OSAKA ALLOYS & STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JLD, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

disallowed in proceedings u/s 143(1), against which application for rectification u/s 154, was filed by the assessee and the AO allowed

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

In the result, the appellant’s appeal is Dismissed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.143/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ess Ess Kay Engineering Co. Vs. Nfac, Delhi/C/O Asstt. Pvt. Ltd. Factory Area, Commissioner Of Income Jalandhar. Tax Circle-4, Jalandhar. [Pan: Aaace5057G] (Respondent) (Appellant)

disallowance has been deleted by the AO in the order u/s. 154 dated 12.02.2020 by amending the order u/s. 143(3) for AY 2017-18. Therefore, he submitted that impugned appeal is hereby withdrawn. However, the rectification

THE MUTHADA KHURD CO OPERATIVE AGRI MULTIPURPOSE SOCIETY LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, PHAGWARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

rectification order u/s 154 nor from the first appeal order ,the actual reasons for disallowance of claim u/s 80P of the Act , in the instant

THE NAKODAR PRIMARY COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURE DEVELOPMENT BANK LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, NAKODAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

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

disallowance of expenditure u/s 40A(7) indicated in Form No.3CD of the Audit Report was not made in the intimation u/s 143(1)(a) is a mistake apparent from record which can be rectified u/s 154 of the I.T. Act. It is not mandatory that such a rectification

SHRI RAJNISH DHAWAN,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

rectification application u/s 154 27.05.2015 (APB pg. 15 & 16) on 27.05.2015 which was disposed of by the AO vide her impugned order dated 24.01.2022. The ld. counsel further contended that the ld. CIT(A) erred in not considering the claim of the assessee u/s 80IB at Rs.17,47,170/- which was wrongly disallowed

FIRST INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS LTD.,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.46/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13

rectification Order passed by Ld. AO u/s 154 of Income Tax Act, 1961 is unsustainable in law. 2. That Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that reimbursement of freight, loading/unloading charges to the associate concern are not in the nature of payment for any sum for carrying out any work and therefore, the reimbursement of expenses is outside

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3, FEROZEPUR vs. MEASAGE SUKHBIR AGRO ENERGY LIMITED, FEROZEPUR

In the result, the appeal ITA No

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

rectification petition u/s 154 on 16.06.2016 with a claim of additional depreciation U/s 32(1) of the Act. The ld.AO disallowed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 3, FEROZEPUR vs. MEASAGE SUKHBIR AGRO ENERGY LIMITED , FEROZEPUR

In the result, the appeal ITA No

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

rectification petition u/s 154 on 16.06.2016 with a claim of additional depreciation U/s 32(1) of the Act. The ld.AO disallowed

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

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

disallowance of TDS u/s 43B, since the aforesaid sum of Rs.8,84,661/- has been reduced to Rs.25,400/- by rectification order passed by CPC, Bengluru vide rectification order u/s 154

UNIVERSAL BIOMASS ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED,GURUHARSAHAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(1), FEROZEPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Brajesh Kumar Singh

disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 80IA for non filing of audit report, has merged with the scrutiny assessment vide notice u/s 143(2), the said claim for deduction being one of the main issue for which the case has been selected for scrutiny, and the said issue of claim u/s 80IA(4)(iv) has been exclusively adjudicated and discussed

ATC LOGISTICAL SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED ,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, AMRITSAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee ITA No

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

154 r.w.s. 143(1) is I.T.A. No. 241/Asr/2023 3 Assessment Year: 2017-18 enclosed herewith wherefrom it is clear that the relief of Rs.9,12,665/- was allowed and it is requested that the necessary relief of Rs.9,12,665/- may kindly be allowed. 6. That the AO was not justified in charging tax on the so-called deemed total

INCOMETAX OFFICER WARD-2(1), AMRITSAR vs. KULWANT LAL SHARMA, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue bearingITA No

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

154 of the Act. 2. The revenue has taken the following grounds: “1. Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) was correct in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,64,502/- made by the Assessing Officer (AO) on account of disallowance of leave encashment claimed as exempt income u/s

INDU MAHAJAN,AMRITSAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF TAX CIRCLE-5 , AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing no

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

disallowance was made for late deposit of contribution made in respect of PF & ESI u/s 36 (1) (va) of the Act. The assessee filed the rectification petition U/s 154

SHRI AMAR NATH JAIN MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( EXEMPTION ) , JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

rectification order passed by the AO u/s 154 of the IT Act, submissions filed by the appellant and find that primary issue for consideration is the claim of basic exemption which is available to an AOP was disallowed

MEASAGE.OSAKA ALLOYS AND STEEL (P) LTD,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

The appeal stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Shri Udayan Dasgupta, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.347/Asr/2019 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S Osaka Alloys & Steel (P) Ltd. Dcit Circle - Ii बनाम/ 428, Mota Singh Nagar, Jalandhar Jalandhar Punjab - 144001 C/O Bhagat & Co. (Ca) Vs. 16 Brij Nagar, Jalandhar, Punjab - 144001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaco-7097-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (" थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Adjournment Request " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Farhat Khan (Cit) - Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03-02-2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 20.02.2026 : आदेश / O R D E R

disallowances and framed an assessment. Subsequently, Ld. Pr. CIT, upon perusal of case records, observed that the assessee worked out book profits of Rs.1,716/- after claiming deduction u/s 80IB for Rs.3,11,72,422/- which was not permissible deduction u/s 115JB. Such omission resulted in short computation of book profit. The Ld. AO failed to work out correct book

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

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

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

disallowance made by the CPC u/s 36(1)(va) by rejecting the assessee’s claim u/s 43B on account of payment of PF & ESI after the due date. 3. The assessee has filed an adjournment application, stating therein that its counsel shall not be able to attend the proceedings due to some unavoidable circumstances. We find no merit

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

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

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

disallowance made by the CPC u/s 36(1)(va) by rejecting the assessee’s claim u/s 43B on account of payment of PF & ESI after the due date. 3. The assessee has filed an adjournment application, stating therein that its counsel shall not be able to attend the proceedings due to some unavoidable circumstances. We find no merit

SHRI AMRIK SINGH ,MANSA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 1 (4) , MANSA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

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

rectification petition u/s 154 before the ld.AO. But it was rejected. Being aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) by challenging the order passed u/s 154/143(1) of the Act. But the assessee remained unsuccessful. Being aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before us. 4. The ld. AR for the assessee filed written submissions which are kept

M/S JAMMU COOPERATIVE WHOLE SALE LIMITED,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2 (1), JAMMU

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No. 150/Asr/2020 Assessment Year: 2005-06 M/S Jammu Cooperative Whole Sale The Ito Limited (Super Bazar) Old Hospital Ward-2(1) Road, City Chowk, Jammu- Jammu 180001(J&K)-180001

rectification order for the Assessment Year 2004-2005 be carried forward and adjusted against the income determined for the Year under consideration. 6. It is prayed that the Hon’ble Tribunal may kindly be pleased to allow the appellant to amend or file additional / alternate ground of appeal at the time of hearing. 2. None appeared on behalf