J. K. EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JAMMU vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

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

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

271(1)(c) of the Act for A.Y 2009-10. 2. All these cases are heard together and are being disposed off by this consolidated order. With the consent of both the parties, appeal in ITA No. 126/Asr/2019 for A.Y 2008-09 was taken as a lead case wherein the assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: 1. “That

J.K.EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

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

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

271(1)(c) of the Act for A.Y 2009-10. 2. All these cases are heard together and are being disposed off by this consolidated order. With the consent of both the parties, appeal in ITA No. 126/Asr/2019 for A.Y 2008-09 was taken as a lead case wherein the assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: 1. “That

J.K. EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JAMMU & KASHMIR vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION)-CIRCLE-1,, CHANDIGARH

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

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

271(1)(c) of the Act for A.Y 2009-10. 2. All these cases are heard together and are being disposed off by this consolidated order. With the consent of both the parties, appeal in ITA No. 126/Asr/2019 for A.Y 2008-09 was taken as a lead case wherein the assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: 1. “That

M/S SHAHEED KARTAR SINGH SARABHA CHARITABLE TRUST (REGD.),LUDHIANA vs. CIT(A)-4, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Charitable Trust and considering the fact that an appeal before the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh was already filed on 13.02.2019 (bearing No. 174/Chandi/2019) with respect to the quantum with respect to the said notice and was under the bonafide belief that no appeal is required to be filed against this order as an appeal

M/S SHAHEED KARTAR SINGH SARABHA CHARITABLE TRUST (REGD.),LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, (E), C-1, CHANDIGARH

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

section 13(1)(c) read with 13(2)(c) and 13(2)(g) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.Therefore, benefit U/s 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is disallowed to the assessee. As per the details provided by the assessee, total income of the trust during the year was Rs.11,98,68,227/-. The entire receipt of income

SH. ANIL TALWAR,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

section 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed on the basis of the DVO’s report because the said Report at best is only an opinion on estimate of investment. In support of the said proposition; CIT v. Prakash Industries Ltd. [ITA No. 6230/Del/2013 dated 19.02.2016]; DCIT v. Ghodawat Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. [ITA no. 1613/Bang/2014 dated 03.06.2016] were heavily relied upon

DCIT, C-1 (E), CHANDIGARH vs. SHRI GURU GOBIND SINGH FOUNDATION, MOGA

In the result appeal of the Department as well as cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargdci T, C-1 (E) Shri Guru Gobind Singh Foundation Circle- 1 (Exemption) 601/11, Tanki Wali Gali No. 2, Dashmesh Chandigarh Nagar Vs. Moga- Punjab Pan No. – Aadts0332A Appellant Respondent

271 (1) (c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars are initiated on this account. 6. Assessee has given this loan to its sister concern and showing the same into the books as loan/advances recoverable. This amount is fund of assessee, which should be part of corpus/capital and deposited in modes u/s 11(5). Assessee has shown this as advance & this

D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-1(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S OM PRAKASH BANSAL CHARITABLE TRUST, JAMMU

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and both the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed

section 13(1)(c) r.w.s. 13(3) of the Act ,adding the rent so paid amounting to Rs. 12,35,434/- to the income of the assessee. 13. The Ld.CIT(A) deleted the addition made and his findings with regard to the same are at para 3.6 to 3.8 of the order as under: ITA Nos.339 & 340/Chd/2020 & C.O. Nos.3 & 4/Chd/2020

D.C.I.T, CIRCLE-1(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S OM PRAKASH BANSAL CHARITABLE TRUST, JAMMU

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and both the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed

section 13(1)(c) r.w.s. 13(3) of the Act ,adding the rent so paid amounting to Rs. 12,35,434/- to the income of the assessee. 13. The Ld.CIT(A) deleted the addition made and his findings with regard to the same are at para 3.6 to 3.8 of the order as under: ITA Nos.339 & 340/Chd/2020 & C.O. Nos.3 & 4/Chd/2020

M/S PUNJAB HERITAGE & TOURISM PROMOTION BOARD,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are hereby

271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). ITA No. 157/Chd/2015 for assessment year 2007-08 is taken as a lead case for narration of facts. ITA No. 157/Chd/2015 for AY 2007-08 3. The assessee is a society created by the Punjab Government. The assessee applied for registration u/s 12AA

M/S PUNJAB HERITAGE & TOURISM PROMOTION BOARD,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are hereby

271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). ITA No. 157/Chd/2015 for assessment year 2007-08 is taken as a lead case for narration of facts. ITA No. 157/Chd/2015 for AY 2007-08 3. The assessee is a society created by the Punjab Government. The assessee applied for registration u/s 12AA

HARYANA STATE AGRICULTURAL MARKETING BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, PANCHKULA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta & Hayana State Agricultural Vs. The D.C.I.T., Marketing Board, Panchkula Circle, Panchkula. Panchkula. Pan: Aaalh0016R (Appellant) (Respondent)

271(1)(c) at para 4.1 wherein the calculation of penalty was worked out by the Assessing Officer as under: “4.1. The appellant is not eligible for credit of income tax of previous years claimed at Rs.7, 66,45,786/- as last item in the table (supra). The appellant has to apply 85% of the receipts of current year

SMT. BALJEET KAUR SEKHON,MOHALI vs. DCIT, MOHALI

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

Charitable Trust, SCO 52-54, Circle 6(1), VS Sector 17-C, Chandigarh. Mohali. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN No: ABXPS6329L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Tej Mohan Singh राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Kultej Singh Bains, Addl. CIT सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 10.07.2018 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख

SH. ARVAIL SINGH,SIRSA vs. PCIT, 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)

271-276 of JPB). iii) ITA No. 1393/D/2017 Dated: 16.04.2021 Paramjeeet Singh Vs ACIT. (Page 277-280 of JPB). iv) ITA N. 5084/D/2019 Dated: 06.07.2022 Girish Kumar vs. ITO (Page 343-348 of JPB). v) ITA No. 1418/D/2023 Dated 21.09.2022 Kamla Devi vs. ITO (Page 349-355 of JPB). vi) ITA No. 1539/D/2020 Dated 17.03.2023 ITO vs. Hari Singh Saini

SH. RANDHIR SINGH,SIRSA vs. PCIT ROHTAK, 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)

271-276 of JPB). iii) ITA No. 1393/D/2017 Dated: 16.04.2021 Paramjeeet Singh Vs ACIT. (Page 277-280 of JPB). iv) ITA N. 5084/D/2019 Dated: 06.07.2022 Girish Kumar vs. ITO (Page 343-348 of JPB). v) ITA No. 1418/D/2023 Dated 21.09.2022 Kamla Devi vs. ITO (Page 349-355 of JPB). vi) ITA No. 1539/D/2020 Dated 17.03.2023 ITO vs. Hari Singh Saini

M/S GANESH DASS HUF,SIRSA vs. PCIT, 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)

271-276 of JPB). iii) ITA No. 1393/D/2017 Dated: 16.04.2021 Paramjeeet Singh Vs ACIT. (Page 277-280 of JPB). iv) ITA N. 5084/D/2019 Dated: 06.07.2022 Girish Kumar vs. ITO (Page 343-348 of JPB). v) ITA No. 1418/D/2023 Dated 21.09.2022 Kamla Devi vs. ITO (Page 349-355 of JPB). vi) ITA No. 1539/D/2020 Dated 17.03.2023 ITO vs. Hari Singh Saini

SURJEET SINGH,SIRSA vs. PCIT, ROHTAK, 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)

271-276 of JPB). iii) ITA No. 1393/D/2017 Dated: 16.04.2021 Paramjeeet Singh Vs ACIT. (Page 277-280 of JPB). iv) ITA N. 5084/D/2019 Dated: 06.07.2022 Girish Kumar vs. ITO (Page 343-348 of JPB). v) ITA No. 1418/D/2023 Dated 21.09.2022 Kamla Devi vs. ITO (Page 349-355 of JPB). vi) ITA No. 1539/D/2020 Dated 17.03.2023 ITO vs. Hari Singh Saini

SH. PARAMJEET SINGH,SIRSA vs. PCIT, 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)

271-276 of JPB). iii) ITA No. 1393/D/2017 Dated: 16.04.2021 Paramjeeet Singh Vs ACIT. (Page 277-280 of JPB). iv) ITA N. 5084/D/2019 Dated: 06.07.2022 Girish Kumar vs. ITO (Page 343-348 of JPB). v) ITA No. 1418/D/2023 Dated 21.09.2022 Kamla Devi vs. ITO (Page 349-355 of JPB). vi) ITA No. 1539/D/2020 Dated 17.03.2023 ITO vs. Hari Singh Saini