MAX FINANCIAL SERVICE LIMITED ,NAWANSHAHR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is therefore partly allowed

house property is occupied as residence by employees or its directors to 18 A.Y.2015-16 enable them to discharge their functions effectively and the letting out is subservient and incidental to the main business of the assessee, such an occupation amounts to an occupation and user of the property by the assessee itself for the purposes of its business. Clearly

SHRI BILAS CHAND,BATHINDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD1(1), BATHINDA

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No. 399/Asr/2018 Assessment Year: 2016-17

house property on land belonging to his wife. The returns filed on 17.7.2017 and 08.8.2017 could not be regarded as valid returns u/s. 139 of the Act. He, accordingly, assessed the income at Rs.5,23,090, i.e., ‘disallowing

MR.VISHAL BATRA,`LUDHIANA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

house property'. However, this is not an allowable deduction under the head 'capital gains’ as claimed by the assessee under the garb of Expenditure on Transfer'. Therefore, 5 Vishal Batrav. Dy. CIT in view of the clear cut provision providing for deduction of the Interest amount out of rental income, and there being no provision for deduction of this amount

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR vs. SHRI RAJAN BATRA, JALANDHAR

In the result, the ITA No

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

disallowed of Rs. 48,083/-, loss claimed on house property, without considering the facts of the case and without observing

SHRI RAJAN BATRA,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

In the result, the ITA No

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

disallowed of Rs. 48,083/-, loss claimed on house property, without considering the facts of the case and without observing

SHRI RAJESH TIWARI,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

In the result, the ITA No

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

disallowed of Rs. 48,083/-, loss claimed on house property, without considering the facts of the case and without observing

SHRI RAJAN BATRA ,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

In the result, the ITA No

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

disallowed of Rs. 48,083/-, loss claimed on house property, without considering the facts of the case and without observing

SHR RAJESH TIWARI,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

In the result, the ITA No

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

disallowed of Rs. 48,083/-, loss claimed on house property, without considering the facts of the case and without observing

SHRI RAJESH TIWARI,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

In the result, the ITA No

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

disallowed of Rs. 48,083/-, loss claimed on house property, without considering the facts of the case and without observing

SHRI RJAN BATRA,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

In the result, the ITA No

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

disallowed of Rs. 48,083/-, loss claimed on house property, without considering the facts of the case and without observing

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR vs. SHRI RAJAN BATRA, JALANDHAR

In the result, the ITA No

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

disallowed of Rs. 48,083/-, loss claimed on house property, without considering the facts of the case and without observing

SHRI RAJAN BATRA,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENRAL CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

In the result, the ITA No

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

disallowed of Rs. 48,083/-, loss claimed on house property, without considering the facts of the case and without observing

SHRI RAJAN BATRA,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

In the result, the ITA No

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

disallowed of Rs. 48,083/-, loss claimed on house property, without considering the facts of the case and without observing

SHRI RAJESH TIWARI,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

In the result, the ITA No

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

disallowed of Rs. 48,083/-, loss claimed on house property, without considering the facts of the case and without observing

SHRI RAJAN BATRA,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

In the result, the ITA No

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

disallowed of Rs. 48,083/-, loss claimed on house property, without considering the facts of the case and without observing

INDIAN TOOLS TECHNOLOGY CENTRE ,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFICER WARD II(1), JALANDHAR

Bench: Sh. Ravish Sood & Dr. M. L. Meena

disallowed and accordingly, addition of Rs. 1,74,48,000/- was made to the income of the assessee. 4. The aggrieved assessee went before the Ld. CIT(A) who has confirmed the addition by observing as under: 6.3 I have carefully considered the facts of the case and submissions of the appellant. During the relevant assessment year, the assessee

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

SHRI PAWAN K KATIA,BATHINDA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, BATHINDA

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No. 315/Asr/2014 Assessment Year: 2009-10

disallowance of expenditure in a sum of Rs.4,17,433, stated as incurred for maintenance of business premises. 2 Pawan K. Katia v. ITO 3. The assessee returned his income for the year under the heads ‘income from house property