ISHAR INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELPOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,BATHINDA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. No. 686/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2022-23

1) should have been I.T.A. No. 686/Asr/2024 8 Assessment Year: 2022-23 allowed as per provisions of section 72 of the Act because the same is within the period of eight years. 6.2 However, he was fair enough to admit that the assessee committed an inadvertent error during the course of filing the return of income ( for the year under

THE DALLA CO OP AGRI MULTIPURPOSE SOCIETY LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-, PHAGWARA

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 593/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 The Dalla Co-Op. Agri Vs. Ito, Ward (1), Multipurpose Society Ltd. C/O Phagwara. B.D. Bansal & Co. B-641, Ground Floor Near A Block Gurudwara Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar. [Pan:-Aacat2201M] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Lakshay Bansal, Ca Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. Dr Respondent By Date Of Hearing 22.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 23.03.2026

1. That the Revenue has wrongly rejected the deduction claimed by the assessee u/s 80P(2)(d), on account of dividend and interest received on investment made in other cooperative society banks. Thus, order is bad in law. 2. That the Revenue allowed the deduction u/s 80P during the assessment

SHRI TARSAIM SINGH JAMWAL,JAMMU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAMMU

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

161 to 163/Asr/2022 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2019-20 Sh. Tarsaim Singh Jamwal, V. Deputy Commissioner of H. No. 73, Sector-B, Income Tax, Central Circle, Sainik Colony, Jammu Aayakar Bhawan, Railhead (J&K)-180015 Complex, Panama Chowk, Jammu [PAN: ACIPJ 8277A] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Joginder Singh, CA Respondent by : Sh. S. R. Kaushik

SHRI TARSAIM SINGH JAMWAL,JAMMU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAMMU

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

161 to 163/Asr/2022 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2019-20 Sh. Tarsaim Singh Jamwal, V. Deputy Commissioner of H. No. 73, Sector-B, Income Tax, Central Circle, Sainik Colony, Jammu Aayakar Bhawan, Railhead (J&K)-180015 Complex, Panama Chowk, Jammu [PAN: ACIPJ 8277A] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Joginder Singh, CA Respondent by : Sh. S. R. Kaushik

SHRI TARSAIM SINGH JAMWAL,JAMMU vs. DEPUTY COMMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE , JAMMU

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

161 to 163/Asr/2022 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2019-20 Sh. Tarsaim Singh Jamwal, V. Deputy Commissioner of H. No. 73, Sector-B, Income Tax, Central Circle, Sainik Colony, Jammu Aayakar Bhawan, Railhead (J&K)-180015 Complex, Panama Chowk, Jammu [PAN: ACIPJ 8277A] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Joginder Singh, CA Respondent by : Sh. S. R. Kaushik

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, FARIDKOT, BSNL BUILDING vs. M/S VOHRA SOLVEX PVT. LTD, SADIQ ROAD

In the result, C.O. filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

1.e. Rs. 2,45,14,364/- from M/s Universal Foods Corporation, Fazilka and Rs 2,43,78,214/- from M/s Evergreen Sales Corporation, Fazilka) 6.10 Accordingly, addition of Rs. 5,86,710/- (i.e. 1.2% of Rs. 4,88,92,578) is upheld out of the total addition of Rs.6,43,54,912/-.” 6. Regarding the issue of reopening