M/S BLUE CITY TOWNSHIP & COLONIZERS,AMRITSAR. vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,, AMRITSAR.

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

234A, 234B and 234C of the Act, and hence adjudicated simultaneously in the following paras. 18. The Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the addition made by the AO by appreciating the merits of the case. The relevant part of the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) order is reproduced as under: “DECISION- The case was reopened on the basis

IDARA AUQAF ASLAMIA TRUST,JAMMU & KASAHMIR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD ANANTNAG, JAMMU AND KASHMIR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

234A at Rs. 12810/- and Rs. 52840/- u/s 234B of the IT Act, 1961, is not at all called for and the same is liable to be cancelled. Alternatively, the interest charged is very high & excessive. 3 Idara Aquaf Islamia Trust v. ITO 8. Any other ground of appeal which may be urged at the time of hearing

MESERS P.D SEKHSARIA TRADING COMPANY ,BATHINDA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the Stay Petition of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryita No. 331/Asr./2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 M/S P. D. Sekhsaria Trading Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income Company Pvt. Ltd., 4242, Tax, Circle-I, Ground Floor, Gurudwara Singh Bathinda, Punjab Sabha Street, Bathinda, Punjab (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcp1720E Sa No. 03/Asr./2019 (In Ita No. 331/Asr./2018: Asstt. Year : 2014-15) M/S P. D. Sekhsaria Trading Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income Company Pvt. Ltd., 4242, Tax, Circle-I, Ground Floor, Gurudwara Singh Bathinda, Punjab Sabha Street, Bathinda, Punjab (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcp1720E Assessee By : Shri. Salil Kapoor, Adv. & Shri. Sanat Kapoor, Adv. Revenue By : Shri. M. P. Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing :20.02.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.03.2019 Order Per N. S. Saini: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Bathinda Dated 26.03.2018. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Addition/Disallowance Of Rs.4,69,47,808/- Made

234A, 234B and 234C of the IT Act and the interest is also wrongly worked out.” 3. The sole issue involved in this appeal is that the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance of loss claimed on account of trading in commodity derivative of Rs.4,69,47,808/- by treating the transactions carried on by the assessee

LATE. SH. GURMAIL. SINGH. S/O. SH. LAL SINGH,SRI MUKATSAR vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

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

68 r.w.s. 115 BBE but taxed it at same rate of 30% as was paid by the assessee under the Head other sources. The higher tax rate of 60% u/s 115BBE was introduced from AY 2017-18. On this exercise carried out by the Ld. AO of replacement of head of income, he imposed penalty for “furnishing of inaccurate particulars

LATE. SH. GURMAIL SINGH S/O. SH. LAL SINGH,SRI MUKATSAR vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

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

68 r.w.s. 115 BBE but taxed it at same rate of 30% as was paid by the assessee under the Head other sources. The higher tax rate of 60% u/s 115BBE was introduced from AY 2017-18. On this exercise carried out by the Ld. AO of replacement of head of income, he imposed penalty for “furnishing of inaccurate particulars

SH. ARASHPREET SINGH S/O LATE SH. GURMAIL SINGH,SHRI MUKATSAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

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

68 r.w.s. 115 BBE but taxed it at same rate of 30% as was paid by the assessee under the Head other sources. The higher tax rate of 60% u/s 115BBE was introduced from AY 2017-18. On this exercise carried out by the Ld. AO of replacement of head of income, he imposed penalty for “furnishing of inaccurate particulars

SH. ARSPREET SINGH . S/O. LATE. SH. GURMAIL SINGH ,MUKTSAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE .II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

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

68 r.w.s. 115 BBE but taxed it at same rate of 30% as was paid by the assessee under the Head other sources. The higher tax rate of 60% u/s 115BBE was introduced from AY 2017-18. On this exercise carried out by the Ld. AO of replacement of head of income, he imposed penalty for “furnishing of inaccurate particulars

SH. ARASHPREET SINGH S/O. LATE SH. GURMAIL SINGH,MUKTSAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CERCLE- II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

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

68 r.w.s. 115 BBE but taxed it at same rate of 30% as was paid by the assessee under the Head other sources. The higher tax rate of 60% u/s 115BBE was introduced from AY 2017-18. On this exercise carried out by the Ld. AO of replacement of head of income, he imposed penalty for “furnishing of inaccurate particulars

SH. ARASHPREET SINGH S/O. LATE SH. GURMAIL SINGH,MUKTSAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

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

68 r.w.s. 115 BBE but taxed it at same rate of 30% as was paid by the assessee under the Head other sources. The higher tax rate of 60% u/s 115BBE was introduced from AY 2017-18. On this exercise carried out by the Ld. AO of replacement of head of income, he imposed penalty for “furnishing of inaccurate particulars

SH. ARASHPREET SINGH. S/O.LATE.SH. GURMAIL SINGH,MUKTSAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX .CIRCLE-II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

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

68 r.w.s. 115 BBE but taxed it at same rate of 30% as was paid by the assessee under the Head other sources. The higher tax rate of 60% u/s 115BBE was introduced from AY 2017-18. On this exercise carried out by the Ld. AO of replacement of head of income, he imposed penalty for “furnishing of inaccurate particulars

LATE. SH. GUMAIL SINGH . S/O. SH. LAL SINGH,MUKTSAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

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

68 r.w.s. 115 BBE but taxed it at same rate of 30% as was paid by the assessee under the Head other sources. The higher tax rate of 60% u/s 115BBE was introduced from AY 2017-18. On this exercise carried out by the Ld. AO of replacement of head of income, he imposed penalty for “furnishing of inaccurate particulars

LATE. SH. GURMAIL. SINGH S/O. SH. LAL SINGH,SHRI MUKAT SAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF 9INCOME TAX. CIRCLE -II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

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

68 r.w.s. 115 BBE but taxed it at same rate of 30% as was paid by the assessee under the Head other sources. The higher tax rate of 60% u/s 115BBE was introduced from AY 2017-18. On this exercise carried out by the Ld. AO of replacement of head of income, he imposed penalty for “furnishing of inaccurate particulars

LATE. SH. GURMAIL SINGH.S/O. LATE SH. LAL SINGH,SRI MUKTSAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -II, BATHINDA

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

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

68 r.w.s. 115 BBE but taxed it at same rate of 30% as was paid by the assessee under the Head other sources. The higher tax rate of 60% u/s 115BBE was introduced from AY 2017-18. On this exercise carried out by the Ld. AO of replacement of head of income, he imposed penalty for “furnishing of inaccurate particulars