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 11.02.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am :

Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessment order as affirmed by the CIT(A) is illegal and void-ab-initio as the approval granted u/s 151 is illegal and mechanical in nature. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred both in law as well

SANJAY RAWAT,DEHRADUN vs. ACIT CENTRAL CRICLE, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode] Ita Nos.90, 95 & 104/Ddn/2024 [Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2013-14 & 2013-14] Sanjay Rawat Vs Acit 18S Ats Colony, Central Circle Sahastradhara Road, Dehradun, Dehradun, Uttarakhand-248001 Uttarakhand Pan-Ahopr5244E Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Adv. Shri Shivam Garg, Adv. & Shri Raghav Sharma, Ca Revenue By Ms. Poonam Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 08.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 11.02.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am :

Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessment order as affirmed by the CIT(A) is illegal and void-ab-initio as the approval granted u/s 151 is illegal and mechanical in nature. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred both in law as well

M/S PARASNATH FUELS (P) LTD.,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalparasnath Fuels Pvt. Ltd., The Dcit, Circle 1(1), 28 Feet Road, Dehradun Vikas Nagar, Vs Dehradun - 248198 Pan-Aaicp2190D Assessee Revenue Assessee By Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv., Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Jcit Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28.11.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am, This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appellate Centre [Cit(A), In Short], Dated 08.10.2024 In Appeal No. Nfac/2016-17/10104734 Arising Out Of The Order Passed U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) Dt. 08.10.2024 For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. That Having Regard To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Assumption Of Jurisdiction In Initiating The Proceedings U/S 147 & Passing The Impugned Order U/S 147/144B & That Too Without Complying With Mandatory Conditions U/S 147 To 151A Parasnath Fuels Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Dcit

Income Tax Act, 1961, is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. That in any case and in any view of the matter, assumption of jurisdiction u/s 147 and passing the impugned order u/s 147/144B, is illegal, bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case and the same

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)

additional grounds :- “1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. Pr. CIT. has erred in law and on facts in assuming jurisdiction u/s 263 which is bad in law inter alia for this reason that the reassessment order dated 21.03.2016 which is sought to be revised u/s 263 itself was invalid on various grounds

SWATI SHARMA,DEHRADNU vs. DCIT, C.C. DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2019-20] Swati Sharma Vs Dcit H.No.-262, Sunderwala, Central Circle, Raipur, Dehradun Dehradun Uttarakhand -248001 Uttarakhand Pan-Dknps2561C Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Rajiv Sahni, Ca Respondent By Ms. Poonam Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 11.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 08.04.2026 Order Per Bench: The Present Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 28.11.2025 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-3, Noida [“Ld. Cit(A)”] U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising Out Of Assessment Order Dated 22.03.2024 Passed U/S 147 Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Based On The Documents Found During The Course Of Search Carried Out In The Case Of Shri Krishna Sharma & Smt. Sheetal Sharma On 02.02.2022, Case Of The Assessee Was Re-Opened U/S 147 Of The Act, Since As Per Seized Documents Titled As Page 6 & 7 Of Annexure A-2, It Is Found That Assessee Has Purchased A Property For A Total Consideration Of Inr 47.00 Lacs & Payments Of Inr 32.00 Lacs Was Made Through Cheque & Inr 15.00 Lacs Was Paid In Cash. Accordingly, Ao Passed The Reassessment Order Dated 06.03.2024 U/S 147 By Making Addition Of Inr 15.00 Lacs Being Cash Payment As Undisclosed Investment U/S 69B R.W.S. 115Bb Of The Act & The Total Income Was Assessed At Inr 20,88,840/-.

reassessment order dated 06.03.2024 u/s 147 by making addition of INR 15.00 lacs being cash payment as undisclosed investment u/s 69B r.w.s. 115BB of the Act and the total income

RENUKA GROVER ,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT/ACIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2019-20] Renuka Grover Vs Dcit/Acit 175, Block-Aa, Karanpur, Central Circle, Dehradun Dehradun Uttarakhand-248001 Uttarakhand Pan-Amvpg2702Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri K.K. Juneja, Adv. Respondent By Shri Amar Pal, Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 08.04.2026 Order Per Bench: The Present Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 15.01.2026 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-3, Noida [“Ld. Cit(A)”] U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising Out Of Assessment Order Dated 06.03.2024 Passed U/S 147 Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Based On The Documents Found During The Course Of Search Carried Out In The Case Of Shri Krishna Sharma & Smt. Sheetal Sharma On 02.02.2022, Case Of The Assessee Was Re-Opened U/S 147 Of The Act, Since As Per Seized Documents Titled As Page 6 & 7 Of Annexure A-2, It Is Found That Assessee Has Purchased A Property For A Total Consideration Of Inr 26.00 Lacs & Payments Of Inr 20.00 Lacs Was Made Through Cheque & Inr 6.00 Lacs Was Paid In Cash. Accordingly, Ao Passed The Reassessment Order Dated 06.03.2024 U/S 147 By Making Addition Of Inr 6.00 Lacs Being Cash Payment As Undisclosed Investment U/S 69B R.W.S. 115Bb Of The Act & The Total Income Was Assessed At Inr 9,14,880/-.

reassessment order dated 06.03.2024 u/s 147 by making addition of INR 6.00 lacs being cash payment as undisclosed investment u/s 69B r.w.s. 115BB of the Act and the total income

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN vs. R.B. ENTERPRISES, DEHRADUN

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra(Through Video Conferencing)

income tax act. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO vs. Tech Span India Pvt. Ltd. (Civil appeal no 2732 of 2017) vide its ruling dated 24.04.2017 has held that, "reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act for the issues already considered in the proceedings conducted on the u/s 143(3) of the Act was merely the change

M/S. R.B. ENTERPRISES,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT, DEHRADUN

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra(Through Video Conferencing)

income tax act. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO vs. Tech Span India Pvt. Ltd. (Civil appeal no 2732 of 2017) vide its ruling dated 24.04.2017 has held that, "reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act for the issues already considered in the proceedings conducted on the u/s 143(3) of the Act was merely the change

M/S. R.B. ENTERPRISES,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT, DEHRADUN

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra(Through Video Conferencing)

income tax act. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO vs. Tech Span India Pvt. Ltd. (Civil appeal no 2732 of 2017) vide its ruling dated 24.04.2017 has held that, "reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act for the issues already considered in the proceedings conducted on the u/s 143(3) of the Act was merely the change

ACHARYA BALKRISHNA,HARIDWAR vs. DCIT, DEHRADUN

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

additions of Rs. 50.00 lacs u/s 68 as unexplained cash credits and Rs. 1,25,000/- as unexplained expenditure u/s 69C for obtaining such loan were made in the hands of the assessee. Against the said order an appeal was filed before the Ld. CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 3. Aggrieved by the said order, assessee

SHRI VIBHU GROVER,KOTDWARA vs. PCIT, DEHRADUN

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalvibhu Grover, Pcit, M/S Grover Sales Corporation, Dehradun. Garage Road, Kotdwara, Vs. Pauri-246169 Pan:Agdpg5842R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Anil Jain, Adv. Department By Shri S.K. Chaterjee, Cit-Dr

147 r.w.s 144B of the Act dated 25.03.2022 and direct the AO to pass fresh assessment order after due enquiries and verification. 5. Against the said order, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. All the grounds of appeal taken by the assessee are challenging the revisionary order passed u/s 263 without appreciating the facts of the case, therefore

KULDEEP GUPTA,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2019-20] Kuldeep Gupta Vs Dcit 80/1, Saraswati Soni Marg, Central Circle Dehradun, Uttarakhand Dehradun Pan-Brgpg6310R Uttarakhand Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Gaurav Gupta Respondent By Ms. Poonam Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 10.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 12.03.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Present Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 17.11.2025 By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A), Noida [“Ld.Cit(A)”] In Appeal No.Cit(Appeals), Nodia-3/10047/2018-19 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising Out Of Assessment Order Dated 06.03.2024 Passed U/S 147 Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Based On The Documents Found During The Course Of Search Carried Out In The Case Of Shri Krishna Sharma & Smt. Sheetal Sharma On 02.02.2022, Case Of The Assessee Was Re-Opened U/S 147 Of The Act, Since As Per Seized Documents Titled As Page 6 & 7 Of Annexure A-2, It Is Found That Assessee Has Purchased Property Alongwith His Brother, Shri Gaurav Gupta For Which Payments Of Inr 15 Lakhs Was Made Though Cheque & Inr 12.50 Lakhs Was Paid In Cash. Accordingly, Ao Passed The Reassessment Order Dated 06.03.2024 U/S 147 By Making Addition Of Inr 6.25 Lakhs Being Assessee’S Share Of 50% In The Cash Payment As Undisclosed Investment U/S 69B R.W.S. 115Bb Of The Act & The Total Income Was Assessed At Inr 9,74,850/-.

reassessment order dated 06.03.2024 u/s 147 by making addition of INR 6.25 Lakhs being assessee’s share of 50% in the cash payment as undisclosed investment u/s 69B r.w.s. 115BB of the Act and the total income

M/S. SHARDA EXPORTS,MEERUT vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE , DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

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

additions in both the Assessment Years. Aggrieved by the assessment orders dated 29/09/2021, the Assessee preferred two Appeals before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide orders dated 27/04/2022 partly allowed the Appeals of the Assessee. Aggrieved by the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 27/04/2022, both assessee as well as the Revenue questioned the order

M/S. SHARDA EXPORTS,MEERUT vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

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

additions in both the Assessment Years. Aggrieved by the assessment orders dated 29/09/2021, the Assessee preferred two Appeals before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide orders dated 27/04/2022 partly allowed the Appeals of the Assessee. Aggrieved by the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 27/04/2022, both assessee as well as the Revenue questioned the order