DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SMT. JASWANT KAUR, MOHALI

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

139(1) of the Act, and then no penalty was leviable. However, if such an unexplained income is determined by the Assessing officer on account of concealment of material facts or on account of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income relating to the computation of income which has the resultant effect of some addition into the taxable returned income then

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. PARAMJIT SINGH, MOHALI

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

139(1) of the Act, and then no penalty was leviable. However, if such an unexplained income is determined by the Assessing officer on account of concealment of material facts or on account of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income relating to the computation of income which has the resultant effect of some addition into the taxable returned income then

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SMT. MANJIT KAUR, CHANDIGARH

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

139(1) of the Act, and then no penalty was leviable. However, if such an unexplained income is determined by the Assessing officer on account of concealment of material facts or on account of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income relating to the computation of income which has the resultant effect of some addition into the taxable returned income then

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SMT. JASWANT KAUR, MOHALI

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

139(1) of the Act, and then no penalty was leviable. However, if such an unexplained income is determined by the Assessing officer on account of concealment of material facts or on account of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income relating to the computation of income which has the resultant effect of some addition into the taxable returned income then

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. KULWANT SINGH, MOHALI

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

139(1) of the Act, and then no penalty was leviable. However, if such an unexplained income is determined by the Assessing officer on account of concealment of material facts or on account of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income relating to the computation of income which has the resultant effect of some addition into the taxable returned income then

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. PARAMJIT SINGH, MOHALI

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

139(1) of the Act, and then no penalty was leviable. However, if such an unexplained income is determined by the Assessing officer on account of concealment of material facts or on account of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income relating to the computation of income which has the resultant effect of some addition into the taxable returned income then

THE INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ENGINEERS SOCIETY,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, EXEMPTIONS, C-1, CHANDIGARH

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

condonation of delay U/S 11 9(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act). However, in those cases where the Income Tax Returns have also been filed beyond the due date prescribed under section 139(1

SH. RAJIV KUMAR,MOHALI vs. ITO , WARD -1,, SANGRUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Condonation of delay of 37 days in filing Appeal for A.Y. 2019-20T keeping in view of Covered matter in favour of assessee by the Hon'ble ITAT Chandigarh Bench and also keeping in view of Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment relaxed the delay due to Covid-19 Hon'ble Sir /Madam, Most respectfully, I, Rajiv Kumar, submit

ASHISH SOOD,ZIRAKPUR vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

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

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

condone the delay in filing Form no.67 and therefore the adjustment undertaken by the CPC u/s.143(1)(a)(ii) is proposed to be upheld. 10.2 The Ld. Counsel then submitted that the aforesaid counter arguments were duly replied by the written submission dt. 07/11/2023 but unfortunately in the impugned order dt. 28/11/2023 there is not even a whisper

THE CHAPLAH CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL SERVICE SOCIETY LTD,VPO CHOULI vs. LD. DCIT , CPC, CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: The Tribunal Against The Order Dt 25.04.2023 Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi.

condone the delay and proceed to decide the appeal on merit. 5. The issue raised in Ground No.1 is against the order of the CIT(A) upholding disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961(in short 'the Act') by the assessee as made by Assessing Officer, CPC in the intimation passed u/s 143(1

EMSON TOOLS MFG. CORPN. LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT/DCIT- 1, LUDHIANA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

condone the delay which was beyond the control of the assessee and the appeal is admitted. 5. Following grounds have been raised in this appeal. 1. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts of the case in upholding addition of Rs. 1188745/- towards late deposit of EPF without appreciating that it has been deposited before filing

VARDHMAN TEXTILES LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, R-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

139; or ITA Nos.1264 to 1267/Chd/2019 & ITA Nos.103 to 106/Chd/2020 A.Ys. 2002-03 to 2005-06 Page 13 of 28 (ii) from the date of furnishing of return of income to the date on which the refund is granted, in a case not covered under sub-clause (i); (aa) where the refund is out of any tax paid under section

VARDHMAN TEXTILES LTD,LUDHIANA vs. PR.CIT-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

139; or ITA Nos.1264 to 1267/Chd/2019 & ITA Nos.103 to 106/Chd/2020 A.Ys. 2002-03 to 2005-06 Page 13 of 28 (ii) from the date of furnishing of return of income to the date on which the refund is granted, in a case not covered under sub-clause (i); (aa) where the refund is out of any tax paid under section

SMT. SHANKRI DEVI,PANCHKULA vs. ACIT, PANCKULA CIRCLE, PANCHKULA

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

condone the delay in filing these appeals. 3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 463/Chd/2023 for A.Y 2018-19 as a lead case for discussion wherein assessee has raised the following effective grounds: 1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

BALBIR KUMAR HUF,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO , CHANDIGARH

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

condone the delay in filing these appeals. 3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 463/Chd/2023 for A.Y 2018-19 as a lead case for discussion wherein assessee has raised the following effective grounds: 1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

SH. AMARDEEP SINGH ATHWAL,YAMUNANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-1, YAMUNANAGAR

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

condone the delay in filing these appeals. 3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 463/Chd/2023 for A.Y 2018-19 as a lead case for discussion wherein assessee has raised the following effective grounds: 1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

RANJIT SINGH,PANCHKULA vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR, CPC DEPARTMENT

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

condone the delay in filing these appeals. 3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 463/Chd/2023 for A.Y 2018-19 as a lead case for discussion wherein assessee has raised the following effective grounds: 1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

INCOME TAX OFFICER, FATEHABAD vs. MAHESH NAGPAL, FATEHABAD

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

condone the delay in filing these appeals. 3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 463/Chd/2023 for A.Y 2018-19 as a lead case for discussion wherein assessee has raised the following effective grounds: 1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals