SHRI SATISH SOIN,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, CC-II, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 303/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Satish Soin, बनाम The Acit, House No.31, Garden Enclave, Central Circle-2, Vs South City-Ii, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan /Tan No: Advps6254N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Kumar & Ms. Muskan Garg, Cas राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 26.05.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.07.2025 Hybrid Hearing आदेश/Order Per Rajpal Yadav, Vp

condone the delay and proceed to decide the appeals on merit. 7. Both the appellants have raised an additional ground of appeal vide which, it has been pleaded that original assessment order passed under Section 153A read with Section 143(3) of the Act was required to be approved by the Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 153D. This approval

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

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

17. The Department does not contend that the assessee had needlessly or frivolously delayed the assessment proceedings at the original or appellate stage. In absence of any such foundation, mere fact that the assessee made a claim during the course of the assessment proceedings which was allowed at the appellate stage would not ipso facto imply that the ITA Nos.1264

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

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

17. The Department does not contend that the assessee had needlessly or frivolously delayed the assessment proceedings at the original or appellate stage. In absence of any such foundation, mere fact that the assessee made a claim during the course of the assessment proceedings which was allowed at the appellate stage would not ipso facto imply that the ITA Nos.1264

INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1, MANDI GOBINDGARH, HQ SIRHIND vs. PARTAP INDUSTRIES LIMITED, RAJPURA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr Krinwant Sahay & Shri Paresh M. Joshiआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 464/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 The Ito, Vs. Partap Industries Limited, बनाम Rajpura Ward-1, New Libra Kothi, Mandi Gobindgarh Railway Road, Sirhind Hq. Sirhind, 140406 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabcp0384Q अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the Court is required to examine as to whether any substantial question of law would arise for consideration we are of the view that the appeal should not be thrown out on technical ground. That apart we find that Tribunal had referred to a decision of the Co-ordinate Bench

M/S SHAKTI SPINNERS LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-7, LUDHIANA

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: the appeal is finally heard or disposed off.

delay in filing of appeal is condoned and the appeal is taken up for adjudication on merits. 7. Coming to the merits of the case, it was argued before us by the Ld. Counsel that the only ground of appeal is with regard to the addition on account of unsecured loans, from the directors and their family members

SHRI GURU NANAK NAM LEWA SEWAK JATHA,,FATEHGARH SAHIB vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

section 139, the assessee could have been advised to approach the Commissioner or the assessee’s application could have referred to the Commissioner, however, nothing to this effect is available on record and even time limit for the Commissioner to dispose off such application has since expired. In such a peculiar situation, the assessee couldn’t be left remedy less

INCOME TAX OFFICER , PATIALA vs. SH. SEWA SINGH, PATIALA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr Krinwant Sahay & Shri Paresh M. Joshiआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 696/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 The Ito, Vs. Shri Sewa Singh, बनाम H. No. B-27,Focal Point, Patiala Patiala 147001 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Abjpj5347B अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Virtual Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : None राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Rahul Sohu, Jcit, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 02.07.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 02 .07.2024 आदेश/Order

Section 260A of 696-Chd-2023 Sewa Singh, Patiala 7 the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the Court is required to examine as to whether any substantial question of law would arise for consideration we are of the view that the appeal should not be thrown out on technical ground. That apart we find that Tribunal had referred

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

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

condoned and the appeal is admitted. 6. Following grounds have been raised in this appeal. 1. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Id. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 5,43,203/- made by Id. A.O. (CPC) on account of late deposit of employee's contribution to ESI/EPF, though

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5, PATIALA vs. SH. MOHAR SINGH, PATIALA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the Court is required to examine as to whether any substantial question of law would arise for consideration we are of the view that the appeal should not be thrown out on technical ground. That apart we find that Tribunal had referred to a decision of the Co-ordinate Bench

INCOME TAX OFFICER, PATIALA vs. KULWARAN SINGH, PATIALA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the Court is required to examine as to whether any substantial question of law would arise for consideration we are of the view that the appeal should not be thrown out on technical ground. That apart we find that Tribunal had referred to a decision of the Co-ordinate Bench

INCOME TAX OFFICER, PATIALA vs. GURMEET SINGH PANDHER, PATIALA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the Court is required to examine as to whether any substantial question of law would arise for consideration we are of the view that the appeal should not be thrown out on technical ground. That apart we find that Tribunal had referred to a decision of the Co-ordinate Bench

HEALTH BIOTECH LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT/ ACIT CIR1(1), CHANDIGARH

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1241, 1242 & 1243/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2017-18 Health Biotech Limited, The Dcit/Acit, Sco 162-164, Ial Building, Vs Circle 1(1),Sector 17-E, Sector 34, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabch1876K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2026

17-E, Sector 34, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AABCH1876K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 25.03.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 06.04.2026 PHYSICAL HEARING O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, VP The present three appeals are directed at the instance

HEALTH BIOTECH LIIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT/ ACIT CIR1(1), CHANDIGARH

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1241, 1242 & 1243/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2017-18 Health Biotech Limited, The Dcit/Acit, Sco 162-164, Ial Building, Vs Circle 1(1),Sector 17-E, Sector 34, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabch1876K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2026

17-E, Sector 34, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AABCH1876K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 25.03.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 06.04.2026 PHYSICAL HEARING O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, VP The present three appeals are directed at the instance

HEALTH BIOTECH LIMITED ,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT/ACIT CIR1(1), CHANDIGARH

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1241, 1242 & 1243/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2017-18 Health Biotech Limited, The Dcit/Acit, Sco 162-164, Ial Building, Vs Circle 1(1),Sector 17-E, Sector 34, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabch1876K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2026

17-E, Sector 34, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AABCH1876K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 25.03.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 06.04.2026 PHYSICAL HEARING O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, VP The present three appeals are directed at the instance

DCIT, CIRCLE, YAMUNANAGAR vs. M/S SYMBIOSIS PHARMACEUTICALS PVT. LTD., YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, appeal is dismissed

Bench: The Due Date As Prescribed In Section 139(1) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 Whereas The Assessee Has Filed Its Return Of Income After The Due Date.

condonation of the said infraction, even if a return is filed in terms of sub section (4), Accepting such a plea would mean that a person who had not filed a return within the due time as prescribed under sub section (1) of (2) of section 139 would not get benefit by filing the return under section 139(4) much

KAKA SINGH ALIAS GULJAR SINGH,PATIALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , PATIALA

condone the delay in filing these appeals.\n3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 463/Chd/2023 for A.Y\n2018-19 as a lead case for discussion wherein assessee has raised the\nfollowing effective grounds:\n1.\nThat having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case\nand in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICE BARNALA vs. LAKHVIR SINGH, GRAIN MARKET, BARNALA

condone the delay in filing these appeals.\n3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 463/Chd/2023 for A.Y\n2018-19 as a lead case for discussion wherein assessee has raised the\nfollowing effective grounds:\n1.\nThat having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case\nand in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(5), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH vs. AVTAR SINGH, VILLAGE- KAIMBWALA

condone the delay in filing these appeals.\n3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 463/Chd/2023 for A.Y\n2018-19 as a lead case for discussion wherein assessee has raised the\nfollowing effective grounds:\n1.\nThat having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case\nand in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals