SH. SANJAY SINGAL HUF,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-

section 132(4)/131(1A) of the Act admitting the fact that they were In the cases of Shri Sanjay Singhal and Others Vs. DCIT, Chandigarh (9 Appeals) 39 engaged in providing the accommodation entries to the beneficiaries including the assessee. 41. There were series of documents found during the search wherein the entries for receipt of cash were recorded

SH. SANJAY SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-

section 132(4)/131(1A) of the Act admitting the fact that they were In the cases of Shri Sanjay Singhal and Others Vs. DCIT, Chandigarh (9 Appeals) 39 engaged in providing the accommodation entries to the beneficiaries including the assessee. 41. There were series of documents found during the search wherein the entries for receipt of cash were recorded

SH. SANJAY SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-

section 132(4)/131(1A) of the Act admitting the fact that they were In the cases of Shri Sanjay Singhal and Others Vs. DCIT, Chandigarh (9 Appeals) 39 engaged in providing the accommodation entries to the beneficiaries including the assessee. 41. There were series of documents found during the search wherein the entries for receipt of cash were recorded

SH. ANIKET SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-

section 132(4)/131(1A) of the Act admitting the fact that they were In the cases of Shri Sanjay Singhal and Others Vs. DCIT, Chandigarh (9 Appeals) 39 engaged in providing the accommodation entries to the beneficiaries including the assessee. 41. There were series of documents found during the search wherein the entries for receipt of cash were recorded

SMT. AARTI SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-

section 132(4)/131(1A) of the Act admitting the fact that they were In the cases of Shri Sanjay Singhal and Others Vs. DCIT, Chandigarh (9 Appeals) 39 engaged in providing the accommodation entries to the beneficiaries including the assessee. 41. There were series of documents found during the search wherein the entries for receipt of cash were recorded

SMT. AARTI SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-

section 132(4)/131(1A) of the Act admitting the fact that they were In the cases of Shri Sanjay Singhal and Others Vs. DCIT, Chandigarh (9 Appeals) 39 engaged in providing the accommodation entries to the beneficiaries including the assessee. 41. There were series of documents found during the search wherein the entries for receipt of cash were recorded

SH. ANIKET SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-

section 132(4)/131(1A) of the Act admitting the fact that they were In the cases of Shri Sanjay Singhal and Others Vs. DCIT, Chandigarh (9 Appeals) 39 engaged in providing the accommodation entries to the beneficiaries including the assessee. 41. There were series of documents found during the search wherein the entries for receipt of cash were recorded

SH. AMAR SINGH,JAGADHARI vs. ITO, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, both the appeal of different assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

4. That learned CIT (Appeals) has erred in law and facts in confirming the AO action by not allowing the benefit of improvement cost of land. 5. That authorities below has erred in law and facts in reopening the assessment u/s 148. 9. We have heard ld. Representatives of both the parties, perused the findings of authorities below and considered

SH. JAI RAM,JAGADHARI vs. ITO, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, both the appeal of different assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

4. That learned CIT (Appeals) has erred in law and facts in confirming the AO action by not allowing the benefit of improvement cost of land. 5. That authorities below has erred in law and facts in reopening the assessment u/s 148. 9. We have heard ld. Representatives of both the parties, perused the findings of authorities below and considered

SHRI KRISHAN KUMAR JALAN,BANGALORE vs. ITO, W-1, SIRSA

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

4. I have considered the facts of the case, the basis of addition made by the\nAssessing Officer, the arguments of the authorised represent- ative during the\nassessment as well as appellate proceedings and the comments of the Assessing\nOfficer in the remand report. It is seen that the impugned purchase of shares\nallegedly effected in the financial year

SANJAY SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

4) of the Act during the search proceedings carried out in his case, on 21.02.2014; that though the findings of such search proceedings carried out in the case of the appellant / Shri R.K. Kedia and Shri Shrish Chandrakant Shah might not have been directly applicable to the facts of the present case for the year under consideration, the findings

M/S SANJAY SINGAL HUF,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

4) of the Act during the search proceedings carried out in his case, on 21.02.2014; that though the findings of such search proceedings carried out in the case of the appellant / Shri R.K. Kedia and Shri Shrish Chandrakant Shah might not have been directly applicable to the facts of the present case for the year under consideration, the findings

SHOBHA SHARMA,SIRSA vs. ITO-WARD-3, SIRSA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

41,950/- in an order of assessment 14.11.2018 under section 147/143(3) of the Act. 2. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has further erred both in law and on facts in upholding the initiation of proceedings under section 147 of the Act and, completion of assessment under section 147/143(3) of the Act without appreciating that

SOHAN SINGH GARCHA,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, LUDHIANA

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptac.O. No. 39/Chd/2012 (In Ita No. 973/Chd/2012) "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07 Shri Sohan Lal Garcha, Vs. The Dcit, 901/2, Punjab Mata Natar, Circle Vi, बनाम Ludhiana Ludhiana

41 & 42/Chd/2017 respectively. 4. In view of the above position, the ITA No. 1337/Chd/2016, C.O.No.39/Chd/2012 and C.O. No. 5/Chd/2013 being related to the same assessee and involving connected issues have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 5. Before taking up the appeals and Cross objections separately, we deem it fit to first narrate

ITO, W-6(5), MOHALI vs. SMT. GURDEV KAUR, KHARAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Disposal Of Appeal.”

4) that he purchased the land and building from assessee for Rs. 71 lacs as against Rs. 30 lacs declared in sale document, having included the differential amount of Rs. 41 lacs in return and paid taxes thereon and the actual consideration of Rs. 71 lacs being also supported by subsequent valuation of Department as also purchaser, capital gains

AJMER SINGH,MOHALI vs. ITO, W-6(5), MOHAL

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Disposal Of Appeal.”

4) that he purchased the land and building from assessee for Rs. 71 lacs as against Rs. 30 lacs declared in sale document, having included the differential amount of Rs. 41 lacs in return and paid taxes thereon and the actual consideration of Rs. 71 lacs being also supported by subsequent valuation of Department as also purchaser, capital gains

AJMER SINGH,MOHALI vs. ITO, W-6(5), MOHAL

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Disposal Of Appeal.”

4) that he purchased the land and building from assessee for Rs. 71 lacs as against Rs. 30 lacs declared in sale document, having included the differential amount of Rs. 41 lacs in return and paid taxes thereon and the actual consideration of Rs. 71 lacs being also supported by subsequent valuation of Department as also purchaser, capital gains

M/S PURE DRINK LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT,CIRCLE, PATIALA

Bench: Hon'Ble Chandigarh Itat Was 27Th March 2020. (Ii) It Is Submitted That Management Of Appellant Company Is Based Is Delhi. Owing To Covid-19 Pandemic Nationwide Lock Down Was Enforced By The Government From 22Nd March 2020 & Therefore The Appellant Was Unable To Physically File The Appeal Documents Before Hon'Ble Itat.

4. That on facts and in law the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 147 by the AO is bad in law and void ab initio. 5. That on facts and in law the AO / CIT(A) have erred in holding / upholding that Capital Gains accrued from "transfer" of property situated at 9BG Kher Marg Worli Naka, Mumbai {hereinafter refereed