SHRI PAWAN KUMAR,JALANDHAR CANTT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the bunch of appeals are allowed

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

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 2. At the outset, the LD. Counsel submitted identical facts, the case in ITA No. 16/Asr/2023 may be taken as a lead case. There was search and seizure proceedings u/s 132 on 25.09.2019 conducted on the premises of M/s AIRWINGS SERVICES PVT. LTD in which the appellant is an employee. A search

SHRI PAWAN KUMAR ,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the bunch of appeals are allowed

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

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 2. At the outset, the LD. Counsel submitted identical facts, the case in ITA No. 16/Asr/2023 may be taken as a lead case. There was search and seizure proceedings u/s 132 on 25.09.2019 conducted on the premises of M/s AIRWINGS SERVICES PVT. LTD in which the appellant is an employee. A search

SHRI PAWAN KUMAR,JALANDHAR CANTT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the bunch of appeals are allowed

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

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 2. At the outset, the LD. Counsel submitted identical facts, the case in ITA No. 16/Asr/2023 may be taken as a lead case. There was search and seizure proceedings u/s 132 on 25.09.2019 conducted on the premises of M/s AIRWINGS SERVICES PVT. LTD in which the appellant is an employee. A search

SHRI PAWAN KUMAR,JALANDHAR CANTT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the bunch of appeals are allowed

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

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 2. At the outset, the LD. Counsel submitted identical facts, the case in ITA No. 16/Asr/2023 may be taken as a lead case. There was search and seizure proceedings u/s 132 on 25.09.2019 conducted on the premises of M/s AIRWINGS SERVICES PVT. LTD in which the appellant is an employee. A search

SH. SHAM LAL,CHANDIGARH vs. D.C.I.T, CENTRAL CIRCLE , AMRITSAR

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

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

section 271 AAA and as such the penalty levied by the DCIT at Rs.3545120/- should have been deleted. 7. That the authorities below did not appreciate that there was unfavourable and tight financial position in the market and there was no malafide intention on the part of the assessee for delaying the payment. There was reasonable and sufficient cause

MILLENNIUM REAL ESTATE DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD,JALANDHAR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical

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

section 69A of the Act and hence, the income of Rs. 1,10,00,000/- declared by the assessee was held taxable as deemed income u/s 69A of the Act and not as income from ‘Business' with Penalty proceedings u/s 271 AAA of the Act. 4. In appeal, CIT appeal has confirmed the addition by observing as under: 3.1 Grounds

SMT. KRISHNA DEVI EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE SOCIETY ,HOSHIARPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal is dismissed both being barred by time limitation and on merits also

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

4. Brief fact of the case is that the assessment of the assessee was completed u/s 153A of the Act related to search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act which was conducted at the premises of the assessee on dated18.02.2010. The penalty was issued for noncompliance of notice u/s 142(1) which was issued on 18.03.2011. The penalty

SMT. KRISHNA DEVI EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE SOCIETY ,HOSHIARPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal is dismissed both being barred by time limitation and on merits also

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

4. Brief fact of the case is that the assessment of the assessee was completed u/s 153A of the Act related to search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act which was conducted at the premises of the assessee on dated18.02.2010. The penalty was issued for noncompliance of notice u/s 142(1) which was issued on 18.03.2011. The penalty

SMT. KRISHNA DEVI EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE SOCIETY ,HOSIARPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal is dismissed both being barred by time limitation and on merits also

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

4. Brief fact of the case is that the assessment of the assessee was completed u/s 153A of the Act related to search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act which was conducted at the premises of the assessee on dated18.02.2010. The penalty was issued for noncompliance of notice u/s 142(1) which was issued on 18.03.2011. The penalty

SMT KRISHNA DEVI EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE SOCIETY ,HOSHIARPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal is dismissed both being barred by time limitation and on merits also

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

4. Brief fact of the case is that the assessment of the assessee was completed u/s 153A of the Act related to search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act which was conducted at the premises of the assessee on dated18.02.2010. The penalty was issued for noncompliance of notice u/s 142(1) which was issued on 18.03.2011. The penalty

SMT KRISHNA DEVI EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE SOCIETY ,HOSHIARPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOE TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal is dismissed both being barred by time limitation and on merits also

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

4. Brief fact of the case is that the assessment of the assessee was completed u/s 153A of the Act related to search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act which was conducted at the premises of the assessee on dated18.02.2010. The penalty was issued for noncompliance of notice u/s 142(1) which was issued on 18.03.2011. The penalty

SMT KRISHNA DEVI EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE SOCIETY ,HOSHIARPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal is dismissed both being barred by time limitation and on merits also

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

4. Brief fact of the case is that the assessment of the assessee was completed u/s 153A of the Act related to search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act which was conducted at the premises of the assessee on dated18.02.2010. The penalty was issued for noncompliance of notice u/s 142(1) which was issued on 18.03.2011. The penalty

SMT. PRITPAL KAUR,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(3), JALANDHAR

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

4 Pritpal Kaur v. ITO appellant appeared before the AO in the penalty proceedings but not mentioned about the sale of the property at which the appellant was residing earlier and even in Column No. 11 of the Form No. 35, no such mention has been made by the appellant. Now, in the appeal proceedings the AR of the appellant

SHRI DARSHAN PAL SINGH GAREWAL,LUDHIANA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

132 of the Act, in the case of Sh. Darshan Pal Grewal (the appellant assessee) was carried upon on 05.12.2012. Thereafter notice u/s 153A of the Act was issued to the assessee and finally the assessment was completed u/s 153A/143(3) on 27.03.2015 with an addition of Rs. 27,72,800/-. Penalty u/s 271AAB of the Act was also initiated

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA vs. DMR BUILDERS PVT LTD, BATHINDA

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed being devoid of merits

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. Nos. 292 & 293/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18

Penalty proceedings u/s 271 (1)(c) of the Act for concealing particulars of income are simultaneously initiated.” 8. The matter was carried in appeal before the first appellate authority and the Ld. CIT (A), has considered all materials on record and has arrived at the conclusion that in absence of any material brought on record there is not even

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA vs. DMR BUILDERS PVT LTD, BATHINDA

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed being devoid of merits

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. Nos. 292 & 293/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18

Penalty proceedings u/s 271 (1)(c) of the Act for concealing particulars of income are simultaneously initiated.” 8. The matter was carried in appeal before the first appellate authority and the Ld. CIT (A), has considered all materials on record and has arrived at the conclusion that in absence of any material brought on record there is not even

SHRI JASBIR SINGH ,AMRITSAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, appeal of the assesseeITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No. 133/Asr/2022 Assessment Year: 2019-20

Penalty proceedings u/s 271 AAC of the I.T.Act, 1961 is separately being initiated being deemed income as per provisions of section 68 of the I.T.Act. [ Addition: Rs.27,20,300/-]” I.T.A. No. 133/Asr/2022 8 Assessment Year: 2019-20 5.2 The ld. AR further placed a detailed statement related to denial of reasonable opportunity during assessment proceeding related to issuance