KANDI FRIENDS EDUCATIONAL TRUST,ROPAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSION OF INCOME TAX, CL. 1, EXEMPTION, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

Section 11. Thus, this addition is not sustainable and accordingly deleted. ITA Nos. 797 & 798/CHD/2024 A.Y.2014-15 & 2015-16 26 Ground No.2 in A.Y. 2015-16 20. In this ground, grievance of the assessee is that CIT (Appeals) has erred in confirming the disallowance of depreciation

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”.

Section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Therefore, the amount of Rs. 10,06,000/- is disallowed and added to the income of the assessee. ix) Disallowance of expenditure claimed by the Assessee under the head depreciation

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”.

Section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Therefore, the amount of Rs. 10,06,000/- is disallowed and added to the income of the assessee. ix) Disallowance of expenditure claimed by the Assessee under the head depreciation

DCIT, C-1 (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH vs. THE INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ENGINEERS SOCIETY, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

11\nand 12, even though the AO has proved that income of the society has\nbeen used to provide benefit \"directly or indirectly\" to any person\nreferred to in section 13(3) i.e. specified persons ignoring the detailed\nfindings given by the Assessing Officer in the Assessment order?\nii.\nWhether on the (acts and in the circumstances of the case

CT EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JALANDHAR vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is Partly Allowed for\nStatistical Purposes as per the directions above

11 and 12, treating the Assessee as an Association of\nPersons (AOP). This denial was predicated on the finding that the Assessee's\nactivities (selling books, running hostels, charging multiple fees—as per Para 7\nand 8 of the AO's order) were commercial in nature, constituting a violation of\nSection 2(15) and Section 13(1)(c) read with

ARYA COLLEGE,LUDHIANA, PUNJAB vs. DCIT, EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE 1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for\nstatistical purposes

Depreciation as per books of accounts of | Rs.12,40,731/-\nthe assessee (Mandatory)\n| TOTAL INCOME | -66,923/-\n4. The CPC, Bangalore has processed the return but made\naddition of Rs.11,39,77,899/- by denying the benefit of\nSection 11 and 12 of the Act. It is pertinent to observe that if\nbenefit of Section

ACIT, CHANDIGARH vs. THE PUNJABI UNIVERSITY, PATIALA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

depreciation of Rs.25,43,66,930/-. The AO was of the view that by Finance Act, 2015, sub-section (6) of Section 11

A.B. SUGARS LIMITED,PUNJAB vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

Depreciation and Amortization Expenses 4,54,86,758 Other Expenses 3,68,07,307 Total 11,53,61,815 Expenditure (B) Profit from COGEN Division (A-B) 25,88,20,248 (37,41,82,063-11,53,61,815) For clarification of Doubt, we are enclosing Segment-wise copies of statement of Profit & Loss Account

A.B. SUGARS LIMITED,PUNJAB vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

Depreciation and Amortization Expenses 4,54,86,758 Other Expenses 3,68,07,307 Total 11,53,61,815 Expenditure (B) Profit from COGEN Division (A-B) 25,88,20,248 (37,41,82,063-11,53,61,815) For clarification of Doubt, we are enclosing Segment-wise copies of statement of Profit & Loss Account

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

section 57.\nThe said provision reads thus:\n\"57. Deductions.-The income chargeable under the head 'Income from other\nsources' shall be computed after making the following deductions, namely :.\n(iv) in the case of income of the nature referred to in clause (viii) of sub-\nsection (2) of section 56, a deduction of a sum equal to fifty

SHAPING CAREERS EDUCATION SOCIETY,PANCHKULA vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD,, AMBALA

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Denying The Exemption By The Cpc.

sections 11 and 12 of the Act was denied on the ground that the assessee had filed its audit report in Form No. 10B instead of the prescribed Form No. 10BB as mandated under Rule 17B of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. 2. In the present appeal Assessee has raised the following grounds: 1. The impugned order u/s 250 dated

M/S LUDHIANA LEASING PVT. LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 241/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 M/S Ludhiana Leasing Pvt.Ltd., बनाम The Dcit, Central Circle-Ii, #168, Sector 8, Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaacl6365N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

depreciation and earned net gain of Rs. 16,71,42,769/- Even the Assessee has paid due capital gains tax on the said receipt, as applicable, under the normal provisions of the Income Tax Act. The Auditor of the Assessee had shown this capital gain under the Column ‘other income’. However, the Assessee in the Income Tax return deducted

M/S TJR PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, CC-2, CHANDIGARH

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

depreciation on vehicle to the extent of Rs. 9,11,4884/- without any justification. 15. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw any grounds of appeal before the final hearing. 2.1 The following additional Grounds have also been taken by the Assessee: 1. That the approval u/s 153D was granted by the JCIT without application

ACIT, CC-2, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S TJR PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., CHANDIGARH

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

depreciation on vehicle to the extent of Rs. 9,11,4884/- without any justification. 15. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw any grounds of appeal before the final hearing. 2.1 The following additional Grounds have also been taken by the Assessee: 1. That the approval u/s 153D was granted by the JCIT without application

M/S PAGRO FROZEN FOODS PVT. LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO, W-2(3), CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

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

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 13. The Ld. AO in the assessment order dt. 26/12/2016 has stated that return declaring income of profit of business is of Rs. 31,54,889/- filed on 29/11/2014 and same is set off against depreciation of 2012-13. The balance depreciation is as under: A.Y Amount of brought forward Amount

CT EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JALANDHAR vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

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

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

Depreciation disallowed (difference between claimed and restricted amount) of Rs. 36,83,779.02/-. 3.3 The AO's order noted the assessee's non-compliant and casual attitude despite being given ample opportunities. The final Assessed Income was computed at Rs. 11,11,11,830/-. Penalty proceedings u/s 270A were initiated separately. 4. Against the order of the AO the assessee

ASPEE SONS,SOLAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PARWANOO, PARWANOO

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

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

11,784/- under Section 80-IC of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The case was selected for scrutiny and assessment was completed under Section 143(3) on 18.11.2016, wherein the Ld. AO made two disallowances: (i) Rs. 18,33,710/- towards ineligible profits from insurance claims and foreign exchange fluctuation not derived from manufacturing activity

S.P. SINGLA CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

11. In reply, ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that the assessee's case itself defeats its purpose for the reason that in para 7 and 8, the AO while recording reasons has clearly admitted that the assessee's case falls under the proviso but ITA 514/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2012-13 18 subsequently in para 9, they invoked clause