SHRIMATI JATINDER KAUR(ALIAS AMRITA),JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JALANDHAR

In the result all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

seizure did not disclose any incriminating material. Copy of the decision is enclosed at page no. 11 [please see reverse of page no. 11 ITA 728-731/Amr/2019 7 (e) Pr. CIT & Others vs. Meeta Gutgutia - 395 ITR 526 [Delhi High Court]: It was held that for the years for which no incriminating documents were found, the invocation of section

SHRIMATI JATINDER KAUR ( ALIAS AMRITA),JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JALANDHAR

In the result all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

seizure did not disclose any incriminating material. Copy of the decision is enclosed at page no. 11 [please see reverse of page no. 11 ITA 728-731/Amr/2019 7 (e) Pr. CIT & Others vs. Meeta Gutgutia - 395 ITR 526 [Delhi High Court]: It was held that for the years for which no incriminating documents were found, the invocation of section

SHRIMATI MEERA AGGARWAL,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2, JALANDHAR

Bench: Shri L. P. Sahu & Shri Ravish Sood

section 292C of the Act under which presumption is raised which is rebuttable and the assessee has duly rebutted by submitting affidavit of her father which has been accepted by the department. 12. That the assessee reserves the right to amend, alter or raise an additional grounds of appeal before the disposal of this appeal.” Search and seizure proceedings under

SH. DIDAR SINGH S/O SH. PREM SINGH,KAPURTHALA vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KAPURTHALA

In the result, the assessee succeeds

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N.K.Choudhryita No.542(Asr)/2016 Assessment Year:2008-09

68 when the appellant was not under any legal obligation to maintain books of accounts as he had opted to file the return under section 44AD is bad in the eyes of law. Hence the order deserves to be struck down. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to exercise his judicious acumen in not appreciating that the admission/confession

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

In the result, the ground nos

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

68 of the Act and undisclosed interest amount of Rs.601/- was added back with the total income of the assessee. Aggrieved assessee challenged the jurisdiction of assessment u/s I.T.A. No. 84/Asr/2022 4 Assessment Year: 2012-13 153C/143(3) framed by the ld. AO and the merit before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) upheld the order

SHRI NASIR AHMED RANGSHU,ANANTNAG vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, SRINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

seizure. In the case of Shri Charan Singh vs. Chandra Bhan Singh (AIR 1988 SC 6370) the Hon’ble Apex Court clarified that the burden of proof lies with the party who substantially asserts the affirmative of the issue and not upon the party who denies it. It was further held that the party cannot, on failure to establish

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

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee is allowed

68,\nhowever, Commissioner exercising his\nrevisionary power under section 263\nset aside assessment orders directing\nAssessing Officer to make fresh\nassessment after conducting detailed\nenquiry and upon satisfying on\ngenuneness of transaction - Whether\norder of Commissioner was not based\non irrelevant considerations and\nfurther in present circumstances, he\nwas not obliged to positively indicate\ndeficiencies in assessment order on\nmerits

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PHAGWARA CIRCLE, PHAGWARA vs. SHRI CHUNI LAL, PHILLAUR

In the result, these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

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

Section 133A of the Act can be retracted at the whim and fancy of the assessee. In the light of the aforesaid, the assertions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted.” The learned DR prayed that either the assessment order be restored or the matter may be remanded back to the CIT appeal for fresh adjudication

ASSIATANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX PHAGWARA CIRCLE, PHAGWARA vs. SHRI HARMESH KUMAR, PHILLAUR

In the result, these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

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

Section 133A of the Act can be retracted at the whim and fancy of the assessee. In the light of the aforesaid, the assertions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted.” The learned DR prayed that either the assessment order be restored or the matter may be remanded back to the CIT appeal for fresh adjudication

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, FARIDKOT, BSNL BUILDING vs. M/S VOHRA SOLVEX PVT. LTD, SADIQ ROAD

In the result, C.O. filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

search and seizure operations of group concerns of assessee, Assessing Officer on basis of statement made by a director of assessee opined that assessee-company siphoned off cash by issuing cheques against bagus capital expenses debited in accounts of assessee-company Accordingly, he made an addition on account of bogus purchases which was confirmed by Commissioner (Appeals) However, Tribunal

M/S GURFATEH FILMS,MOHALI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’Ble & Sh. Ravish Soodita No.50/Asr./2018 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 M/S Gurfateh Films, 4140 Vs Dcit, Sector 68, Mohali Central Circle-Ii, Jalandhar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aakfg9328D

68, Mohali Central Circle-II, Jalandhar (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAKFG9328D ITA No.51/Asr./2018 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Gurfateh Films & Sippy Vs DCIT, Grewal Production Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-II, 1013, Sector 67, Mohali Jalandhar (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAECG8982G Assessee by : Sh. Jatinder Sharma, CA Revenue by : Smt. Parvinder Kaur, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 16.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement

M/S. OHRI & BATRA SHOWBIZ PRIVATE LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL-CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

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

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

seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was carried out on dated 05.12.2012. During search operation certain incriminating documents found and seized which belongs to the assessee company. As per the ld. AO the notice u/s 153A was issued and duly served on the assessee and the assessment was completed u/s 153A. The addition was made in the hands

M/S. OHRI & BATRA SHOWBIZ PRIVATE LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

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

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

seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was carried out on dated 05.12.2012. During search operation certain incriminating documents found and seized which belongs to the assessee company. As per the ld. AO the notice u/s 153A was issued and duly served on the assessee and the assessment was completed u/s 153A. The addition was made in the hands

M/S. OHRI & BATRA SHOWBIZ PRIVATE LIMITED ,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

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

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

seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was carried out on dated 05.12.2012. During search operation certain incriminating documents found and seized which belongs to the assessee company. As per the ld. AO the notice u/s 153A was issued and duly served on the assessee and the assessment was completed u/s 153A. The addition was made in the hands

M/S OHRI & BATRA SHOWBIZ PRIVATE LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

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

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

seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was carried out on dated 05.12.2012. During search operation certain incriminating documents found and seized which belongs to the assessee company. As per the ld. AO the notice u/s 153A was issued and duly served on the assessee and the assessment was completed u/s 153A. The addition was made in the hands

SHRI ANKUSH NARULA,AMRITSAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of the

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

68,240/- during the assessment proceeding. The addition was made in two heads; i) cash I.T.A. No.619 & 434/Asr/2018 4 &I.T.A. No.435/Asr/2018 deposit in bank amount of Rs.4,09,500/-. ii) amount of Rs.2,86,250/- on account of investment in the property & the same as unexplained investment. The assessee in appeal proceeding and also before the ITAT also challenged

SHRI GAURAV NARULA ,FEROZPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE , AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of the

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

68,240/- during the assessment proceeding. The addition was made in two heads; i) cash I.T.A. No.619 & 434/Asr/2018 4 &I.T.A. No.435/Asr/2018 deposit in bank amount of Rs.4,09,500/-. ii) amount of Rs.2,86,250/- on account of investment in the property & the same as unexplained investment. The assessee in appeal proceeding and also before the ITAT also challenged

SHRI GAURAV NARULA ,AHMEDABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of the

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

68,240/- during the assessment proceeding. The addition was made in two heads; i) cash I.T.A. No.619 & 434/Asr/2018 4 &I.T.A. No.435/Asr/2018 deposit in bank amount of Rs.4,09,500/-. ii) amount of Rs.2,86,250/- on account of investment in the property & the same as unexplained investment. The assessee in appeal proceeding and also before the ITAT also challenged