PAWAN GARG,PANCHKULA vs. ITO WARD 5((5) CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1218/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Pawan Garg, The Ito, House No. 766, Sector 16, Vs Ward 5(5), Panchkula. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Abmpg4243N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ajay Jain, Ca Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.02.2026

234C and 234D as per the provisions of IT. Act, 1961. Penalty proceedings u/s 271F for non-filing of ITR in respect to the notice u/s 148 of the IT. Act 1961, penalty proceedings u/s 271 (1)(b) for noncompliance of notices u/s 142(1) and penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) for concealing the income or for furnishing inaccurate

SHRI RAJDEEP SINGH CHIMNI,CHANDIGARH vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the addition so made and sustained by the ld CIT(A) is hereby deleted and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

234C Rs. 52,898/- Total Tax Payable Rs. 43,56,745/- Less: prepaid taxes Rs. 40,15,527/- Add: Refund already issued Rs. 7,910/- Balance payable Rs. 3,49,128/- Demand of Rs. 8,45,501/- (i.e. 11,94,629 - 3,49,128) taken to remission account.” 6 It was further submitted that the matter is squarely covered

SMT. DEEPINDER KAUR JOHAL,PATIALA vs. ITO, WARD-4, PATIALA

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ANDSHRI PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

234C and 234D nor the appellant can have any grievance in this regard. Accordingly, ground of appeal no. 3 is dismissed 14. The ld. CIT(A) by impugned order has sustained the order of ld. AO dated27.12.2018. ITA 532/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2012-13 8 15. The assessee before this Tribunal has raised following grounds of appeal in Form 36 which

M/S ASHA TECHNOLOGIES,KALA AMB vs. ITO, SIRMOUR

In the result, both the above appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed as aforesaid in respect of impugned orders dt

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

capital account and Rs. 11,00,000/- in the name of M/s. Asha Telecom Pvt. Ltd. as liabilities. But it did not furnish any information regarding sources of these credits and neither any confirmation from M/s. Asha Telecom Pvt. Ltd. was furnished. Similarly, Para 8 of the questionnaire remained unanswered. Vide Para 9 of its reply, it was stated that

M/S ASHA TECHNOLOGIES,SIRMOUR vs. ADDL. CIT, SOLAN

In the result, both the above appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed as aforesaid in respect of impugned orders dt

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

capital account and Rs. 11,00,000/- in the name of M/s. Asha Telecom Pvt. Ltd. as liabilities. But it did not furnish any information regarding sources of these credits and neither any confirmation from M/s. Asha Telecom Pvt. Ltd. was furnished. Similarly, Para 8 of the questionnaire remained unanswered. Vide Para 9 of its reply, it was stated that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, LUDHIANA vs. MALBROS INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD, FARIDKOT

In the result, both the appeals and the Cross Objections are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 992 & 993/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2016-17 The Dcit, Vs Malbros International Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-2, Village – Mansoorwal, Teh-Zira, Ludhiana. Head Offices Old Cantt. Road, Faridkot. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aadcm7203R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & C.O. Nos. 46 & 45/Chd/2024 In आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 992 & 993/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2016-17 Malbros International Pvt. Ltd., The Dcit, Village – Mansoorwal, Teh-Zira, Vs Central Circle-2, Head Offices Old Cantt. Road, Ludhiana. Faridkot. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aadcm7203R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.06.2025

gain time then ITA No.992 & 993/CHD/2024 & CO 46 & 45/CHD/2024 A.Y.2017-18 & 2016-17 6 the court should lean against acceptance of the explanation. While condoning delay the Could should not forget the opposite party altogether. It must be borne in mind that he is a looser and he too would have incurred quiet a large litigation expenses. It would

M/S SHUBHAM COTTON MILLS PVT. LTD.,ELLENABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, SIRSA

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

gains", is a loss, the assessee shall be entitled to have the amount of such loss set off against his income from any other source under the same head. (2) Where the result of the computation made for any assessment year under sections 48 to 55 in respect of any short-term capital asset is a loss, the assessee shall

SH. SURESH CHAUDHRY,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, W-1(3), LUDHIANA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are dismissed

234C and 234D have been wrongly and illegally charged. 7. That the Appellant craves permission to add, amend, elucidate any ground of appeal at the time of hearing 6. The ld. Sr.DRs rely upon the orders. ITA 1153, 1155 & 1157 /CHD/2019 A.Y. 2012-13 Page 5 of 7 7. In the facts of the present case, it is seen that

SH. ASHISH CHAUDHRY,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, W-1(1), LUDHIANA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are dismissed

234C and 234D have been wrongly and illegally charged. 7. That the Appellant craves permission to add, amend, elucidate any ground of appeal at the time of hearing 6. The ld. Sr.DRs rely upon the orders. ITA 1153, 1155 & 1157 /CHD/2019 A.Y. 2012-13 Page 5 of 7 7. In the facts of the present case, it is seen that

SH. AMIT CHAUDHRY,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, W-1(1), LUDHIANA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are dismissed

234C and 234D have been wrongly and illegally charged. 7. That the Appellant craves permission to add, amend, elucidate any ground of appeal at the time of hearing 6. The ld. Sr.DRs rely upon the orders. ITA 1153, 1155 & 1157 /CHD/2019 A.Y. 2012-13 Page 5 of 7 7. In the facts of the present case, it is seen that

DCIT, LUDHIANA vs. SH. INDERJIT SINGH BRAR, MOHALI

capital gain & other sources". It is stated that the assessee is maintaining personal books of accounts which has been produced. 2.1 During the course of search of the residence premises of the assessee at Mohali, certain documents in the form of annexure ISB-8, 11 & 21 were found during the course of search. The notings on these documents are discussed

SH. INDERJIT SINGH BRAR,BATHINDA vs. DCIT, LUDHIANA

capital gain & other sources". It is stated that the assessee is maintaining personal books of accounts which has been produced. 2.1 During the course of search of the residence premises of the assessee at Mohali, certain documents in the form of annexure ISB-8, 11 & 21 were found during the course of search. The notings on these documents are discussed

DCIT, LUDHIANA vs. SH. INDERJIT SINGH BRAR, MOHALI

capital gain & other sources". It is stated that the assessee is maintaining personal books of accounts which has been produced. 2.1 During the course of search of the residence premises of the assessee at Mohali, certain documents in the form of annexure ISB-8, 11 & 21 were found during the course of search. The notings on these documents are discussed

AMRIK SINGH BHULLAR,SANGRUR vs. ITO, WARD, SANGRUR

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

section 154(8) but the order was passed on 09-11-2018 i.e. after expiry of 6 months.” 2. By the remaining grounds, the assessee assails the issue on merits. 3. At the time of hearing, an adjournment application was moved on behalf of the assessee. None was present in support thereof. However, considering the record, the ld. Sr.DR addressing

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, LUDHIANA vs. MALBROS INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD, FARIDKOT

In the result, both the appeals and the Cross Objections\nare dismissed

gain time then\nthe court should lean against acceptance of the\nexplanation. While condoning delay the Could should\nnot forget the opposite party altogether. It must be\nborne in mind that he is a looser and he too would\nhave incurred quiet a large litigation expenses. It\nwould be a salutary guideline that when courts\ncondone the delay