ITAT Chandigarh Bench
6,746 judgments
ABHIMANYU GUPTA ,PATIALA vs DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-PATIALA , PATIALA
SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)
MAHINDER KAUR,PANCHKULA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, PANCHKULA
SOHAN LAL,MANDI vs CIT(A), NEW DELHI
SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 208/CHD/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19 | Sohan Lal Walia, M/s Walia Enterprises, Ner Chowk, Balh, Mandi (HP). | Vs | The ITO, Mandi. | |-------------------------------------------------------------------|----|----------------| स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: ABLPW2185L अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent Assessee by: Shri Munish Sood, CA Revenue by : Smt. Yamini, CIT DR Date
ARUN KUMAR,LUDHIANA vs ITO WARD 6(1), LUDHIANA
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH vs THEON PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED, CHANDIGARH
SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)
DCIT, CC-3, LUDHIANA, KITCHLU NAGAR vs MANI RAM BALWANT RAI HUF, CIVIL LINES
SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)
M/S SINGLA BUILDERS AND PROMOTERS LIMITED,RUPNAGAR, PUNJAB vs DCIT/ACIT(CEN)-1 CHD, CHANDIGARH
him: 6.4 The DVO has issued the report without confronting the issues and without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard; 6.5 In respect of construction expense of a builder, the addition could not have been made u/s 69B on the basis of report of DVO.
M/S CREDO ASSETS PVT. LTD.,RUPNAGAR PUNJAB vs DCIT/ACIT(CEN)-1 CHD, CHANDIGARH
SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK,BAIJNATH vs ITO(TDS), PALAMPUR
the Commissioner. Similarly, it has been used in section 5 of Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and construction of this expression has fallen for consideration before Hon'ble High Court as well as before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, then, Hon'ble Court were unanimous in their conclusion that this expression is to be used liberally. We may make reference to the following observations of the Hon'ble Supreme court from the decision in the case of Collector Land Acquisition Vs
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK,BAIJNATH vs ITO(TDS), PALAMPUR
the Commissioner. Similarly, it has been used in section 5 of Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and construction of this expression has fallen for consideration before Hon'ble High Court as well as before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, then, Hon'ble Court were unanimous in their conclusion that this expression is to be used liberally. We may make reference to the following observations of the Hon'ble Supreme court from the decision in the case of Collector Land Acquisition Vs
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK,BAIJNATH vs ITO(TDS), PALAMPUR
the Commissioner. Similarly, it has been used in section 5 of Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and construction of this expression has fallen for consideration before Hon'ble High Court as well as before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, then, Hon'ble Court were unanimous in their conclusion that this expression is to be used liberally. We may make reference to the following observations of the Hon'ble Supreme court from the decision in the case of Collector Land Acquisition Vs
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK,PARWANOO vs INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), SOLAN
the Commissioner. Similarly, it has been used in section 5 of Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and construction of this expression has fallen for consideration before Hon'ble High Court as well as before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, then, Hon'ble Court were unanimous in their conclusion that this expression is to be used liberally. We may make reference to the following observations of the Hon'ble Supreme court from the decision in the case of Collector Land Acquisition Vs
PARAMJIT SINGH,MOHALI, PUNJAB vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI
SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)
MITTAL COTSPIN LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(5), LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA
the Tribunal against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short ‘the CIT (A)'] dated 25.06.2025 passed for assessment year 2014-15.
SANT KIRPAL VIDYAK MISSION,,LUDHIANA vs CIT (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH
SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)
ZABSANG CHOEKHORLING MONASTERY,JOGINDER NAGAR MANDI H.P vs INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD SOLAN, SOLAN
SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)
RAI VIRENDER SINGH,KAITHAL, HARYANA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KAITHAL, KAITHAL, HARYANA
SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)
MONICA BIBBLY SOOD,CHANDIGARH vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3), CHANDIGARH
SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)
M/S CREDO ASSETS PVT. LTD.,RUPNAGAR PUNJAB vs DCIT/ACIT(CEN)-1 CHD, CHANDIGARH
HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)
SAHEED DARSHAN FILLING STATION,LUDHIANA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER (ITO), WARD 3, KHANNA, KHANNA
SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)
