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

Bench: Sh. Vikram Singh Yadav & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

69B, read with Section 115BBE, are not applicable in the instant case 32 17. Per Contra the Ld DR relied on the order of the Ld PCIT, and argued that he was justified in setting aside the order due to the fact that the order passed u/s 143(3) was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue

SHRI RAJ KUMAR ( M/S RADHIKA SALES CORP ), AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 3 (3), AMRITSAR

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

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

disallowance. ii. Paramount Impex v. AC IT, Circle-J, Ludhiana [2020] 117 taxmann.com 802 (Chandigarh Trib.) Section 145 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 - Method of accounting - Rejection of Account (Non-maintenance of stock register) - Assessment year 2013-14 - Whether where assessee was dealing in a large number of small items and it was consistently following method of determining stock

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-I, JALANDHAR vs. SHRI SUMAN AGGARWAL, JALANDHAR

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed being infructuous

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meenai.T.A. No. 101/Asr/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10

69B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ignoring the content of the seized document. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is right in allowing relief to the assessee when seized document clearly indicates that the rate recorded in the registered sale deed was much lower than the rate mentioned in the agreement

SH. MANINDER SINGH CHEEMA,HOSHIARPUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, HOSHIARPUR

In the result, the assessee appeal is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meenai.T.A. No. 702/Asr/2013 Assessment Year: 2009-10

disallowance of Rs. 14,15,788/- confirmed by learned CIT(A) is uncalled for since Rs. 83,00,000/- were surrendered towards development cost of Kartar Estate Pvt. Ltd. It was submitted that this amount has to, be added in the trading account and would result in increased cost of saleable area of the year under consideration. 11. Per contra