THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. M/S BROADWAYS OVERSEAS LTD, JALANDHAR

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

gains derived from eligible industrial undertaking from any business. Whereas, under section 10B the deduction has been provided on profits of the business of the undertaking by a hundred percent export- oriented undertaking. Thus, the Judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Liberty India (supra) and Saraf Exports (supra) relied by the Ld. DR are distinguishable

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. M/S BROADWAY OVERSEAS LTD., JALANDHAR

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

gains derived from eligible industrial undertaking from any business. Whereas, under section 10B the deduction has been provided on profits of the business of the undertaking by a hundred percent export- oriented undertaking. Thus, the Judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Liberty India (supra) and Saraf Exports (supra) relied by the Ld. DR are distinguishable

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. M/S BROADWAY OVERSEAS LTD., JALANDHAR

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

gains derived from eligible industrial undertaking from any business. Whereas, under section 10B the deduction has been provided on profits of the business of the undertaking by a hundred percent export- oriented undertaking. Thus, the Judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Liberty India (supra) and Saraf Exports (supra) relied by the Ld. DR are distinguishable

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. M/S BROADWAY OVERSEAS LTD., JALANDHAR

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

gains derived from eligible industrial undertaking from any business. Whereas, under section 10B the deduction has been provided on profits of the business of the undertaking by a hundred percent export- oriented undertaking. Thus, the Judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Liberty India (supra) and Saraf Exports (supra) relied by the Ld. DR are distinguishable

BRODAWAYS OVERSEAS LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

gains derived from eligible industrial undertaking from any business. Whereas, under section 10B the deduction has been provided on profits of the business of the undertaking by a hundred percent export- oriented undertaking. Thus, the Judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Liberty India (supra) and Saraf Exports (supra) relied by the Ld. DR are distinguishable

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2 (2), MUKTSAR vs. AJAIB SINGH, VILLAGE BHARU

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. No. 354/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13

1,36,00,000/- per acre and the total sale consideration for 23 Kanai 2 Marla is Rs.3,92,70,000/-. The Assessing Officer observed that as per information available, the Assessee had made cash deposit of Rs.27,00,000/- in his bank account. Since, the Assessee had not filed the Return of Income, I.T.A. No. 354/Asr/2024 5 Assessment Year

THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, MUKTSAR vs. M/S. MAKKAR COTTON MILLS,, MUKTSAR

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.504/Asr/2014 Assessment Year: 2006-07

Section 48 of Income Tax Act, 1961 by taking the deemed value of consideration of property, as per registered deeds. The Ld. CIT (A) after considering the compromise dated 23.04.2005 has held that this document is part of the record and has observed that the entire property i.e. land, building and machinery as belong to the firm M/s Makkar Cotton

POONAM MARWAHA,AMRITSAR vs. ACIT DCIT CEN CIR, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee is allowed

92. The same figure was\nseparately shown in computation of total income at page 4. Hence\nsection 115BBE is not attracted. No stock register is maintained\nand this fact has also been given in the tax audit report by auditor\nin the form 3CB.\nThat the Ld. AO had issued various questionnaires along\nwith statutory notice

LATE. SH. GURMAIL SINGH.S/O. LATE SH. LAL SINGH,SRI MUKTSAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

92-127 of compilation of judgement already on record) Late Sh. Gurmail Singh v. Dy. CIT & Ors • DCIT Vs. Shree Bhagwati Machines Pvt. Ltd. fITA No. 296-301 /Jp/20221 fITAT Jaipur/ (Refer page no. 128-172 of compilation of judgement already on record) 15. It is further submitted that as against above aggregate peak of Rs. 1,40,65000/- from

LATE. SH. GURMAIL. SINGH. S/O. SH. LAL SINGH,SRI MUKATSAR vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

92-127 of compilation of judgement already on record) Late Sh. Gurmail Singh v. Dy. CIT & Ors • DCIT Vs. Shree Bhagwati Machines Pvt. Ltd. fITA No. 296-301 /Jp/20221 fITAT Jaipur/ (Refer page no. 128-172 of compilation of judgement already on record) 15. It is further submitted that as against above aggregate peak of Rs. 1,40,65000/- from

LATE. SH. GURMAIL SINGH S/O. SH. LAL SINGH,SRI MUKATSAR vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

92-127 of compilation of judgement already on record) Late Sh. Gurmail Singh v. Dy. CIT & Ors • DCIT Vs. Shree Bhagwati Machines Pvt. Ltd. fITA No. 296-301 /Jp/20221 fITAT Jaipur/ (Refer page no. 128-172 of compilation of judgement already on record) 15. It is further submitted that as against above aggregate peak of Rs. 1,40,65000/- from

SH. ARASHPREET SINGH S/O LATE SH. GURMAIL SINGH,SHRI MUKATSAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

92-127 of compilation of judgement already on record) Late Sh. Gurmail Singh v. Dy. CIT & Ors • DCIT Vs. Shree Bhagwati Machines Pvt. Ltd. fITA No. 296-301 /Jp/20221 fITAT Jaipur/ (Refer page no. 128-172 of compilation of judgement already on record) 15. It is further submitted that as against above aggregate peak of Rs. 1,40,65000/- from

SH. ARSPREET SINGH . S/O. LATE. SH. GURMAIL SINGH ,MUKTSAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE .II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

92-127 of compilation of judgement already on record) Late Sh. Gurmail Singh v. Dy. CIT & Ors • DCIT Vs. Shree Bhagwati Machines Pvt. Ltd. fITA No. 296-301 /Jp/20221 fITAT Jaipur/ (Refer page no. 128-172 of compilation of judgement already on record) 15. It is further submitted that as against above aggregate peak of Rs. 1,40,65000/- from

SH. ARASHPREET SINGH S/O. LATE SH. GURMAIL SINGH,MUKTSAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CERCLE- II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

92-127 of compilation of judgement already on record) Late Sh. Gurmail Singh v. Dy. CIT & Ors • DCIT Vs. Shree Bhagwati Machines Pvt. Ltd. fITA No. 296-301 /Jp/20221 fITAT Jaipur/ (Refer page no. 128-172 of compilation of judgement already on record) 15. It is further submitted that as against above aggregate peak of Rs. 1,40,65000/- from

SH. ARASHPREET SINGH S/O. LATE SH. GURMAIL SINGH,MUKTSAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

92-127 of compilation of judgement already on record) Late Sh. Gurmail Singh v. Dy. CIT & Ors • DCIT Vs. Shree Bhagwati Machines Pvt. Ltd. fITA No. 296-301 /Jp/20221 fITAT Jaipur/ (Refer page no. 128-172 of compilation of judgement already on record) 15. It is further submitted that as against above aggregate peak of Rs. 1,40,65000/- from

SH. ARASHPREET SINGH. S/O.LATE.SH. GURMAIL SINGH,MUKTSAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX .CIRCLE-II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

92-127 of compilation of judgement already on record) Late Sh. Gurmail Singh v. Dy. CIT & Ors • DCIT Vs. Shree Bhagwati Machines Pvt. Ltd. fITA No. 296-301 /Jp/20221 fITAT Jaipur/ (Refer page no. 128-172 of compilation of judgement already on record) 15. It is further submitted that as against above aggregate peak of Rs. 1,40,65000/- from

LATE. SH. GUMAIL SINGH . S/O. SH. LAL SINGH,MUKTSAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

92-127 of compilation of judgement already on record) Late Sh. Gurmail Singh v. Dy. CIT & Ors • DCIT Vs. Shree Bhagwati Machines Pvt. Ltd. fITA No. 296-301 /Jp/20221 fITAT Jaipur/ (Refer page no. 128-172 of compilation of judgement already on record) 15. It is further submitted that as against above aggregate peak of Rs. 1,40,65000/- from

LATE. SH. GURMAIL. SINGH S/O. SH. LAL SINGH,SHRI MUKAT SAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF 9INCOME TAX. CIRCLE -II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

92-127 of compilation of judgement already on record) Late Sh. Gurmail Singh v. Dy. CIT & Ors • DCIT Vs. Shree Bhagwati Machines Pvt. Ltd. fITA No. 296-301 /Jp/20221 fITAT Jaipur/ (Refer page no. 128-172 of compilation of judgement already on record) 15. It is further submitted that as against above aggregate peak of Rs. 1,40,65000/- from