ACIT, LUDHIANA vs. M/S VARDHMAN TEXTILE LIMITED, LUDHIANA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 1429/Chd/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07 Vardhman Textiles Limited, The Addl.Cit, Range- 1, बनाम Ludhiana Chandigarh Road, Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabcm4692E Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Ludhiana Dated 15.10.2010

801C by allocating Head office expenses. 4. That without prejudice to ground No. 3, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts while allocating gross head office expenses instead of expenses net of income. 5. That the Ld. C1T(A) erred in law and on the facts while confirming theaction of Ld. AO while taxing the capital receipt

VARDHMAN TEXTILES LTD,LUDHIANA vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 1429/Chd/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07 Vardhman Textiles Limited, The Addl.Cit, Range- 1, बनाम Ludhiana Chandigarh Road, Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabcm4692E Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Ludhiana Dated 15.10.2010

801C by allocating Head office expenses. 4. That without prejudice to ground No. 3, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts while allocating gross head office expenses instead of expenses net of income. 5. That the Ld. C1T(A) erred in law and on the facts while confirming theaction of Ld. AO while taxing the capital receipt

VARDHMAN TEXTILE LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ADDL. CIT, LUDHIANA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 1429/Chd/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07 Vardhman Textiles Limited, The Addl.Cit, Range- 1, बनाम Ludhiana Chandigarh Road, Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabcm4692E Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Ludhiana Dated 15.10.2010

801C by allocating Head office expenses. 4. That without prejudice to ground No. 3, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts while allocating gross head office expenses instead of expenses net of income. 5. That the Ld. C1T(A) erred in law and on the facts while confirming theaction of Ld. AO while taxing the capital receipt

ACIT, LUDHIANA vs. M/S VARDHMAN TEXTILES LTD., LUDHIANA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 1429/Chd/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07 Vardhman Textiles Limited, The Addl.Cit, Range- 1, बनाम Ludhiana Chandigarh Road, Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabcm4692E Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Ludhiana Dated 15.10.2010

801C by allocating Head office expenses. 4. That without prejudice to ground No. 3, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts while allocating gross head office expenses instead of expenses net of income. 5. That the Ld. C1T(A) erred in law and on the facts while confirming theaction of Ld. AO while taxing the capital receipt

SHIVOM COTSPIN LIMITED,KALA AMB vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, PARWANOO

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.560/Chd/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2015-16 Shivam Cotspin Limited, The Dcit, Circle, बनाम Village Kheri, Parwanoo Kala Amb, Trilokpur Road, Sirmour Himachal Pradesh "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aajs9111L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

801c @ 100%, as per the direction of the Hon'ble High Court. Hence it is held that the assessee is entitled to claim of deduction u/s 80IC @ 30% only.” 5. The matter was carried before the Ld. CIT(A) who allowed the assesses claim, holding that aharmoniousreading of the statute laid out thatto allow the benefit of enhanced rate

DCIT-CIRCLE, PARWANOO vs. M/S SHIVOM COTSPIN LTD., SIRMOUR

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.560/Chd/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2015-16 Shivam Cotspin Limited, The Dcit, Circle, बनाम Village Kheri, Parwanoo Kala Amb, Trilokpur Road, Sirmour Himachal Pradesh "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aajs9111L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

801c @ 100%, as per the direction of the Hon'ble High Court. Hence it is held that the assessee is entitled to claim of deduction u/s 80IC @ 30% only.” 5. The matter was carried before the Ld. CIT(A) who allowed the assesses claim, holding that aharmoniousreading of the statute laid out thatto allow the benefit of enhanced rate

DCIT-CIRCLE, PARWANOO vs. M/S SHIVOM COTSPIN LTD., SIRMOUR

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.560/Chd/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2015-16 Shivam Cotspin Limited, The Dcit, Circle, बनाम Village Kheri, Parwanoo Kala Amb, Trilokpur Road, Sirmour Himachal Pradesh "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aajs9111L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

801c @ 100%, as per the direction of the Hon'ble High Court. Hence it is held that the assessee is entitled to claim of deduction u/s 80IC @ 30% only.” 5. The matter was carried before the Ld. CIT(A) who allowed the assesses claim, holding that aharmoniousreading of the statute laid out thatto allow the benefit of enhanced rate

ACIT, CIRCLE, PARWANOO vs. SHIVOM COTSPIN LIMITED, SIRMOUR

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.560/Chd/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2015-16 Shivam Cotspin Limited, The Dcit, Circle, बनाम Village Kheri, Parwanoo Kala Amb, Trilokpur Road, Sirmour Himachal Pradesh "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aajs9111L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

801c @ 100%, as per the direction of the Hon'ble High Court. Hence it is held that the assessee is entitled to claim of deduction u/s 80IC @ 30% only.” 5. The matter was carried before the Ld. CIT(A) who allowed the assesses claim, holding that aharmoniousreading of the statute laid out thatto allow the benefit of enhanced rate

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

801C deduction. That the Appellant craves, leave for permission to add, amend, or alter any 3. ground of appeal at the time of hearing. Record of Hearing 15. The hearing in the matter took place before this Tribunal on 14/08/2024 and 27/08/2024 when both the Ld. AR for the assessee and Ld. DR for Revenue appeared before

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4,, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

801C deduction. That the Appellant craves, leave for permission to add, amend, or alter any 3. ground of appeal at the time of hearing. Record of Hearing 15. The hearing in the matter took place before this Tribunal on 14/08/2024 and 27/08/2024 when both the Ld. AR for the assessee and Ld. DR for Revenue appeared before

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, , AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

801C deduction. That the Appellant craves, leave for permission to add, amend, or alter any 3. ground of appeal at the time of hearing. Record of Hearing 15. The hearing in the matter took place before this Tribunal on 14/08/2024 and 27/08/2024 when both the Ld. AR for the assessee and Ld. DR for Revenue appeared before

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, FOCAL POINT

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

801C deduction. That the Appellant craves, leave for permission to add, amend, or alter any 3. ground of appeal at the time of hearing. Record of Hearing 15. The hearing in the matter took place before this Tribunal on 14/08/2024 and 27/08/2024 when both the Ld. AR for the assessee and Ld. DR for Revenue appeared before

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA, - vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LTD, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

801C deduction. That the Appellant craves, leave for permission to add, amend, or alter any 3. ground of appeal at the time of hearing. Record of Hearing 15. The hearing in the matter took place before this Tribunal on 14/08/2024 and 27/08/2024 when both the Ld. AR for the assessee and Ld. DR for Revenue appeared before

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

801C deduction. That the Appellant craves, leave for permission to add, amend, or alter any 3. ground of appeal at the time of hearing. Record of Hearing 15. The hearing in the matter took place before this Tribunal on 14/08/2024 and 27/08/2024 when both the Ld. AR for the assessee and Ld. DR for Revenue appeared before

DCIT CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LTD, LUDHIANA

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

801C deduction. That the Appellant craves, leave for permission to add, amend, or alter any 3. ground of appeal at the time of hearing. Record of Hearing 15. The hearing in the matter took place before this Tribunal on 14/08/2024 and 27/08/2024 when both the Ld. AR for the assessee and Ld. DR for Revenue appeared before

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

801C deduction. That the Appellant craves, leave for permission to add, amend, or alter any 3. ground of appeal at the time of hearing. Record of Hearing 15. The hearing in the matter took place before this Tribunal on 14/08/2024 and 27/08/2024 when both the Ld. AR for the assessee and Ld. DR for Revenue appeared before

DCIT, CC-I, CHANDIGARH , CHANDIGARH vs. VALCO INDUSTRIES LTD., , CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: The Hon'Ble Punjab & Haryana High Court? Ii) Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Is Right Holding Such Consequential Order As Void An Initio Ignoring The Facts That Order Passed By Ld. Pcit (Central), Gurugram U/S 263 Has Not Attained Its Finality? Iii) Whether On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Right In Holding That Consequential Order Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 263 Of The Act As Void As Initio Without Giving Any Liberty To The Revenue To Revive The Proceedings Consequent To Any Directions Or Order

capital receipt by the assessee. 4. Thereafter, notice u/s 148 was issued on 10/03/2017 and reassessment was completed u/s 147 r/w 143(3) on 27/11/2017 at an income of Rs 8,87,92,864/- wherein the deduction claimed u/s 80IC was restricted to 30% as against 100% claimed by the assessee. On appeal, the disallowance was confirmed

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

capital is of Rs. 2.57 Crores and the reserves and surplus are to the tune of Rs. 115.35 Crores. Hence, placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Bright Enterprises Private Ltd. ITA number 224 of 2013 dated 24/07/2015, and judgment in the case of a CIT Vs. Omax bikes limited

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

capital is of Rs. 2.57 Crores and the reserves and surplus are to the tune of Rs. 115.35 Crores. Hence, placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Bright Enterprises Private Ltd. ITA number 224 of 2013 dated 24/07/2015, and judgment in the case of a CIT Vs. Omax bikes limited