THE JASSOMAZARA COOP MULTIPUPOSE SOCIETY LIMITED,NAWANSHAHR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the four appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. Nos. 513 To 516/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21

reassessment proceedings (as reproduced in the assessment order ) and the case is deficient in factual evidence and has proceeded on the basis of incorrect factual representations leading to incorrect findings. 15.4 In our humble opinion, interest of justice will be best served if the matter is remanded back to the Ld. CIT (A), to consider the claim of the assessee

THE JASSOMAZARA COOP MULTIPUPOSE SOCIETY LIMITED,NAWANSAHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the four appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. Nos. 513 To 516/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21

reassessment proceedings (as reproduced in the assessment order ) and the case is deficient in factual evidence and has proceeded on the basis of incorrect factual representations leading to incorrect findings. 15.4 In our humble opinion, interest of justice will be best served if the matter is remanded back to the Ld. CIT (A), to consider the claim of the assessee

SAINIK CO OPERATIVE HOUSE BUILDING SOCIETY LIMITED,JAMMU AND KASHMIR vs. ITO WARD 1(1), JAMMU, JAMMU

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed on the legal issue as indicated above

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. No. 698/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14

d) of the Act would be non-compliant with the IT Act and no such notice could be issued beyond the period as specified under Section 149 (1) of the IT Act. This decision of the Delhi High Court is consistent I.T.A. No. 698/Asr/2024 18 Assessment Year: 2013-14 with our view based on the interpretation of the decisions

SHRI HARSH VARDHAN ,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

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

2) of Section 22 and may proceed to reassess such income, profits or gains". The argument is that the service of the requisite notice on the assessee is a condition precedent to the validity of any reassessment made under Section 34; and if a valid notice is not issued as required, proceedings taken by the Income Tax Officer in pursuance

SH. VISHWA MITTER SEKHRI CHARITABLE SOCIETY,BATALA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, (EXEMPTION), AMRITSAR.

In the result the 2nd ground raised by the assessee is liable to be allowed

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meenai.T.A. No. 75/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: 2007-08

D. R. Date of Hearing 06.07.2021 Date of 13.07.2021 Pronouncement ORDER Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order dated 16.10.2015 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Amritsar in respect of A.Y. 2007-08. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1 That on the facts

M/S LORD MAHAVIRA HOMEOP[ATHIC MEDICAL COLLEGE & HOSPITAL ,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- ( EXEMPTIONS), JALANDHAR

In the result the 2nd ground raised by the assessee is liable to be allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

22 of the paper book and it was brought to the notice of the Ld. CIT that there has been amendment to section 12AA and as per clause (2) of section 12AA, which have placed in the paper book at page 21, where by way of clause (IA) read with clause (2) w.e.f. 1.6.1999, it had stated that

LORD MAHAVIRA HOMOEOPHATIC MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL ,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS), JALANDHAR

In the result the 2nd ground raised by the assessee is liable to be allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

22 of the paper book and it was brought to the notice of the Ld. CIT that there has been amendment to section 12AA and as per clause (2) of section 12AA, which have placed in the paper book at page 21, where by way of clause (IA) read with clause (2) w.e.f. 1.6.1999, it had stated that

M/S LORD MAHAVIR HOMEOPATHIC MEDICAL COLLAGE & HOSPITAL,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- ( EXEMPTIONS), JALANDHAR

In the result the 2nd ground raised by the assessee is liable to be allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

22 of the paper book and it was brought to the notice of the Ld. CIT that there has been amendment to section 12AA and as per clause (2) of section 12AA, which have placed in the paper book at page 21, where by way of clause (IA) read with clause (2) w.e.f. 1.6.1999, it had stated that

SHRI MANMOHAN SINGH ,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, ground no. 4 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.171/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19

section 2(22)(e), deeming provision has been brought in the statute to cover up transaction. The benefit is not individual but solely on business exigency. The deeming provision is always under the control of express provision. It is pertinent to observe that the benefit of expressed provision is covered in deeming provision or not. Considering the factual matrix

SHRI. MANJIT KRISHAN MALHOTRA,ABOHAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BATHINDA

The appeals of the assessee are disposed of in the terms indicated as above

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

reassessment under s. 147. We also do not find anything in the context of s. 273 which would require the words 'regular assessment' to be given a meaning different from the one given by the legislature when these words were defined." 25. I respectfully agree with the views expressed by Chandurkar J. Moreover, there is another aspect to this case

SH. MANJIT KRISHAN MALHOTRA,ABOHAR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCME TAX , BATHINDA

The appeals of the assessee are disposed of in the terms indicated as above

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

reassessment under s. 147. We also do not find anything in the context of s. 273 which would require the words 'regular assessment' to be given a meaning different from the one given by the legislature when these words were defined." 25. I respectfully agree with the views expressed by Chandurkar J. Moreover, there is another aspect to this case

SHRIMATI AMARJIT KAUR W/O BUGAR SINGH,MANSA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(4), MANSA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

d) Gurera Gas Cylinders Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT 258 ITR 170 P&H A perusal of the reasons recorded by respondent No. 2 shows that he had applied his mind to the relevant material and formed a belief that the petitioner had not disclosed complete facts which could enable it to claim deduction under section 80-1 and, therefore

JALALABAD SOLVEX PRIVATE LTD,JALALABAD vs. PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , AMRITSAR-1, PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

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

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

d-oiled,( cake) has been sold to customers and the sales are duly invoiced, recorded in regular books of accounts and has formed a part of the total turnover for the year under appeal. 5. As observed by the AO in the assessment order (page- 4 paragraph –14) the sellers of raw materials ( rice bran) Mr. Avinash Chander

SHRI NAROTAM SINGH,MANSA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -1(4), MANSA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

d) By any other means of transmission of documents as provided by rules made by the Board in this behalf. The above said notice was served through the Notice Server of the Department which is one of the mean of transmission of documents as provided by the rules made by the Board. ii. The necessary satisfaction has also been recorded

SHRI TARLOCHAN SINGH,MANSA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MANSA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

d) By any other means of transmission of documents as provided by rules made by the Board in this behalf. The above said notice was served through the Notice Server of the Department which is one of the mean of transmission of documents as provided by the rules made by the Board. ii. The necessary satisfaction has also been recorded

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

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

22. That before invoking the provisions of section 263, it is very much necessary to adhere to the twin conditions as embedded in section 263. In the circumstances where only one of the conditions is satisfied and the condition is not dealt with, in such circumstances the proceedings initiated vide section 263 are without jurisdiction. That the said twin conditions

IMRAN MAJEED,SRINAGAR vs. ITO, WARD 1, SRINAGAR, SRINAGAR

In the result, the appeal for the Asstt

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

reassessment in case of assessee was initiated after expiry of three years from end of relevant assessment year, sanction for issue of notice under section 148 ought to have been granted by authorities of rank referred to in section 151 (ii) and not by authorities of relatively lower rank under section 151 (i) Whether there was a gross delay

IMRAN MAJEED,SRINAGAR vs. ITO WARD 1, SRINAGAR, SRINAGAR

In the result, the appeal for the Asstt

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

reassessment in case of assessee was initiated after expiry of three years from end of relevant assessment year, sanction for issue of notice under section 148 ought to have been granted by authorities of rank referred to in section 151 (ii) and not by authorities of relatively lower rank under section 151 (i) Whether there was a gross delay