ITAT Chandigarh Bench

SATINDER PAUL THROUGH L/H NEELAM SAINI,PINJORE vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, PANCHKULA

SH. SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member)

KOOLKING FOUNDATION,MALERKOTLA vs THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 883/CHD/2025 U/s 80G Kookling Foundation, C/o Kookling Udhyog Private Limited, Village Ratolan, Focal Point, Dhuri Road, Malerkotla 148023 स्थायी लेखा सं./ PAN NO: AAFTK7048D अपीलार्थी/Appellant The CIT Vs. (Exemptions), Chandigarh प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent ( HYBRID HEARING ) निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. Pankaj Bhalla, CA (Virtual) राजस्व की ओर से/ Revenue by : Sh. Manav Bansal, CIT DR सु

KOOLKING FOUNDATION,MALERKOTLA vs THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

JANTA LAND PROMOTERS PVT LTD,MOHALI vs THE PRINICIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CHANDIGARH-1, CHANDIGARH

BARFANI SEWA MANDAL,KAITHAL vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS , CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

BHUPINDER SINGH SIDHU(HUF),MOHALI vs ITO, WARD 4(1), CHANDIGARH

SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

ATAM PARKASH,PATIALA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, PATIALA., PATIALA

SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

ATAM PARKASH,PATIALA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, PATIALA, PATIALA

SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

ATAM PARKASH,PATIALA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, PATIALA, PATIALA

SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

ATAM PARKASH,PATIALA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, PATIALA, PATIALA

SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (IN SITU) CIRCLE-I, , LUDHIANA vs KAPIL THAPAR, LUDHIANA

SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

ANIKET VERMA,PANCHKULA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD PANCHKULA

SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

NIRMALJIT SINGH KHATRA,CHANDIGARH vs ITO, WARD-2(1), CHANDIGARH

SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

KULDIP SINGH,CHANDIGARH vs ITO, WARD-5(5), CHANDIGARH

SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 789/CHD/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2012-13 | Sh. Kuldip Singh, | बनाम | The ITO, | 3386, Sector 46C, | Vs. | Ward 5(5), | Chandigarh 160047 | | Chandigarh स्थायी लेखा सं./ PAN NO: BPHPS0923R अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent (PHYSICAL HEARING ) निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CA राजस्व की ओर से/ Revenue by : Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR सुन

DISTRICT ELECTION OFFICE HAMIRPUR, SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE OFFICE,HAMIRPUR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, (TDS) MANDI, MANDI

SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

POOJA KANSAL,CHANDIGARH vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, G.GARH, GOBINDGARH

SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

POOJA KANSAL,CHANDIGARH vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, G.GARH, GOBINDGARH

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -5, PANCHKULA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, SECTOR-, PANCHKULA vs NAVDESH INFRATECH, PANCHKULA

SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

AMIT SAINI,KURUKSHETRA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KURUKSHETRA, HARYANA, WARD-I, KUK, HARYANA

the Ld. CIT(A). However, despite several notices under Section 250 being issued electronically to the registered e-mail address, there was no compliance by the assessee. The CIT(A), therefore, proceeded ex parte and held that the assessee had failed to substantiate his grounds of appeal or file any documentary evidence in support of his claim. 7.1 The CIT(A) observed that the Assessing Officer had rightly made the addition under Section 144 of the Act since the assessee had not availed the

YOGESH CHANDER & SONS HUF,LUDHIANA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(1), LUDHIANA

the Ld. CIT(A). Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the CPC holding that the appellant had not fulfilled the conditions of the proviso to Rule 37BA(2) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, namely (i) filing of declaration with the deductor, and (ii) reporting of tax deduction by the deductor in the name of the other person.