M/S FASTWAY TRANSMISSION (P) LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH

In the result the captioned appeals of the assessee are

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

rectification application u/s 154 of the Act. Neither any new fact, nor any new evidence is required to be produced for adjudication of the above issue as all the relevant facts relating to the issue are already on the file. The question as to whether the assessee can take an additional ground at the appellate stage even when the same

M/S FASTWAY TRANSMISSION (P) LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result the captioned appeals of the assessee are

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

rectification application u/s 154 of the Act. Neither any new fact, nor any new evidence is required to be produced for adjudication of the above issue as all the relevant facts relating to the issue are already on the file. The question as to whether the assessee can take an additional ground at the appellate stage even when the same

M/S PUNJAB CHEMICALS & CROP. PROTECTION LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ADDL. CIT, NEAC DELHI

The appeal stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.127/Chandi/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.128/Chandi/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S Punjab Chemicals & Crop. Addl. Cit Protection Ltd. Nfac बनाम/ Milestone-18, Ambala-Kalka Road Delhi Vs. Vpo Bhankharpur, Derabassi Distt. Sas Nagar (Mohali), Punjab 140201 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacp-9904-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Anil Khanna (Ca) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Kusum Bansal (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17-03-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22-05-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1.1 Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee For Assessment Years (Ay) 2008-09 & 2009-10 Is In Second Round Of Litigation Since The Appeal Was Disposed-Off By Tribunal Vide Ita Nos.60/Chd/2013 & Ita No.100/Chd/2013 Common Order Dated 23-07-2018 For Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10 Wherein Few Of The Issues Were Restored Back To Lower

rectification u/s 154 before Ld. DRP which was disposed-off on 17-02-2023. The rectified directions were carried out by Ld. AO vide order dated 08-05-2023. 1.3 Though the assessee has raised multiple grounds of appeal, however, the grounds as urged by Ld. AR are – (i) Disallowance of Commission Paid to Directors for Rs.35 Lacs; (ii) Disallowance

M/S PUNJAB CHEMICALS & CROP. PROTECTION LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ADDL. CIT, NEAC DELHI

The appeal stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.127/Chandi/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.128/Chandi/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S Punjab Chemicals & Crop. Addl. Cit Protection Ltd. Nfac बनाम/ Milestone-18, Ambala-Kalka Road Delhi Vs. Vpo Bhankharpur, Derabassi Distt. Sas Nagar (Mohali), Punjab 140201 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacp-9904-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Anil Khanna (Ca) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Kusum Bansal (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17-03-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22-05-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1.1 Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee For Assessment Years (Ay) 2008-09 & 2009-10 Is In Second Round Of Litigation Since The Appeal Was Disposed-Off By Tribunal Vide Ita Nos.60/Chd/2013 & Ita No.100/Chd/2013 Common Order Dated 23-07-2018 For Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10 Wherein Few Of The Issues Were Restored Back To Lower

rectification u/s 154 before Ld. DRP which was disposed-off on 17-02-2023. The rectified directions were carried out by Ld. AO vide order dated 08-05-2023. 1.3 Though the assessee has raised multiple grounds of appeal, however, the grounds as urged by Ld. AR are – (i) Disallowance of Commission Paid to Directors for Rs.35 Lacs; (ii) Disallowance

MAHAJAN CONVEYER INDUSTRIES,KANGRA vs. ITO-WARD,PALAMPUR, PALAMPUR

The appeals stand allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita 1053/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita 1054/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita 1055/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita 1056/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita 1052/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S Mahajan Conveyer Industries Acit Circle-1 बनाम/ Plot No 32 To 35, Industrial Area, Palampur Bai Attarian Tehsil Indora Vs. Kangra (Hp) 176202 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aanfm-3447-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri J.S.Bhasin (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Priyanka Dhar (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06-08-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-08-2025

rectification was carried out. However, order dated 05-09- 2016 was against rectified u/s 154 on 22-08-2017 to re-compute disallowance of interest. Since, no appeal was filed against the same, this order attained finality. However, case was reopened and notice u/s 148 was issued on 11-03-2019 for the reason that the capital subsidy of Rs.29.52

MAHAJAN CONVEYER INDUSTRIES,KANGRA vs. ITO-WARD,PALAMPUR, PALAMPUR

The appeals stand allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita 1053/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita 1054/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita 1055/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita 1056/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita 1052/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S Mahajan Conveyer Industries Acit Circle-1 बनाम/ Plot No 32 To 35, Industrial Area, Palampur Bai Attarian Tehsil Indora Vs. Kangra (Hp) 176202 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aanfm-3447-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri J.S.Bhasin (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Priyanka Dhar (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06-08-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-08-2025

rectification was carried out. However, order dated 05-09- 2016 was against rectified u/s 154 on 22-08-2017 to re-compute disallowance of interest. Since, no appeal was filed against the same, this order attained finality. However, case was reopened and notice u/s 148 was issued on 11-03-2019 for the reason that the capital subsidy of Rs.29.52

MAHAJAN CONVEYER INDUSTRIES,KANGRA vs. ITO-WARD, PALAMPUR, PALAMPUR

The appeals stand allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita 1053/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita 1054/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita 1055/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita 1056/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita 1052/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S Mahajan Conveyer Industries Acit Circle-1 बनाम/ Plot No 32 To 35, Industrial Area, Palampur Bai Attarian Tehsil Indora Vs. Kangra (Hp) 176202 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aanfm-3447-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri J.S.Bhasin (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Priyanka Dhar (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06-08-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-08-2025

rectification was carried out. However, order dated 05-09- 2016 was against rectified u/s 154 on 22-08-2017 to re-compute disallowance of interest. Since, no appeal was filed against the same, this order attained finality. However, case was reopened and notice u/s 148 was issued on 11-03-2019 for the reason that the capital subsidy of Rs.29.52

MAHAJAN CONVEYER INDUSTRIES,KANGRA vs. ITO-WARD,PALAMPUR, PALAMPUR

The appeals stand allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita 1053/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita 1054/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita 1055/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita 1056/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita 1052/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S Mahajan Conveyer Industries Acit Circle-1 बनाम/ Plot No 32 To 35, Industrial Area, Palampur Bai Attarian Tehsil Indora Vs. Kangra (Hp) 176202 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aanfm-3447-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri J.S.Bhasin (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Priyanka Dhar (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06-08-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-08-2025

rectification was carried out. However, order dated 05-09- 2016 was against rectified u/s 154 on 22-08-2017 to re-compute disallowance of interest. Since, no appeal was filed against the same, this order attained finality. However, case was reopened and notice u/s 148 was issued on 11-03-2019 for the reason that the capital subsidy of Rs.29.52

MAHAJAN CONVEYER INDUSTRIES,KANGRA vs. ITO-WARD,PALAMPUR, PALAMPUR

The appeals stand allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita 1053/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita 1054/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita 1055/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita 1056/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita 1052/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S Mahajan Conveyer Industries Acit Circle-1 बनाम/ Plot No 32 To 35, Industrial Area, Palampur Bai Attarian Tehsil Indora Vs. Kangra (Hp) 176202 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aanfm-3447-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri J.S.Bhasin (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Priyanka Dhar (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06-08-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-08-2025

rectification was carried out. However, order dated 05-09- 2016 was against rectified u/s 154 on 22-08-2017 to re-compute disallowance of interest. Since, no appeal was filed against the same, this order attained finality. However, case was reopened and notice u/s 148 was issued on 11-03-2019 for the reason that the capital subsidy of Rs.29.52

ADHUNIK PACKAGERS PVT. LTD.,PARWANOO vs. ITO (TDS), SOLAN

Bench: The Said Date I.E. 1.6.2015. Therefore, The Mistake Was Apparent From The Record & Required To Be Rectified U/S 154 Of The Act. .

depreciation was allowed overlooking Section 80VVA of the Act. Overlooking of a statutory provision is clearly a mistake apparent on record and on that basis, rectification under Section 154 of the Act was clearly admissible. Impermissibility of deduction is not debatable if Section 80VVA is applied. This being so, the CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal erred

ADHUNIK PACKAGERS PVT. LTD.,PARWANOO vs. ITO (TDS), SOLAN

Bench: The Said Date I.E. 1.6.2015. Therefore, The Mistake Was Apparent From The Record & Required To Be Rectified U/S 154 Of The Act. .

depreciation was allowed overlooking Section 80VVA of the Act. Overlooking of a statutory provision is clearly a mistake apparent on record and on that basis, rectification under Section 154 of the Act was clearly admissible. Impermissibility of deduction is not debatable if Section 80VVA is applied. This being so, the CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal erred

ADHUNIK PACKAGERS PVT. LTD.,PARWANOO vs. ITO (TDS), SOLAN

Bench: The Said Date I.E. 1.6.2015. Therefore, The Mistake Was Apparent From The Record & Required To Be Rectified U/S 154 Of The Act. .

depreciation was allowed overlooking Section 80VVA of the Act. Overlooking of a statutory provision is clearly a mistake apparent on record and on that basis, rectification under Section 154 of the Act was clearly admissible. Impermissibility of deduction is not debatable if Section 80VVA is applied. This being so, the CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal erred

ADHUNIK PACKAGERS PVT. LTD.,PARWANOO vs. ITO (TDS), SOLAN

Bench: The Said Date I.E. 1.6.2015. Therefore, The Mistake Was Apparent From The Record & Required To Be Rectified U/S 154 Of The Act. .

depreciation was allowed overlooking Section 80VVA of the Act. Overlooking of a statutory provision is clearly a mistake apparent on record and on that basis, rectification under Section 154 of the Act was clearly admissible. Impermissibility of deduction is not debatable if Section 80VVA is applied. This being so, the CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal erred

ADHUNIK PACKAGERS PVT. LTD.,PARWANOO vs. ITO (TDS), SOLAN

Bench: The Said Date I.E. 1.6.2015. Therefore, The Mistake Was Apparent From The Record & Required To Be Rectified U/S 154 Of The Act. .

depreciation was allowed overlooking Section 80VVA of the Act. Overlooking of a statutory provision is clearly a mistake apparent on record and on that basis, rectification under Section 154 of the Act was clearly admissible. Impermissibility of deduction is not debatable if Section 80VVA is applied. This being so, the CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal erred

ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SML ISUZU LTD., CHANDIGARH

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

rectification under section 154. Statue must be read as a whole. It is contended that when there is no discussion on the issues in the assessment order and no details were called for by the AO or filed by the assessee on the issues, no finding either positive or negative was arrived at during the course of the original assessment

M/S NOVA IRON AND STEEL LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Filing Of Income Tax Return.

u/s 43B of the Act. Record of Hearing 6. The hearing in the appeal took place on 14/08/2024 before us when both the parties appeared and were heard at length on merits of their respective submissions. The Ld. AR contended that claim of depreciation of Rs. 1,03,13,420/- was wrongly allowed by the CPC, Bangaluru while processing under

JCIT(OSD), C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. THE SIKH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, PATIALA

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Against Assessment Order Dt. 30/03/2013 Which Was Passed By Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patiala Range, Patiala, Punjab Which Order Is Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao’S Order”.

154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 18. Upon application of the assessee on 03/04/2013 following rectification order was passed : 7. Keeping in view of the above discussion, the addition on account of depreciation on building under construction is required to be made at Rs. 72,33,282/- instead of Rs. 3,21,88,727/-. With this observation, the income

THE SIKH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,PATIALA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE, PATIALA

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Against Assessment Order Dt. 30/03/2013 Which Was Passed By Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patiala Range, Patiala, Punjab Which Order Is Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao’S Order”.

154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 18. Upon application of the assessee on 03/04/2013 following rectification order was passed : 7. Keeping in view of the above discussion, the addition on account of depreciation on building under construction is required to be made at Rs. 72,33,282/- instead of Rs. 3,21,88,727/-. With this observation, the income