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

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

TEJA SINGH,AMBALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ,WARD-4, AMBALA CANTT, AMBALA

The appeal stand allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.889/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Shri Teja Singh Income Tax Officer C/O Rajiv Goel & Associates Ward-4 बनाम/ Vs. 179, Bank Road, Ambala Cantt. Ambala Cantt. Ambala (Haryana)-133 001 Haryana – 133 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Bqzps-3706-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.891/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Shri Baldev Singh Income Tax Officer C/O Rajiv Goel & Associates Ward-3 बनाम/ Vs. 179, Bank Road, Ambala Cantt. Ambala Cantt. Ambala (Haryana)-133 001 Haryana – 133 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Brzps-4850-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Rohit Goel (Ca) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-11-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10-12-2025

capital gains which were not considered during regular assessment proceedings u/s 143(3). Therefore, the aforesaid cash deposit remained unexplained. The reasons were recorded on 12-02-2014 and Ld. AO sought approval of appropriate authority to reopen the case of the assessee. In Column No. 7 of the approval form (placed on Page Nos.4 & 5), it has been mentioned

BALDEV SINGH,VILLAGE JANDLI,AMBALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3, AMBALA, AMBALA CANTT

The appeal stand allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.889/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Shri Teja Singh Income Tax Officer C/O Rajiv Goel & Associates Ward-4 बनाम/ Vs. 179, Bank Road, Ambala Cantt. Ambala Cantt. Ambala (Haryana)-133 001 Haryana – 133 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Bqzps-3706-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.891/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Shri Baldev Singh Income Tax Officer C/O Rajiv Goel & Associates Ward-3 बनाम/ Vs. 179, Bank Road, Ambala Cantt. Ambala Cantt. Ambala (Haryana)-133 001 Haryana – 133 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Brzps-4850-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Rohit Goel (Ca) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-11-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10-12-2025

capital gains which were not considered during regular assessment proceedings u/s 143(3). Therefore, the aforesaid cash deposit remained unexplained. The reasons were recorded on 12-02-2014 and Ld. AO sought approval of appropriate authority to reopen the case of the assessee. In Column No. 7 of the approval form (placed on Page Nos.4 & 5), it has been mentioned

WINSOME TEXTILE INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

gain of Rs.11,99,000/- which was not treated as a revenue receipt and thus in terms of the reasons recorded escaped in- come for A.Y. 2011-12. The assessee submitted its reply and after due application of mind, the re- turned income was accepted in terms of order passed under Section 143(3) read with Section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH vs. WINSOME TEXTILE INDUSTRIES LTD, CHANDIGARH

Capital Fund Ltd. and subsequently repatriated to India\nover a period of four years which during F.Y. 2010-11 resulted in a foreign\nexchange gain of Rs.11,99,000/- which was not treated as a revenue receipt and\nthus in terms of the reasons recorded escaped in-come for A.Y. 2011-12. The\nassessee submitted its reply and after

ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SML ISUZU LTD., CHANDIGARH

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

Capital and Debt Market Ltd. v. ACIT: 118 TTJ 351 (Mum ITAT) - Angel Commodities Broking (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT: 164 TTJ 275 (Mum ITAT) - FedEx Express Transportation & Supply Chain Services India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT: 169 TTJ 732 (Mum. Trib.) - Bhavik Rajesh Khandra Share and Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. vs DCIT: 8 ITR(Trib) 155 (Mum. Trib) - Kisan Ratilal Choksey

ACIT, CIRCLE, PANCHKULA vs. M/S HARYANA STATE ELECTRONICS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Shri Sanjay Garg

gainfully refer to the Hon'ble Delhi High Court decision in the case of CIT Vs. Jagjit Industrie Limited (supra). In this case after examining various case laws on the subject, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court concluded as under:- "16. The present factual matrix has to be tested on the touchstone and anvil of the aforesaid enunciation

M/S HARYANA STATE ELECTRONICS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, PANCHKULA

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Shri Sanjay Garg

gainfully refer to the Hon'ble Delhi High Court decision in the case of CIT Vs. Jagjit Industrie Limited (supra). In this case after examining various case laws on the subject, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court concluded as under:- "16. The present factual matrix has to be tested on the touchstone and anvil of the aforesaid enunciation

M/S GLAXO SMITHKLINE ASIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, C-4(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue, stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

capital account but on revenue account, though giving enduring benefit in future, were held to be revenue in nature and hence allowable. In view of the above, the disallowance of market research expense is directed to be deleted and we hold that the assessee is entitled to claim the same as revenue in nature. The assessee has alternately pleaded

M/S GLAXO SMITHKLINE ASIA PVT. LTD.,NABHA vs. DCIT, C-4(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue, stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

capital account but on revenue account, though giving enduring benefit in future, were held to be revenue in nature and hence allowable. In view of the above, the disallowance of market research expense is directed to be deleted and we hold that the assessee is entitled to claim the same as revenue in nature. The assessee has alternately pleaded

ACIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S GLAXO SMITHKLINE ASIA PVT. LTD., GURGAON

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue, stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

capital account but on revenue account, though giving enduring benefit in future, were held to be revenue in nature and hence allowable. In view of the above, the disallowance of market research expense is directed to be deleted and we hold that the assessee is entitled to claim the same as revenue in nature. The assessee has alternately pleaded

ACIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S GLAXO SMITHKLINE ASIA PVT. LTD., GURGAON

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue, stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

capital account but on revenue account, though giving enduring benefit in future, were held to be revenue in nature and hence allowable. In view of the above, the disallowance of market research expense is directed to be deleted and we hold that the assessee is entitled to claim the same as revenue in nature. The assessee has alternately pleaded

ACIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S GLAXO SMITHKLINE ASIA PVT. LTD., GURGAON

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue, stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

capital account but on revenue account, though giving enduring benefit in future, were held to be revenue in nature and hence allowable. In view of the above, the disallowance of market research expense is directed to be deleted and we hold that the assessee is entitled to claim the same as revenue in nature. The assessee has alternately pleaded

ACIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S GLAXO SMITHKLINE ASIA PVT. LTD., GURGAON

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue, stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

capital account but on revenue account, though giving enduring benefit in future, were held to be revenue in nature and hence allowable. In view of the above, the disallowance of market research expense is directed to be deleted and we hold that the assessee is entitled to claim the same as revenue in nature. The assessee has alternately pleaded

GLAXOSMITHKLINE ASIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue, stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

capital account but on revenue account, though giving enduring benefit in future, were held to be revenue in nature and hence allowable. In view of the above, the disallowance of market research expense is directed to be deleted and we hold that the assessee is entitled to claim the same as revenue in nature. The assessee has alternately pleaded

GLAXOSMITHKLINE ASIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue, stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

capital account but on revenue account, though giving enduring benefit in future, were held to be revenue in nature and hence allowable. In view of the above, the disallowance of market research expense is directed to be deleted and we hold that the assessee is entitled to claim the same as revenue in nature. The assessee has alternately pleaded

GLAXOSMITHKLINE ASIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue, stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

capital account but on revenue account, though giving enduring benefit in future, were held to be revenue in nature and hence allowable. In view of the above, the disallowance of market research expense is directed to be deleted and we hold that the assessee is entitled to claim the same as revenue in nature. The assessee has alternately pleaded