SHRI NAVAL KISHORE SINGH,JAMMU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, JAMMU

In the result, the ground of appeal No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

forward balance of opening capital as on 1st April, 2013 as per reflection in the balance sheet for the year under appeal and second issue relates to the disallowance of bank interest of Rs. 14,97,898/-, as claimed in the audited accounts for the year. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a civil contractor

MESERS MALWA MOTORS,BATHINDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), BATHINDA

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No. 131/Asr/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-13

forward unabsorbed business loss and depreciation at Rs.5,52,861. The assessment was completed u/s.143(3) on 29/1/2015 at an income of Rs.3,25,343, making three separate adjustments/additions aggregating to Rs.3,22,718, as under: 2 ITA Nos. 131/Asr/2018 (AY 2012-13) Malwa Motors v. ITO Particular Amount (Rs.) Remark (a) Credits in respected of commission

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1),FEROZEPUR, FEROZEPUR vs. MS.JATIN AGRO, FORT ROAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 103 & 104/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2017-18 Ito, Ward-3(1), Vs. M/S Jatin Agro Fort Road, Ferozepur. 152-P, Ferozepur. [Pan:-Aarpm5393F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Sh. Ashray Sarna, Ca Appellant By Respondent By Sh. Sunil Gautam, Cit. Dr

loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned. 7 In view of the above, I have reasons to believe that income to the tune of Rs.4,32,80,900/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of provisions of section 147 of the Act Keeping in the view the above

INCOME TAX OFFICER, FEROZEPUR vs. MS.JATIN AGRO, FORT ROAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 103 & 104/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2017-18 Ito, Ward-3(1), Vs. M/S Jatin Agro Fort Road, Ferozepur. 152-P, Ferozepur. [Pan:-Aarpm5393F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Sh. Ashray Sarna, Ca Appellant By Respondent By Sh. Sunil Gautam, Cit. Dr

loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned. 7 In view of the above, I have reasons to believe that income to the tune of Rs.4,32,80,900/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of provisions of section 147 of the Act Keeping in the view the above

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR vs. SHRI BHUPINDER SINGH. M/S NOVELTY SWEETS, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

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

carried out on 05.02.2019 and statement of Sh. Jatinder Singh (Karta Bhupinder Singh HUF) was recorded on 06.02.2019. The AO has mentioned that as per Profit & Loss account as on 03.02.2021, assessee showed sales of Rs.2,60,29,553/- and same was confronted recording of statement at the time of survey proceedings. As per the AO during survey proceedings, some

M/S GURU RAM DASS EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,BATHINDA vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi. T. A. No. 598/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: N.A.

carried on in pursuance of or for achieving a charitable purpose/object. Nothing, therefore, turns on the assessee stating before us of its’ expenditure exceeding income; the expenditure including a handsome component of depreciation (Rs. 37 lacs for AY 2015-16), so that there is substantial cash profit and, two, the depreciation stands provided on an accelerated (WDV) basis

M/S. JAMMU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,,JAMMU ( J&K) vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMMU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the department is dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryita No. 498/Asr./2013 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Jammu Development Authority, Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vikas Bhawan, Rail Head Tax, Circle-I, Complex, Jammu, J & K Jammu (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadfj7335A Ita No. 494/Asr./2013 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs Jammu Development Authority, Tax, Circle-I, Vikas Bhawan, Rail Head Jammu Complex, Jammu, J & K (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcp1720E Assessee By : Shri. R. K. Gupta, Ca & Shri. Vasu Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Shri. M. P. Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing :21.02.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2019 Order Per N. S. Saini: These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 06.05.2013, Jammu.

loss or at the cost price. Majority of lands under the occupation of JDA have been transferred by the State Govt., without charging any premium. Thus the contention of the assessee that - “It is an agency of Govt., created for development and not for purchase & sale of property. It is further brought to your kind notice that the authority

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMMU vs. M/S. JAMMU DEVELPMENT AUTHORITY,, JAMMU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the department is dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryita No. 498/Asr./2013 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Jammu Development Authority, Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vikas Bhawan, Rail Head Tax, Circle-I, Complex, Jammu, J & K Jammu (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadfj7335A Ita No. 494/Asr./2013 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs Jammu Development Authority, Tax, Circle-I, Vikas Bhawan, Rail Head Jammu Complex, Jammu, J & K (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcp1720E Assessee By : Shri. R. K. Gupta, Ca & Shri. Vasu Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Shri. M. P. Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing :21.02.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2019 Order Per N. S. Saini: These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 06.05.2013, Jammu.

loss or at the cost price. Majority of lands under the occupation of JDA have been transferred by the State Govt., without charging any premium. Thus the contention of the assessee that - “It is an agency of Govt., created for development and not for purchase & sale of property. It is further brought to your kind notice that the authority

M/S SHARP CHUKS AND MACHINES PRIVATE LIMITED ,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

The appeal of the assessee is disposed of in the terms as above

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

carried out by the assessee. It is pertinent to bear in mind that expenditure laid out for the purpose of business is to be allowed deduction either as expenditure or to be capitalized on which depreciation will be allowed. The assessee might have earned income from the business which has not been accounted and used for constructing the business asset

GMG HEALTHCARE PRIVATE LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

Bench: Shri L. P. Sahu & Shri Ravish Sood

depreciation was charged to the profit and loss account; and (ii) that, the liability outstanding towards the aforementioned party though disputed had however not ceased. As is discernible from the orders of the lower authorities, we find that they had summarily brushed aside the aforesaid claim of the assessee, and without looking into the fact situation pertaining to the outstanding

THE DY. COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX, JAMMU vs. M/S. THE JAMMU & KASHMIR BANK LTD,, SRINAGAR

In the result, the ground No

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

Loss A/c was declared amount to Rs.10,55,09,82,000/-. The assessing authority had added back in different heads related u/s 40(a) (ia) for non-deduction TDS, interest paid to JDA (J & K Development Authority). for non-deduction of TDS disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) amount to Rs.5,52,429/-, claim of depreciation on wooden partition deducting

THE DY. COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX, JAMMU vs. M/S. THE JAMMU & KASHMIR BANK LTD,, SRINAGAR

In the result, the ground No

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

Loss A/c was declared amount to Rs.10,55,09,82,000/-. The assessing authority had added back in different heads related u/s 40(a) (ia) for non-deduction TDS, interest paid to JDA (J & K Development Authority). for non-deduction of TDS disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) amount to Rs.5,52,429/-, claim of depreciation on wooden partition deducting

THE JAMMU AND KASHMIR BANK LIMITED,SRINAGAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JAMMU

In the result, the ground No

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

Loss A/c was declared amount to Rs.10,55,09,82,000/-. The assessing authority had added back in different heads related u/s 40(a) (ia) for non-deduction TDS, interest paid to JDA (J & K Development Authority). for non-deduction of TDS disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) amount to Rs.5,52,429/-, claim of depreciation on wooden partition deducting

ASSISTANT COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1, JAMMU vs. MESERS JAMMU & KASHMIR BANK LIMITED , SRINAGAR

In the result, the ground No

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

Loss A/c was declared amount to Rs.10,55,09,82,000/-. The assessing authority had added back in different heads related u/s 40(a) (ia) for non-deduction TDS, interest paid to JDA (J & K Development Authority). for non-deduction of TDS disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) amount to Rs.5,52,429/-, claim of depreciation on wooden partition deducting

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JAMMU vs. MESERS JAMMU & KASHMIR BANK LIMITED , SRINAGAR

In the result, the ground No

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

Loss A/c was declared amount to Rs.10,55,09,82,000/-. The assessing authority had added back in different heads related u/s 40(a) (ia) for non-deduction TDS, interest paid to JDA (J & K Development Authority). for non-deduction of TDS disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) amount to Rs.5,52,429/-, claim of depreciation on wooden partition deducting

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX , CIRCLE -1,, JAMMU vs. THE JAMMU & KASHMIR BANK LTD.,, SRINAGAR

In the result, the ground No

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

Loss A/c was declared amount to Rs.10,55,09,82,000/-. The assessing authority had added back in different heads related u/s 40(a) (ia) for non-deduction TDS, interest paid to JDA (J & K Development Authority). for non-deduction of TDS disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) amount to Rs.5,52,429/-, claim of depreciation on wooden partition deducting

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JAMMU, SRINAGAR vs. MESERS JAMMU & KASHMIR BANK LIMITED , SRINAGAR

In the result, the ground No

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

Loss A/c was declared amount to Rs.10,55,09,82,000/-. The assessing authority had added back in different heads related u/s 40(a) (ia) for non-deduction TDS, interest paid to JDA (J & K Development Authority). for non-deduction of TDS disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) amount to Rs.5,52,429/-, claim of depreciation on wooden partition deducting

WALIA CONSTRUCATION COMPANY ,PATHANKOT vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, AMRITSAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee ITA No

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

carry on business of transportation, income of which is shown in our trading/profit & loss account filed in the return. Truck/Tipper used for transportation only has deprecation rate of 30% as per income tax act. So we charged depreciation @30% on Truck/Tipper used for transportation of public. We also charged depreciation @25% on Truck/Tipper used for own business of contractor ship