SH. ARVIND SINGH ,RISHIKESH vs. ITO, RISHIKESH, RISHIKESH

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for

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

Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by computing the income of the Assessee at Rs. 78,68

ACIT, MEERUT vs. SHRI SACHIN UPADHAYA, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2007-08

section 68 of the act. 8.2 Before the first appellate authority, the assessee furnished date wise details of the transaction and submitted that substantial sum of money was withdrawn in cash from his bank account. Further explaining, the assessee submitted that the cash was withdrawn as the assessee was in the process of buying

BG EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DDIT/ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE -1, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

68,11,169 by treating it as pre-operative in nature. 6 6.2 The learned AO / DRP erred in not appreciating that the said expenditure was incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the Appellant’s business in India. 6.3 The learned AO / DRP erred in not appreciating that this expenditure was held as allowable