RAM NIWAS,FATEHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICE, SIRSA ROAD, INDUSTRIAL AREA, FATEHABAD

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

aa. (1236/CHD/2016) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page 80-94 of WS) bb. Dtd. 20.01.2026 Shri Suresh Kumar vs ITO (390/CHD/2023) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page of 95-112 WS)  Further, it is submitted that Hon’ble P&H HC in the case of Mahender Pal Narang (supra) held that interest

MUNISH KUMAR LEGAL HEIR LATE SH GURDEEP SINGH,VILL MANAKPUR, YAMUNANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD 5, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

aa. (1236/CHD/2016) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page 80-94 of WS) bb. Dtd. 20.01.2026 Shri Suresh Kumar vs ITO (390/CHD/2023) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page of 95-112 WS)  Further, it is submitted that Hon’ble P&H HC in the case of Mahender Pal Narang (supra) held that interest

KARAN PRATAP SINGH,SIRSA, HARYANA vs. ITO, WARD-1, SIRSA, HARYANA

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

aa. (1236/CHD/2016) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page 80-94 of WS) bb. Dtd. 20.01.2026 Shri Suresh Kumar vs ITO (390/CHD/2023) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page of 95-112 WS)  Further, it is submitted that Hon’ble P&H HC in the case of Mahender Pal Narang (supra) held that interest

SH. RAM LAL,FATEHABAD vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

aa. (1236/CHD/2016) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page 80-94 of WS) bb. Dtd. 20.01.2026 Shri Suresh Kumar vs ITO (390/CHD/2023) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page of 95-112 WS)  Further, it is submitted that Hon’ble P&H HC in the case of Mahender Pal Narang (supra) held that interest

MANINDER JEET SINGH V.P.O. UDHAMGARH,JAGADHRI,HARYANA vs. PRABHJOT KAUR,PCIT, PANCHKULA

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

aa. (1236/CHD/2016) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page 80-94 of WS) bb. Dtd. 20.01.2026 Shri Suresh Kumar vs ITO (390/CHD/2023) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page of 95-112 WS)  Further, it is submitted that Hon’ble P&H HC in the case of Mahender Pal Narang (supra) held that interest

ANIL TUTEJA,FATEHABAD vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ROHTAK, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

aa. (1236/CHD/2016) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page 80-94 of WS) bb. Dtd. 20.01.2026 Shri Suresh Kumar vs ITO (390/CHD/2023) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page of 95-112 WS)  Further, it is submitted that Hon’ble P&H HC in the case of Mahender Pal Narang (supra) held that interest

SH. DEVENDER KUMAR,YAMUNA NAGAR vs. ITO, WARD -1, YAMUNA NAGAR

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

aa. (1236/CHD/2016) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page 80-94 of WS) bb. Dtd. 20.01.2026 Shri Suresh Kumar vs ITO (390/CHD/2023) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page of 95-112 WS)  Further, it is submitted that Hon’ble P&H HC in the case of Mahender Pal Narang (supra) held that interest

ASHOK KUMAR THAKRAL,JAGADHRI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANCHKULA , PANCHKULA

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: the Tribunal as pointed out by the Registry. Considering that the issue involved is purely legal in nature, and respectfully following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji & Others [(1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC)], which emphasizes that substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations, we condone the delay in filing these appeals.3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 167/Chd/2023 for A.Y 2018-19 as a lead case f

aa. (1236/CHD/2016) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page 80-94 of WS) bb. Dtd. 20.01.2026 Shri Suresh Kumar vs ITO (390/CHD/2023) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page of 95-112 WS)  Further, it is submitted that Hon’ble P&H HC in the case of Mahender Pal Narang (supra) held that interest

PARVEEN KUMAR,229,VILLAGE MANAKPUR-II,TEHSIL JAGADHRI,HARYANA vs. PRABHJOT KAUR,PCIT PANCHKULA, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: the Tribunal as pointed out by the Registry. Considering that the issue involved is purely legal in nature, and respectfully following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji & Others [(1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC)], which emphasizes that substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations, we condone the delay in filing these appeals.3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 167/Chd/2023 for A.Y 2018-19 as a lead case f

aa. (1236/CHD/2016) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page 80-94 of WS) bb. Dtd. 20.01.2026 Shri Suresh Kumar vs ITO (390/CHD/2023) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page of 95-112 WS)  Further, it is submitted that Hon’ble P&H HC in the case of Mahender Pal Narang (supra) held that interest

MADHU GREWAL,CHANDIGARH vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: the Tribunal as pointed out by the Registry. Considering that the issue involved is purely legal in nature, and respectfully following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji & Others [(1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC)], which emphasizes that substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations, we condone the delay in filing these appeals.3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 167/Chd/2023 for A.Y 2018-19 as a lead case f

aa. (1236/CHD/2016) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page 80-94 of WS) bb. Dtd. 20.01.2026 Shri Suresh Kumar vs ITO (390/CHD/2023) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page of 95-112 WS)  Further, it is submitted that Hon’ble P&H HC in the case of Mahender Pal Narang (supra) held that interest

SH. BALJINDER SINGH,CHANDIGARH vs. PR.CIT, CHANDIGARH -1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

aa. (1236/CHD/2016) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page 80-94 of WS) bb. Dtd. 20.01.2026 Shri Suresh Kumar vs ITO (390/CHD/2023) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page of 95-112 WS)  Further, it is submitted that Hon’ble P&H HC in the case of Mahender Pal Narang (supra) held that interest

SH. GURDEEP SINGH MAHAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

aa. (1236/CHD/2016) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page 80-94 of WS) bb. Dtd. 20.01.2026 Shri Suresh Kumar vs ITO (390/CHD/2023) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page of 95-112 WS)  Further, it is submitted that Hon’ble P&H HC in the case of Mahender Pal Narang (supra) held that interest

SH. AMARJEET SINGH,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

aa. (1236/CHD/2016) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page 80-94 of WS) bb. Dtd. 20.01.2026 Shri Suresh Kumar vs ITO (390/CHD/2023) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page of 95-112 WS)  Further, it is submitted that Hon’ble P&H HC in the case of Mahender Pal Narang (supra) held that interest

INDER KAUR,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

aa. (1236/CHD/2016) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page 80-94 of WS) bb. Dtd. 20.01.2026 Shri Suresh Kumar vs ITO (390/CHD/2023) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page of 95-112 WS)  Further, it is submitted that Hon’ble P&H HC in the case of Mahender Pal Narang (supra) held that interest

PARAMJIT SINGH,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

aa. (1236/CHD/2016) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page 80-94 of WS) bb. Dtd. 20.01.2026 Shri Suresh Kumar vs ITO (390/CHD/2023) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page of 95-112 WS)  Further, it is submitted that Hon’ble P&H HC in the case of Mahender Pal Narang (supra) held that interest

BIMLA DEVI,JAGADHRI vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

aa. (1236/CHD/2016) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page 80-94 of WS) bb. Dtd. 20.01.2026 Shri Suresh Kumar vs ITO (390/CHD/2023) (Chandigarh ITAT) in favour of “A”. (Copy appended at page of 95-112 WS)  Further, it is submitted that Hon’ble P&H HC in the case of Mahender Pal Narang (supra) held that interest