SHRI CHANDAN BHARDWAJ,TARN TARAN vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-1, AMRITSAR

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

u/s 271(1)(c) read with section 274 of the Act is bad in law as it does not specify 7 ITAs No.591/ASR/2017 and 455/ASR/2018 whether the penalty have been initiated for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 2.2 Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench

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

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

u/s 271F of IT Act amounting to Rs.5,000. The assessee filed appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) but CIT (A) has confirmed the penalty on two grounds. 1. That the AR of appellant appear before the AO in the penalty proceedings but has not mentioned about the sale of the property at which the appellant was residing

ESTATE OF SH. JAGIR SINGH BHULLAR,AMRITSAR. vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TARN TARAN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.306/Asr/2014 & 591/Asr/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Estate Of Sh. Jagir Singh Bhullar Vs. Income Tax Officer, Through S. Jasbir—Singh Ward-1(3), Bhullar, Tarn Taran, E-250 Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar, Punjab. Punjab.

Penalty order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3)/147 and under section 271(1) (c ),respectively, of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the ‘Act’). 2. Since these two appeals relate to the same assessee and same assessment year, therefore these have been clubbed and heard together and a consolidated order is being passed

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TARN TARAN vs. ESTATE OF LATE SH. JAGIR SINGH BHULLAR, TARN TARAN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.306/Asr/2014 & 591/Asr/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Estate Of Sh. Jagir Singh Bhullar Vs. Income Tax Officer, Through S. Jasbir—Singh Ward-1(3), Bhullar, Tarn Taran, E-250 Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar, Punjab. Punjab.

Penalty order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3)/147 and under section 271(1) (c ),respectively, of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the ‘Act’). 2. Since these two appeals relate to the same assessee and same assessment year, therefore these have been clubbed and heard together and a consolidated order is being passed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE- 1, BATHINDA vs. SHRI GURDAS GARG, BATHINDA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the appeals

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

penalty proceedings u/ s 271(l)(c) are initiated simultaneously for furnishing inaccurate particulars of the income.” I.T.A. Nos.506/Asr/2019 8 & Others 7. The ld. DR vehemently argued and mentioned that the transaction related to “high sea sale” is speculative transaction and the loss earned from this transaction would be treated as speculative loss u/s 43(5) of the Act. There

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA vs. MEASAGE GURDAS AGRO PRIVATE LIMITED, BATHINDA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the appeals

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

penalty proceedings u/ s 271(l)(c) are initiated simultaneously for furnishing inaccurate particulars of the income.” I.T.A. Nos.506/Asr/2019 8 & Others 7. The ld. DR vehemently argued and mentioned that the transaction related to “high sea sale” is speculative transaction and the loss earned from this transaction would be treated as speculative loss u/s 43(5) of the Act. There

MEASAGE GURDAS AGRO PRIVATE LIMITED,BATHINDA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE- 1 , BATHINDA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the appeals

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

penalty proceedings u/ s 271(l)(c) are initiated simultaneously for furnishing inaccurate particulars of the income.” I.T.A. Nos.506/Asr/2019 8 & Others 7. The ld. DR vehemently argued and mentioned that the transaction related to “high sea sale” is speculative transaction and the loss earned from this transaction would be treated as speculative loss u/s 43(5) of the Act. There

SHRI GURDAS GARG,BATHINDA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE- 1, BATHINDA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the appeals

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

penalty proceedings u/ s 271(l)(c) are initiated simultaneously for furnishing inaccurate particulars of the income.” I.T.A. Nos.506/Asr/2019 8 & Others 7. The ld. DR vehemently argued and mentioned that the transaction related to “high sea sale” is speculative transaction and the loss earned from this transaction would be treated as speculative loss u/s 43(5) of the Act. There

MEASAGE G. G. CONTINENTAL TRADERS PRIVATE LIMITED,BATHINDA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the appeals

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

penalty proceedings u/ s 271(l)(c) are initiated simultaneously for furnishing inaccurate particulars of the income.” I.T.A. Nos.506/Asr/2019 8 & Others 7. The ld. DR vehemently argued and mentioned that the transaction related to “high sea sale” is speculative transaction and the loss earned from this transaction would be treated as speculative loss u/s 43(5) of the Act. There

SHRI GURDAS GARG,BATHINDA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the appeals

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

penalty proceedings u/ s 271(l)(c) are initiated simultaneously for furnishing inaccurate particulars of the income.” I.T.A. Nos.506/Asr/2019 8 & Others 7. The ld. DR vehemently argued and mentioned that the transaction related to “high sea sale” is speculative transaction and the loss earned from this transaction would be treated as speculative loss u/s 43(5) of the Act. There

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA vs. MEASAGE G.G.OILS AND FAITS PRIVATE LIMITED, BATHINDA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the appeals

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

penalty proceedings u/ s 271(l)(c) are initiated simultaneously for furnishing inaccurate particulars of the income.” I.T.A. Nos.506/Asr/2019 8 & Others 7. The ld. DR vehemently argued and mentioned that the transaction related to “high sea sale” is speculative transaction and the loss earned from this transaction would be treated as speculative loss u/s 43(5) of the Act. There

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE- 1 , BATHINDA vs. MEASAGE G. G CONTINENTAL TRADERS PRIVATE LIMITED, BATHINDA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the appeals

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

penalty proceedings u/ s 271(l)(c) are initiated simultaneously for furnishing inaccurate particulars of the income.” I.T.A. Nos.506/Asr/2019 8 & Others 7. The ld. DR vehemently argued and mentioned that the transaction related to “high sea sale” is speculative transaction and the loss earned from this transaction would be treated as speculative loss u/s 43(5) of the Act. There

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA vs. SHRI GURDAS GARG, BATHINDA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the appeals

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

penalty proceedings u/ s 271(l)(c) are initiated simultaneously for furnishing inaccurate particulars of the income.” I.T.A. Nos.506/Asr/2019 8 & Others 7. The ld. DR vehemently argued and mentioned that the transaction related to “high sea sale” is speculative transaction and the loss earned from this transaction would be treated as speculative loss u/s 43(5) of the Act. There

MEASAGE G. G. OILS AND FATS PRIVATE LIMITED,BATHINDA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE- 1, BATHINDA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the appeals

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

penalty proceedings u/ s 271(l)(c) are initiated simultaneously for furnishing inaccurate particulars of the income.” I.T.A. Nos.506/Asr/2019 8 & Others 7. The ld. DR vehemently argued and mentioned that the transaction related to “high sea sale” is speculative transaction and the loss earned from this transaction would be treated as speculative loss u/s 43(5) of the Act. There

SH GAUTAM SETH,BATALA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, BATALA

In the result, the Ground Nos

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

Section 40A(3) without appreciating the fact that the provision of 40A(3) is not applicable where the Gross Profit Ratio is estimated u/ s. 44AF. 5. That the AO and CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in making an addition of Rs. 14,88,263/- u/s. 44AF without appreciating the fact that the transaction of purchase