THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. M/S BROADWAYS OVERSEAS LTD, JALANDHAR

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

21. Heard rival contentions, perused the material on record, impugned order, written submission and case law cited before us. Admittedly, there are two issues involved with regard to transfer pricing adjustments for interest on loan advanced to AE in foreign currency and interest on outstanding receivables in the account of AE. The Ld. CIT(A) has discussed that

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. M/S BROADWAY OVERSEAS LTD., JALANDHAR

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

21. Heard rival contentions, perused the material on record, impugned order, written submission and case law cited before us. Admittedly, there are two issues involved with regard to transfer pricing adjustments for interest on loan advanced to AE in foreign currency and interest on outstanding receivables in the account of AE. The Ld. CIT(A) has discussed that

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. M/S BROADWAY OVERSEAS LTD., JALANDHAR

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

21. Heard rival contentions, perused the material on record, impugned order, written submission and case law cited before us. Admittedly, there are two issues involved with regard to transfer pricing adjustments for interest on loan advanced to AE in foreign currency and interest on outstanding receivables in the account of AE. The Ld. CIT(A) has discussed that

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. M/S BROADWAY OVERSEAS LTD., JALANDHAR

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

21. Heard rival contentions, perused the material on record, impugned order, written submission and case law cited before us. Admittedly, there are two issues involved with regard to transfer pricing adjustments for interest on loan advanced to AE in foreign currency and interest on outstanding receivables in the account of AE. The Ld. CIT(A) has discussed that

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. M/S BROADWAY OVERSEAS LTD., JALANDHAR

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

21. Heard rival contentions, perused the material on record, impugned order, written submission and case law cited before us. Admittedly, there are two issues involved with regard to transfer pricing adjustments for interest on loan advanced to AE in foreign currency and interest on outstanding receivables in the account of AE. The Ld. CIT(A) has discussed that

BRODAWAYS OVERSEAS LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

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

21. Heard rival contentions, perused the material on record, impugned order, written submission and case law cited before us. Admittedly, there are two issues involved with regard to transfer pricing adjustments for interest on loan advanced to AE in foreign currency and interest on outstanding receivables in the account of AE. The Ld. CIT(A) has discussed that

SATIA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUKTSAR vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE I, BATHINDA, BATHINDA

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

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

Section 80-IA(8) - HELD THAT:- We are of the considered view that the method adopted by the Assessee for determining the arm's length price was correct, and the adjustments made by the AO were not in line with the applicable provisions of the Income Tax Act. Therefore, in this situation, and in our opinion, the addition made

M/S. SATIA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUKTSAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA

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

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

21 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Section 115BBG deals with Income from sale of Carbon Credit does not take within its ambit the income from sale of RECs/ESCs: '115BBG, Tax on income from transfer of carbon credits. ~{i) Where the toad income of an assessee includes any income by way of transfer of carbon credits, the income-tax payable shall

MAX FINANCIAL SERVICE LIMITED ,NAWANSHAHR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is therefore partly allowed

Price Acquisition Shares Acquisition share during the year 1-12-2005 36 7,21,290 500 euros 878.64 33,388 31-08-2006 2 33,27,46,972 500 euros 31-03-2014 2323 7,23,24,900 500 euros 878.64 20,41,087 2361 The above table shows the adjustments made by the assesses to book both short term

M/S. JAMMU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,,JAMMU ( J&K) vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMMU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the department is dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryita No. 498/Asr./2013 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Jammu Development Authority, Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vikas Bhawan, Rail Head Tax, Circle-I, Complex, Jammu, J & K Jammu (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadfj7335A Ita No. 494/Asr./2013 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs Jammu Development Authority, Tax, Circle-I, Vikas Bhawan, Rail Head Jammu Complex, Jammu, J & K (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcp1720E Assessee By : Shri. R. K. Gupta, Ca & Shri. Vasu Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Shri. M. P. Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing :21.02.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2019 Order Per N. S. Saini: These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 06.05.2013, Jammu.

price at market rate prevailing in the locality to be fixed by the Revenue Minister on the recommendations of the concerned Dy. Commissioner except in case where market rate of a tertian piece of land of either kees or more than that falling in the locality. In such a case market rates shall be fixed with concurrence of Finance Department

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMMU vs. M/S. JAMMU DEVELPMENT AUTHORITY,, JAMMU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the department is dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryita No. 498/Asr./2013 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Jammu Development Authority, Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vikas Bhawan, Rail Head Tax, Circle-I, Complex, Jammu, J & K Jammu (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadfj7335A Ita No. 494/Asr./2013 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs Jammu Development Authority, Tax, Circle-I, Vikas Bhawan, Rail Head Jammu Complex, Jammu, J & K (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcp1720E Assessee By : Shri. R. K. Gupta, Ca & Shri. Vasu Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Shri. M. P. Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing :21.02.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2019 Order Per N. S. Saini: These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 06.05.2013, Jammu.

price at market rate prevailing in the locality to be fixed by the Revenue Minister on the recommendations of the concerned Dy. Commissioner except in case where market rate of a tertian piece of land of either kees or more than that falling in the locality. In such a case market rates shall be fixed with concurrence of Finance Department

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE), JAMMU vs. ANITA KAPAHI, JAMMU

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed being devoid of merits

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

21 kanals and 8 marlas at khasra no. 940 min., mutation no. 1698 area chowadi at a total price of Rs.7,57,56,000/- which was the set forth value as per the deed of conveyance(as well as the circle rate),the payment of which has been made through bank channel and reflected in bank accounts. However, the assessee

NASA AGRO INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,FAZILKA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-II, BATHINDA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

transferred by the assessee to the M/s Devinder Kumar Deepesh Kumar ,as an accommodation entry for recording of bogus purchase, because 4 I.T.A. No. 236/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12 as per the AO the physical movement of goods could not be proved, in absence of any Bilty, weighment slip of goods, octroi receipts, and in absence of any proof

SMT. SATYAWATI MARWAHA THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SH, CHANDER SHEIKHAR MARWAHA,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal for Asstt

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

21. We further note that the assessee has indulged in regular trading activity of various scripts during the same period , through the same broker ( dhanleela being one such script ) and AO has not conducted any enquiry against the stock broker “Max Growth Capital Private Limited” and has brought nothing on record to dispute the evidences submitted by the assessee

SMT. SATYAWATI MARWAHA THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SH. CHANDER SHEIKHAR MARWAHA,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal for Asstt

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

21. We further note that the assessee has indulged in regular trading activity of various scripts during the same period , through the same broker ( dhanleela being one such script ) and AO has not conducted any enquiry against the stock broker “Max Growth Capital Private Limited” and has brought nothing on record to dispute the evidences submitted by the assessee

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 deposited

SMT. GURJEET KAUR,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- IV (2),, JALANDHAR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our

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

price of the property. This fact of receipt of on-money under the agreement to sell by the appellant stands amply proved by the quantum of cash deposits made in the bank accounts of the appellant and family members. Hence, I do not find force in the contentions of the appellant and the judicial decisions relied upon are found

SMT. GURJEET KAUR,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- IV (2),, JALANDHAR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our

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

price of the property. This fact of receipt of on-money under the agreement to sell by the appellant stands amply proved by the quantum of cash deposits made in the bank accounts of the appellant and family members. Hence, I do not find force in the contentions of the appellant and the judicial decisions relied upon are found