M/S GOODWIL TRADERS,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SRINAGAR

In the result, these three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. A.O had grossly erred in law & on facts of the case by not accepting the actual gross profit of the assessee which was calculated as per the books of accounts of the assessee. 2. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case

GOODWILL TRADERS.,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(1), SRINAGAR

In the result, these three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. A.O had grossly erred in law & on facts of the case by not accepting the actual gross profit of the assessee which was calculated as per the books of accounts of the assessee. 2. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case

GOODWILL TRADERS,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(1), SRINAGAR

In the result, these three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. A.O had grossly erred in law & on facts of the case by not accepting the actual gross profit of the assessee which was calculated as per the books of accounts of the assessee. 2. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) CIRCLE-3, FEROZEPUR vs. MEASAGE OM SONS MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, FARIDKOT

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

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

disallowance was sustained on account of excess claim of depreciation. 3.5. Being aggrieved on appeal order the revenue has filed appeal before us by challenging the relief granted on amount of Rs. 3,38,60,465/- and Rs. 2,38,149/- by the ld. CIT(A). 4. The ld. AR filed written submissions which are kept in the record

M/S. CHAUDHARY ENTERPRISES,,BATHINDA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, BATHINDA

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed on the afore-said terms

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 578/Asr/2013 Assessment Year: 2008-09

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ hereinafter) dated 02.12.2010 for Assessment Year (AY) 2008-09. 2. The first issue raised in appeal is qua an addition in the sum of Rs.4,14,900/- on account of difference in the charges receivable as per the assessee’s accounts and that as per the tax deduction statement

SH. BARAT PAL SOOD,,PHAGWARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,, PHAGWARA

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

disallowance of interest on interest free loan/advance to daughter at Rs.88,855/-, on account of undeclared house property Income at Rs.1,17,600/- and on account of undeclared bank interest Income at Rs.34,242/-, respectively. Accordingly, the AO 3 completed the assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act dated 23.12.2011 assessing total income at Rs.22,55,590/-. 4. Feeling aggrieved from