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

section 68. Copy of the decision is enclosed at page no. 91. The view of the Delhi High Court in this case has been endorsed by the Supreme Court as the SLP of the revenue was dismissed and stands reported at 380 ITR 64 (Statute). Copy of the order is enclosed at page no. 92. In view

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

section 68. Copy of the decision is enclosed at page no. 91. The view of the Delhi High Court in this case has been endorsed by the Supreme Court as the SLP of the revenue was dismissed and stands reported at 380 ITR 64 (Statute). Copy of the order is enclosed at page no. 92. In view

SHRI MANJIT SINGH S/O SHRI.GURDEV SINGH KHERA,MOGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER -II, MOGA

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

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

Section 68 of the Act in the case of the Appellant as the Appellant had never maintained any books of Accounts for the year under consideration. 7. That the Appellant craves leave to add/alter any of the grounds of Appeal before or during the course of Appellate Proceeding.” 2. Brief fact of the case is thatthe assessment was completed

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

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

section 68. 20. Per contra, the Ld. DR supported the impugned order. He contended that the AO observed that the amounts which the assessee paid over and above the prices mentioned in the registries of purchase of land by the assessee company during FY 2008-09 were amounting to a sum of Rs 216,23,000/-, being the cash

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(5), JALANDHAR vs. SHRI NITIN PAL SINGH , JALANDHAR

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

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

68 and 69 of Income-tax Act, 1961. 6. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on the facts in the case in ignoring the section of the Assessing Officer, in his remand report, wherein he pointed out a number: of credit entries which did not tally with submission of the assessee and were not verifiable

SHRI. NITIN PAL SINGH ,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(3), JALANDHAR

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

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

68 and 69 of Income-tax Act, 1961. 6. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on the facts in the case in ignoring the section of the Assessing Officer, in his remand report, wherein he pointed out a number: of credit entries which did not tally with submission of the assessee and were not verifiable

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 (1), JALANDHAR vs. SHRI ANIL KUMAR WASON, JALANDHAR

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

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No. 164/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15

section 143(2), notice was issued by the ld. AO. In scrutiny assessment, assessee filed relevant documents before the ld. AO specially all the Sundry Creditors of the assessee amounts to Rs.5,68,93,270/-. The assessment was completed u/s. 143(3). The ld. AO made an addition amount of Rs.5,68.93,270/- I.T.A. No.164/Asr/2023 3 Assessment Year

SHRI GURBINDER SINGH MAHAL,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-IV ( 2), AMRITSAR

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

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

section 250(4)] through banks instead of disposing off the appeal for non-appearance without adjudicating on merits. 7. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, or alter any of the grounds of appeal.” I.T.A. No.22/Asr/2023 4 Assessment Year: 2014-15 2. The case was called for hearing, first, the ld. DR filed an adjournment petition before the bench

SHRI HARPHOOL BHARDWAJ,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFICER, NAKODAR, NAKODAR

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

46A is not satisfied in this case However, as directed, in order to examine the affidavit of assessee's brother ShriPranNath, a letter was issued to him on 06.06.2018 requesting him to attend the office on 15.06.2018. ShriPranNath attended the office on 27.06.2018 and his statement was recorded (copy enclosed). I.T.A No. 551/ASR/2018 3 Taking into consideration the facts stated

MEASAGE GURU NANAK MILK PRODUCTS ,FEROZEPUR CANTT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the particular issue u/s 153C of the Act related in ITA

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

46A of the IT Rule 1962. The appeal orders were passed accordingly. Being aggrieved the assessee filed an appeal before us. Issue Related Section 153D 5. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, Mr. Sarna vehemently argued only on the legal grounds. The factual grounds are not pressed. During the hearing the ld. Counsel produced the copy of the approval

MEASAGE GURU NANAK MILK PRODUCTS ,FEROZEPURCANTT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the particular issue u/s 153C of the Act related in ITA

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

46A of the IT Rule 1962. The appeal orders were passed accordingly. Being aggrieved the assessee filed an appeal before us. Issue Related Section 153D 5. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, Mr. Sarna vehemently argued only on the legal grounds. The factual grounds are not pressed. During the hearing the ld. Counsel produced the copy of the approval

MEASAGE GURU NANAK MILK PRODUCTS,FEROZEPUR CANTT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the particular issue u/s 153C of the Act related in ITA

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

46A of the IT Rule 1962. The appeal orders were passed accordingly. Being aggrieved the assessee filed an appeal before us. Issue Related Section 153D 5. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, Mr. Sarna vehemently argued only on the legal grounds. The factual grounds are not pressed. During the hearing the ld. Counsel produced the copy of the approval

M/S. PINKU BATRA ,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

In the result, the particular issue u/s 153C of the Act related in ITA

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

46A of the IT Rule 1962. The appeal orders were passed accordingly. Being aggrieved the assessee filed an appeal before us. Issue Related Section 153D 5. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, Mr. Sarna vehemently argued only on the legal grounds. The factual grounds are not pressed. During the hearing the ld. Counsel produced the copy of the approval

M/S. PINKU BATRA ,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

In the result, the particular issue u/s 153C of the Act related in ITA

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

46A of the IT Rule 1962. The appeal orders were passed accordingly. Being aggrieved the assessee filed an appeal before us. Issue Related Section 153D 5. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, Mr. Sarna vehemently argued only on the legal grounds. The factual grounds are not pressed. During the hearing the ld. Counsel produced the copy of the approval

SHRI RAVI NARULA ,FEROZE PUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTER CIRCLE , AMRITSAR

In the result, the particular issue u/s 153C of the Act related in ITA

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

46A of the IT Rule 1962. The appeal orders were passed accordingly. Being aggrieved the assessee filed an appeal before us. Issue Related Section 153D 5. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, Mr. Sarna vehemently argued only on the legal grounds. The factual grounds are not pressed. During the hearing the ld. Counsel produced the copy of the approval

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

In the result, the particular issue u/s 153C of the Act related in ITA

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

46A of the IT Rule 1962. The appeal orders were passed accordingly. Being aggrieved the assessee filed an appeal before us. Issue Related Section 153D 5. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, Mr. Sarna vehemently argued only on the legal grounds. The factual grounds are not pressed. During the hearing the ld. Counsel produced the copy of the approval

M/S. PINKU BATRA ,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

In the result, the particular issue u/s 153C of the Act related in ITA

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

46A of the IT Rule 1962. The appeal orders were passed accordingly. Being aggrieved the assessee filed an appeal before us. Issue Related Section 153D 5. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, Mr. Sarna vehemently argued only on the legal grounds. The factual grounds are not pressed. During the hearing the ld. Counsel produced the copy of the approval

M/S. PINKU BATRA ,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

In the result, the particular issue u/s 153C of the Act related in ITA

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

46A of the IT Rule 1962. The appeal orders were passed accordingly. Being aggrieved the assessee filed an appeal before us. Issue Related Section 153D 5. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, Mr. Sarna vehemently argued only on the legal grounds. The factual grounds are not pressed. During the hearing the ld. Counsel produced the copy of the approval