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”.

depreciation. receipts. Samana 11427470 18954132 1130287 Patiala 37699750 84077224 6664172 Zirakpur 3373077 2651392 8076586 Society 22974168 7733275 47476722 75474465 113416023 63347767 11. From the above chart, the percentage of the utilisation of income of the society is worked out as under: Total receipts of the society Rs. 11,34,16,023/- 85% of Rs. 11

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”.

depreciation. receipts. Samana 11427470 18954132 1130287 Patiala 37699750 84077224 6664172 Zirakpur 3373077 2651392 8076586 Society 22974168 7733275 47476722 75474465 113416023 63347767 11. From the above chart, the percentage of the utilisation of income of the society is worked out as under: Total receipts of the society Rs. 11,34,16,023/- 85% of Rs. 11

VIRGO ALUMINUM LTD.,SIRMOUR vs. PR. C.I.T., CIRCLE, PATIALA

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 438/Chd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18

11,32,895/- and credit entry of Rs. 1,29,425/- even though this issue was specifically raised in the notice u/s 263(1) supra (d) The AO completely failed to raise any query if the assessee had any evidence to establish that it had made diligent efforts to recover the outstanding payments from Metalmine Enterprises

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

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

d)] of sub-section (1), the income or the property\" of the trust or\ninstitution or any part of such income or property shall, for the purposes of\nthat clause, be deemed to have been used or applied for the benefit of a\nperson referred to in sub-section (3), —\n(a) if any part of the income or property

RANJIT SINGH,PANCHKULA vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR, CPC DEPARTMENT

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

Section 16 or Section 17 of the Act. We, therefore, hold that the statutory interest paid under Section 34 of the Act is interest paid for the delayed payment of the compensation amount and, therefore, is a revenue receipt liable to tax under the Income Tax Act." 9. This position of law has been consistently reiterated by this Court

BALBIR KUMAR HUF,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO , CHANDIGARH

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

Section 16 or Section 17 of the Act. We, therefore, hold that the statutory interest paid under Section 34 of the Act is interest paid for the delayed payment of the compensation amount and, therefore, is a revenue receipt liable to tax under the Income Tax Act." 9. This position of law has been consistently reiterated by this Court

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

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

Section 16 or Section 17 of the Act. We, therefore, hold that the statutory interest paid under Section 34 of the Act is interest paid for the delayed payment of the compensation amount and, therefore, is a revenue receipt liable to tax under the Income Tax Act." 9. This position of law has been consistently reiterated by this Court

PAWAN KUMAR,FATEHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, FATEHABAD

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

Section 16 or Section 17 of the Act. We, therefore, hold that the statutory interest paid under Section 34 of the Act is interest paid for the delayed payment of the compensation amount and, therefore, is a revenue receipt liable to tax under the Income Tax Act." 9. This position of law has been consistently reiterated by this Court

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

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

Section 16 or Section 17 of the Act. We, therefore, hold that the statutory interest paid under Section 34 of the Act is interest paid for the delayed payment of the compensation amount and, therefore, is a revenue receipt liable to tax under the Income Tax Act." 9. This position of law has been consistently reiterated by this Court

INCOME TAX OFFICER, FATEHABAD vs. MAHESH NAGPAL, FATEHABAD

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

Section 16 or Section 17 of the Act. We, therefore, hold that the statutory interest paid under Section 34 of the Act is interest paid for the delayed payment of the compensation amount and, therefore, is a revenue receipt liable to tax under the Income Tax Act." 9. This position of law has been consistently reiterated by this Court

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

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

Section 16 or Section 17 of the Act. We, therefore, hold that the statutory interest paid under Section 34 of the Act is interest paid for the delayed payment of the compensation amount and, therefore, is a revenue receipt liable to tax under the Income Tax Act." 9. This position of law has been consistently reiterated by this Court

SAROJ CHAUDHARY BALA,PANCHKULA vs. ITO, WARD-4, PANCHKULA

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

Section 16 or Section 17 of the Act. We, therefore, hold that the statutory interest paid under Section 34 of the Act is interest paid for the delayed payment of the compensation amount and, therefore, is a revenue receipt liable to tax under the Income Tax Act." 9. This position of law has been consistently reiterated by this Court

ARJESH KUMAR,PATIALA vs. ITO NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE , DELHI

Section 16 or Section 17 of the Act. We, therefore, hold that the statutory interest paid under Section 34 of the Act is interest paid for the delayed payment of the compensation amount and, therefore, is a revenue receipt liable to tax under the Income Tax Act." 9. This position of law has been consistently reiterated by this Court

WINSOME TEXTILE INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

11. In this regard, during the course of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the appellant had filed its original return of income on 28.09.2011 declaring profit of Rs 21,05,90,768/- which was set off against the brought forward losses. However, tax was paid under sections 115JB of Income Tax Act, 1961. Thereafter, notice under section

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

D, Chandigarh\nबनाम\nThe ITO\nWard 5(5)\nChandigarh\nस्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAGHG7637F\nअपीलार्थी/Appellant\n\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by :\nShri Manpreet Singh, C.A\nराजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by :\nShri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR\n\nप्रत्यर्थी/Respondent\n\nआयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 486 /Chd/2025\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2020-21\n\n15\n\nground

SH. AJIT SINGH,PINJORE vs. ITO, WARD-1, PANCHKULA

D, Chandigarh\nWard 5(5)\nChandigarh\nस्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAGHG7637F\nअपीलार्थी/Appellant\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से/ Assessee by :\nShri Manpreet Singh, C.A\nराजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by :\nShri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR\nआयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 486 /Chd/2025\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2020-21\n15\nShri Hakam Singh\nH.No. 47, Part-II, Vill. Baran\nPatiala

NARENDER KAUR,KURUKSHETRA, HARYANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 , KURUKSHETRA

D, Chandigarh\nबनाम\nThe ITO\nWard 5(5)\nChandigarh\nस्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAGHG7637F\nअपीलार्थी/Appellant\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से/ Assessee by :\nShri Manpreet Singh, C.A\nराजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by :\nShri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR\nआयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 486 /Chd/2025\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2020-21\nShri Hakam Singh\nH.No. 47, Part-II, Vill. Baran

GURDEEP SINGH HUF,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO, WARD 5(5), CHANDIGARH

D, Chandigarh\nस्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAGHG7637F\nअपीलार्थी/Appellant\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से/ Assessee by :\nShri Manpreet Singh, C.A\nराजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by :\nShri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR\nआयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 486 /Chd/2025\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2020-21\n15\nShri Hakam Singh\nH.No. 47, Part-II, Vill. Baran\nPatiala-147001, Punjab\nबनाम\nThe