ITAT Amritsar Judgments — April 2023

SHRI NAVNEET SINGH,AMRITSAR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, AMRITSAR

ITA 266/ASR/2022[2022-21]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2022-21Allowed

The Tribunal held that since the issue of TDS disallowance was settled by the rectification order and the reduced demand was paid, the CIT(A)'s order had become infructuous. Therefore, the appeal was allowed.

M/S PARADISE MULTIPLEX CUM VILLAS. PVT. LTD,ABOHAR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-II(3), ABOHAR

ITA 138/ASR/2019[2009-10]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2009-10Dismissed

The Tribunal upheld the orders of the CIT(A) and the Assessing Officer, finding no infirmity. The assessee failed to produce evidence to substantiate its claims regarding the creditworthiness of creditors and other grounds.

M/S PARADIES MULTIPLEXS CUM VILLAS PVT LTD,ABHOAR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3), ABOHAR

ITA 628/ASR/2018[2008-09]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2008-09Dismissed

The Tribunal upheld the orders of the CIT(A) and the Assessing Officer, finding no infirmity. The assessee failed to produce evidence to substantiate its claims regarding the creditworthiness of creditors and other grounds.

SHRI BASHIR AHMAD SOFI,NOWHATTA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, SRINAGAR

ITA 37/ASR/2023[2017-18]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2017-18Remanded

The Tribunal found that the lower authorities passed orders ex-parte without granting a reasonable opportunity of being heard due to non-service of notices. Following a coordinate bench decision, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for de novo assessment.

BASHIR AHMAD SOFI,SRINAGAR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, SRINAGAR

ITA 208/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: Disposed28 Apr 2023AY 2017-18Remanded

The Tribunal found that the lower authorities passed orders ex-parte without granting a reasonable opportunity of being heard due to non-service of notices. Following a coordinate bench decision, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for de novo assessment.

MEASAGE GURDAS AGRO PRIVATE LIMITED,BATHINDA vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA

ITA 496/ASR/2019[2013-14]Status: Disposed27 Apr 2023AY 2013-14Dismissed

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals due to low tax effect as per CBDT circular. The assessees' revenue-neutral appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA vs MEASAGE GURDAS AGRO PRIVATE LIMITED, BATHINDA

ITA 509/ASR/2019[2013-14]Status: Disposed27 Apr 2023AY 2013-14Dismissed

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals due to low tax effect as per CBDT circular. The assessees' revenue-neutral appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

SHRI KUNAL GARG,BATHINDA vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE- 1, BATHINDA

ITA 497/ASR/2019[2013-14]Status: Disposed27 Apr 2023AY 2013-14Dismissed

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals due to low tax effect as per CBDT circular. The assessees' revenue-neutral appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

MEASAGE G.K CONTINENTAL TRADES PRIVATE LIMITED,BATHINDA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 1 (1 ), BATHINDA

ITA 514/ASR/2019[2016-17]Status: Disposed27 Apr 2023AY 2016-17Dismissed

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals due to low tax effect as per CBDT circular. The assessees' revenue-neutral appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

SHRIMATI RIMMY GARG,BATHINDA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 1 (3 ), BATHINDA

ITA 515/ASR/2019[2016-17]Status: Disposed27 Apr 2023AY 2016-17Dismissed

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals due to low tax effect as per CBDT circular. The assessees' revenue-neutral appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

SHRI ANU ANKIT JAIN,BATHINDA vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 1, BATHINDA

ITA 512/ASR/2019[2016-17]Status: Disposed27 Apr 2023AY 2016-17Dismissed

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals due to low tax effect as per CBDT circular. The assessees' revenue-neutral appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

SHRI KUNAL GARG,BATHINDA vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 1, BATHINDA

ITA 518/ASR/2019[2016-17]Status: Disposed27 Apr 2023AY 2016-17Dismissed

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals due to low tax effect as per CBDT circular. The assessees' revenue-neutral appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

ASSISTANT COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-=1, JALANDHAR vs M/S DP VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, JALANDHAR

ITA 206/ASR/2022[2012-13]Status: Disposed27 Apr 2023AY 2012-13Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the addition was not justifiable as the loan was received through banking channels from an NRI, and the lender's own assessment was completed without adverse comments on the loan source. The creditworthiness was therefore established.

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR vs M/S SILVERLINE BUILDTECH PRIVTA LIMITED, JALANDHAR

ITA 205/ASR/2022[2015-16]Status: Disposed27 Apr 2023AY 2015-16Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the addition was not justifiable as the loan was received through banking channels from an NRI, and the lender's own assessment was completed without adverse comments on the loan source. The creditworthiness was therefore established.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA vs SHRI KUNAL GARG, BATHINDA

ITA 504/ASR/2019[2016-17]Status: Disposed27 Apr 2023AY 2016-17Dismissed

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals due to low tax effect as per CBDT circular. The assessees' revenue-neutral appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA vs SHRI KUNAL GARG, BATHINDA

ITA 503/ASR/2019[2013-14]Status: Disposed27 Apr 2023AY 2013-14Dismissed

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals due to low tax effect as per CBDT circular. The assessees' revenue-neutral appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.

SH. SURINDER SINGH LEGAL HEIR. OF SMT SITA DEVI,BATHINDA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(1), BATHINDA

ITA 149/ASR/2019[2007-08]Status: Disposed27 Apr 2023AY 2007-08Dismissed

The Tribunal noted that the death of an assessee does not extinguish their tax liability, and legal representatives are liable. However, due to the failure of the legal heirs to be brought on record and the lack of a power of attorney, the appeal was abated.

SHRI SHAM SUNDER AGGARWAL,KAPURTHALA vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, JALANDHAR

ITA 17/ASR/2021[2011-12]Status: Disposed27 Apr 2023AY 2011-12Allowed

The Tribunal held that the PCIT's order under Section 263 was vitiated because the PCIT did not properly deal with the assessee's submissions and documents. Instead of verifying them, the PCIT merely remanded the matter to the AO for further verification.

DHARAM CHANDAN CHARITABLE TRUST,LUDHIANA vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

ITA 653/ASR/2019[2019-20]Status: Disposed26 Apr 2023AY 2019-20Allowed

The Tribunal found that the payments made by the assessee were related to its charitable activities and that the evidence submitted was sufficient. The Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(E) and directed that registration be granted.

SUKHDEV SINGH,JAMMU vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 2 (2 ), JAMMU

ITA 15/ASR/2023[2012-13]Status: Disposed25 Apr 2023AY 2012-13Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) order was passed ex-parte without affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Following a coordinate bench decision, the Tribunal restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment.

M/S. KARNAIL SINGH & COMPANY,JALANDHAR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3, JALANDHAR

ITA 26/ASR/2023[2019-20]Status: Disposed25 Apr 2023AY 2019-20Dismissed

The Tribunal held that employee contributions to PF and ESI, if not remitted to the government account within the due date as per relevant statutes, are to be treated as income of the assessee. The disallowance made by the authorities was upheld.

LATE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH,MOGA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, MOGA

ITA 50/ASR/2020[2011-12]Status: Disposed25 Apr 2023AY 2011-12Remanded

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had passed the order in a summary and mechanical manner without assigning specific reasons for rejecting the assessee's explanation. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for a fresh, speaking order.

M/S. KARNAIL SINGH & COMPANY,JALANDHAR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3, JALANDHAR

ITA 25/ASR/2023[2018-19]Status: Disposed25 Apr 2023AY 2018-19Dismissed

The Tribunal held that employee contributions to PF and ESI, if not remitted to the government account within the due date as per relevant statutes, are to be treated as income of the assessee. The disallowance made by the authorities was upheld.

AIC JAMMU AND KASHMIR EDI FOUNDATION,SRINAGAR vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

ITA 39/ASR/2020[2019-20]Status: Disposed24 Apr 2023AY 2019-20Dismissed

The Tribunal upheld the order of the CIT(Exemption), stating that the Commissioner must be satisfied about the genuineness of the activities before granting registration. Since no charitable activities were demonstrated, the registration was rightly denied.

SHRI GURBINDER SINGH MAHAL,AMRITSAR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-IV ( 2), AMRITSAR

ITA 22/ASR/2023[2014-15]Status: Disposed24 Apr 2023AY 2014-15Allowed

The Tribunal held that the source of cash deposits was well explained by the sale of the assessee's father's property. The assessee, acting as a power of attorney holder, was not liable for tax on his father's property sale proceeds. The addition made by the AO was quashed.

SPARROW SECURITY SERVICES,JAMMU vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1), JAMMU

ITA 40/ASR/2023[2018-19]Status: Disposed24 Apr 2023AY 2018-19Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the addition related to employee's contribution paid after the due date, amounting to Rs. 10,79,120/-, is upheld. However, the additions for employer's contribution (Rs. 28,91,068/-) and employee's contribution where cheques were presented before the due date but cleared later (Rs. 8,37,424.90) are to be quashed.

M/S GCA MARKETING PVT. LTD,BATHINDA vs A.C.I.T, CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA

ITA 287/ASR/2017[2009-10]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2023AY 2009-10Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the assessee failed to prove the genuineness of its agricultural income and the source of share capital. The AO's additions were based on material on record and inquiries.

SHRI ASHWANI MALHOTRA,AMRITSAR vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, AMRITSAR

ITA 73/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2023AY 2017-18Dismissed

The tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as infructuous because the assessment order passed by the AO NFAC, Delhi had accepted the assessee's contentions.

SHRI BHARAT ARORA,PUNJAB vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

ITA 309/ASR/2018[2008-09]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2023AY 2008-09Partly Allowed

The Tribunal remanded the issue of addition on South Indian Bank credits back to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration. It quashed the addition on ICICI Bank credits due to lack of evidence and deleted the addition on the difference in declared income.

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JAMMU vs M/S FILL INDUSTRIES, SRINAGAR

ITA 288/ASR/2015[2001-02]Status: Disposed13 Apr 2023AY 2001-02Remanded

The tribunal rectified an inadvertent mistake in its previous order. The correction was made to the order pronounced on 24.02.2023, ensuring accuracy in the disposal of the appeals.

RASULPUR CO-OPEARTIVE AGRICULTURE SERVICE SOCIETY LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, LUDHIANA

ITA 18/ASR/2021[2011-12]Status: Disposed12 Apr 2023AY 2011-12Dismissed

The Tribunal allowed the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal as it had become infructuous. The Revenue had no objection to this request.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR vs SHRI BHAVNOOR SINGH BEDI, JALANDHAR

ITA 88/ASR/2020[2017-18]Status: Disposed11 Apr 2023AY 2017-18Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) correctly deleted the additions as the cash deposits were out of the surrendered income for which tax had already been paid. The revenue's appeals were dismissed.

SHRI BHAVNOOR SINGH BEDI,JALANDHAR vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JALANDHAR

ITA 51/ASR/2020[2014-15]Status: Disposed11 Apr 2023AY 2014-15Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) correctly deleted the additions as the cash deposits were out of the surrendered income for which tax had already been paid. The revenue's appeals were dismissed.

SH.SURESH KUMAR SHARMA.S/O SH. RAKHA RAM,KOTKAPURA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3 (3), FAIDKOT

ITA 110/ASR/2019[2010-11]Status: Disposed11 Apr 2023AY 2010-11Remanded

The Tribunal found that the legal grounds challenging the reopening were not properly agitated before the lower authorities. Similarly, the grounds for penalty waiver were not substantiated with evidence. Therefore, both appeals were remitted back to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR vs SHRI JATINDER SINGH BEDI, JALANDHAR

ITA 89/ASR/2020[2016-17]Status: Disposed11 Apr 2023AY 2016-17Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) correctly deleted the additions as the cash deposits were out of the surrendered income for which tax had already been paid. The revenue's appeals were dismissed.

SHRI BHAVNOOR SINGH BEDI,JALANDHAR vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JALANDHAR

ITA 53/ASR/2020[2016-17]Status: Disposed11 Apr 2023AY 2016-17Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) correctly deleted the additions as the cash deposits were out of the surrendered income for which tax had already been paid. The revenue's appeals were dismissed.

M. K HOTEL & RESORTS LIMITED,AMRITSAR vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, AMRITSAR

ITA 14/ASR/2023[2020-21]Status: Disposed11 Apr 2023AY 2020-21Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the disallowance made under Section 143(1)(a) was justified as the audit report indicated delayed payments, which contravened Section 36(1)(va). However, an additional ground regarding eligibility for deduction under Section 37 was remanded back to the CIT(A).

SH. SURESH KUMAR SHARMA S/O. SH. RAKHA RAM,KOTKAPURA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(3), FARIDKOT

ITA 111/ASR/2019[2011-11]Status: Disposed11 Apr 2023AY 2011-11Remanded

The Tribunal found that the legal grounds challenging the reopening were not properly agitated before the lower authorities. Similarly, the grounds for penalty waiver were not substantiated with evidence. Therefore, both appeals were remitted back to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR vs SHRI BHAVNOOR SINGH BEDI, JALANDHAR

ITA 87/ASR/2020[2016-17]Status: Disposed11 Apr 2023AY 2016-17Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) was correct in deleting the additions as the cash deposits were out of the surrendered income on which tax had already been paid. Therefore, no further addition was warranted.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR vs SHRI JATINDER SINGH BEDI, JALANDHAR

ITA 90/ASR/2020[2017-18]Status: Disposed11 Apr 2023AY 2017-18Dismissed

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) correctly deleted the additions as the cash deposits were out of the surrendered income for which tax had already been paid. The revenue's appeals were dismissed.

SHRI RAJ KUMAR ( M/S RADHIKA SALES CORP ), AMRITSAR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 3 (3), AMRITSAR

ITA 195/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: Disposed11 Apr 2023AY 2017-18Allowed

The Tribunal held that the AO's estimation of sales was based on surmises and conjectures, ignoring the evidence provided by the assessee. The Tribunal found that the cash deposits were explained by the sale of stock-in-trade, which was already reflected in the turnover.

ESS ESS KAY ENGINEERING COMPAY PRIVATE LIMITED,KAPURTHALA vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4, JALANDHAR

ITA 23/ASR/2023[2019-20]Status: Disposed11 Apr 2023AY 2019-20Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the disallowance made under Section 143(1)(a) was in accordance with law, citing the Supreme Court's decision in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. However, the additional ground regarding Section 37 was remanded back to the CIT(A).

KAY SWITCGEARS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KAPURTHALA vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4, JALANDHAR

ITA 24/ASR/2023[2020-21]Status: Disposed11 Apr 2023AY 2020-21Partly Allowed

The Tribunal held that the disallowance made under Section 143(1)(a) was justified as the audit report indicated delayed payments, which contravened Section 36(1)(va). However, an additional ground regarding eligibility for deduction under Section 37 was remanded back to the CIT(A).

GURU GOBIND SINGH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,MOGA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTIONS, JALANDHAR

ITA 576/ASR/2018[2011-12]Status: Disposed10 Apr 2023AY 2011-12Remanded

The Tribunal found that the assessee was denied a reasonable opportunity to present its case on merit. Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

SHRI SACHIN KAPUR,JALANDHAR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3 (2), JALANDHAR

ITA 261/ASR/2022[2018-19]Status: Disposed10 Apr 2023AY 2018-19Partly Allowed

The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. vs. CIT, which held that delayed payments of employee contributions to PF/ESI are disallowable. The issue of personal expenses in one appeal was remanded.

M/S. RAMCO ENGG WORKS,JALANDHAR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 1 (1), JALANDHAR

ITA 253/ASR/2022[2019-20]Status: Disposed10 Apr 2023AY 2019-20Partly Allowed

The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. vs. CIT, which held that delayed payments of employee contributions to PF/ESI are disallowable. The issue of personal expenses in one appeal was remanded.