SH. ASHOK KUMAR,HARIDWAR vs. ITO, HARIDWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalashok Kumar, Assessment Unit, 19, Sitapur Mazara, Jwalapur, Income Tax Haridwar, Uttarakhand-249407 Vs. Department. Pan-Btupk9604E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Pankaj Goel, Adv. Department By Shri A. S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 08/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17/09/2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (‘The Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short) In Appeal No. Nfac/2014-15/10271519 Dated 10.04.2025 For Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Agriculturist Having No Any Other Source Of Income Than Agricultural Income. Since, The Income From Agricultural Operations Is Exempt From Tax, He Was Not Obliged To File The Return Of Income. The Assessing Officer Based On The Information That Assessee Has Deposited A Sum Of Rs.76,00,000/- In Zila Sahkari Bank Ltd., Initiated Reassessment Proceedings In The Case Of Assessee By Recording Reasons That Income To The Extent Of Rs.76,00,000/- Has Escaped Assessment In The Order Passed U/S 148A(D) Of The Act. Accordingly, Notices U/S 148 Was Issued On 26.03.2022. In Response To Which Assessee Filed Return Of Income On 12.04.2022 Ashok Kumar Vs. Ito Declaring Total Income Of Rs.10,00,000/- From Agriculture Activity & Claimed The Same As Exempt From Tax. The Assessing Officer Passed The Reassessment Order Wherein He Has Made The Additions On Account Of Agriculture Income Of Rs.10,00,000/- By Treating The Same As Income From Other Sources & Further Made Additions Of Rs.76,00,000/- Being Cash Deposited During Demonetization As Unexplained Money U/S 69A Of The Act. The Ao Further Made Additions Of Rs.2,67,195/- As Against Nil Income Declared Towards Bank Interest.

exempt from tax. The Assessing Officer passed the reassessment order wherein he has made the additions on account of agriculture income of Rs.10,00,000/- by treating the same as income from other sources and further made additions of Rs.76,00,000/- being cash deposited during demonetization as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. The AO further made additions

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

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

exempting the income of Rs 6,84,52,829/- 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

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

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

exempting the income of Rs 6,84,52,829/- 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

M/S. JAYCEES PUBLIC SCHOOL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS), DEHRADUN

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Assessment Year: 2011-12

147 to 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. That in any case and in any view of the matter, action of Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the action of Ld. AO in framing the impugned reassessment order u/s 148/143(3), is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. That having regard

SOCIETY FOR ADVANCEMENT IN EDUCATION,MUSSOORIE vs. ITO EXEMPTION WORD DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Exemption) for Assessment Year 2009-10 and 2010-11 and for Assessment Year 2011-12 Joint/Additional Ld. CIT(E) affixed the rubber stamp ‘Yes I am satisfied’. Authorities have only appended their signature on the rubber stamp affixed for giving sanction for initiation of re-assessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act for the respective Assessment Years

SOCIETY FOR ADVANCEMENT IN EDUCATION,MUSSOORIE vs. ITO EXEMPTION WORD DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Exemption) for Assessment Year 2009-10 and 2010-11 and for Assessment Year 2011-12 Joint/Additional Ld. CIT(E) affixed the rubber stamp ‘Yes I am satisfied’. Authorities have only appended their signature on the rubber stamp affixed for giving sanction for initiation of re-assessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act for the respective Assessment Years

SOCIETY FOR ADVANCEMENT IN EDUCATION,MUSSOORIE vs. ITO EXEMPTION DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Exemption) for Assessment Year 2009-10 and 2010-11 and for Assessment Year 2011-12 Joint/Additional Ld. CIT(E) affixed the rubber stamp ‘Yes I am satisfied’. Authorities have only appended their signature on the rubber stamp affixed for giving sanction for initiation of re-assessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act for the respective Assessment Years

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

u/s 139 of the Act. The ld. DR relying on the assessment order, submitted that the order of the ld. CIT(A) being erroneous which deserves to be set aside. Thus, sought for allowing the appeal. 6. Per contra, the ld. AR submitted that the issue involved in the present appeal is squarely covered in assessee’s own case

AMRIT VARSHA UDYOG LTD,KOTDWAR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, DEHRADUN

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

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

u/s. 147 of the IT Act on the issue of bogus purchases made to the extent of Rs. 49,13,825/- from M/s Shri) Ganpati Enterprises, Rs. Rs.15,10,506/- from M/s Delhi Steel Trading Co. and Rs.53,00,074/- from M/s New India Traders. During the course of the 2nd reassessment proceeding, the assessee provided bills for goods purchased