SH. MAHESH CHUGH,CHANDIGARH vs. PR.CIT-2, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

delay is, accordingly, condoned. Ordered accordingly. 4. The ld. AR, accordingly, was directed to address the grievance of the assessee in the appeal filed. On behalf of the assessee, it was submitted at the outset that the assessee does not wish to specifically press ground No. 2 as the issue would stand addressed by the other grounds. ITA 104 /CHD/2021

SEEMA SALWAHAN,AMBALA CANTT. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, AMBALA CANTT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav

54F amounting to Rs.28,92,978/-. The AO has initiated a penalty under Section 270A of the Act. He imposed penalty of Rs.2,87,066/- being 50% of the tax on under reported income. 3. The appeal to the ld. CIT(A) did not bring any relief to the assessee because it was dismissed for the reason that there

JAGDEV SINGH ,AMBALA vs. ITO WARD4 , YAMUNA NAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

condone the delay for which sufficient cause is shown, and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. In the present appeal assessee’s main contention is that the Ld. CIT(A) has decided the case without considering the reply, remand report and also the reply to remand report given by him to CIT(A). 5. Briefly the facts of the case