SH.GAURAV AGGARWAL,GURDAS PUR vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

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

section 260-A of the Act, 1961. 5. In the result, this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed”. The SLP was filed against this order and was dismissed by the Hon’ble Apex Court [2021] 130 taxmann.com 177 (SC). Alternatively, the ld. DR argued and specifically raised the voice against the share script M/s Kappac Pharma

SH. RAMAN KUMAR AGGARWAL,GURDAS PUR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

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

section 260-A of the Act, 1961. 5. In the result, this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed”. The SLP was filed against this order and was dismissed by the Hon’ble Apex Court [2021] 130 taxmann.com 177 (SC). Alternatively, the ld. DR argued and specifically raised the voice against the share script M/s Kappac Pharma

SMT. DEEPTI AGGARWAL,GURDAS PUR vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

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

section 260-A of the Act, 1961. 5. In the result, this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed”. The SLP was filed against this order and was dismissed by the Hon’ble Apex Court [2021] 130 taxmann.com 177 (SC). Alternatively, the ld. DR argued and specifically raised the voice against the share script M/s Kappac Pharma

SHREE AMAR KSHATRIYA SABHA CHARITABLE TRUST ,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- ( EXEMPTIONS), JAMMU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. No. 492/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21

260/- after claiming exemptions u/s 11 and 10(23C), along with a belatedly filed audit report in Form 10B uploaded and approved on the same date. 3.1 The assessment has been completed by CPC, Bangalore u/s 143(1) on a total income of Rs. 39,49,400/- without allowing the claim for exemptions due to the reasons that the statutory

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

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

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee is allowed

disallowance - Cash payment exceeding prescribed limit\n(Rule 6DD) - Assessment year 2013-14 - Assessee-company was engaged in business of\nmanufacturing of dairy products Assessee filed return and Assessing Officer passed\nassessment order after making certain additions - Principal Commissioner observed that\nassessee made cash payment in excess of Rs. 20,000 to milk sellers who were traders and\nsaid sellers