SANJEEV KUMAR GOYAL,FATEHABAD vs. DCIT, CC-2, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed

Bench: This Hon’Ble Tribunal Under Section 253 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 As Amended From Time To Time. 2. The Assessee Is Aggrieved By The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dt. 20/01/2023 In Appeal No. 10853/2018-19/It/Cit(A)-5/Ldh/2021-22 For The A.Y. 2019-20 Under Section 250(6) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Which Was Dismissed. Therefore The Present Second Appeal Under Section 253 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Before Us Against The Aforesaid Order Dt. 20/01/2023 Which Is Hereinafter Referred To As The Impugned Order.

depreciation during the year under consideration. During the assessment proceedings the assessee has not produced any bills/vouchers/ proof of payment/ copy of accounts of the building as Capital Work in Progress to substantiate the claim of source of investment made for the construction of building. The onus to prove the sources of the surrender income lies entirely on the assessee

M/S SHUBHAM COTTON MILLS PVT. LTD.,ELLENABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, SIRSA

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 133A of the Act. It is thus submitted that the entire sum declared as income has been offered to tax separately in the Profit & Loss Account furnished alongwith return of income. 3. It is submitted that if the aforesaid sum is excluded from Profit 8B Loss Account, the revised Profit 8B LOSS Account is as under: 2866228 Net Profit

SH. GURINDER MAKKAR,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-3, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

depreciation amounting to Rs. 70,000/- on the building. 5. Notwithstanding, the above said grounds of appeal, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has wrongly confirmed the order passed u/s 143(3). 6. That the Ld. CIT(A), Ludhiana has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in invoking the provision of Section 68 of the Income

SHRI BALBIR SINGH VERMA,SHIMLA vs. PR.CIT, SHIMLA

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

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

133A conducted on 04.03.2015. 3.2 Regarding Interest Claimed under Section 24(b) of the Act, the AO observed that the assessee claimed Rs. 39,15,328/- as interest on borrowed capital for seven properties under Section 24(b). The Ld. AO asked the assessee to provide loan agreements and bank certificates related to loan. However, the assessee did not provided

M/S ASHA TECHNOLOGIES,KALA AMB vs. ITO, SIRMOUR

In the result, both the above appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed as aforesaid in respect of impugned orders dt

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

133A of the IT Act to find out the true facts of the case when there was no compliance and cooperation on the part of the assessee to prove its primary onus. And on the basis of survey only true facts of the case were ascertained which helped in ascertaining the factual reality. The assessing office collected information

M/S ASHA TECHNOLOGIES,SIRMOUR vs. ADDL. CIT, SOLAN

In the result, both the above appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed as aforesaid in respect of impugned orders dt

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

133A of the IT Act to find out the true facts of the case when there was no compliance and cooperation on the part of the assessee to prove its primary onus. And on the basis of survey only true facts of the case were ascertained which helped in ascertaining the factual reality. The assessing office collected information

ANISH GARG,PATIALA vs. ITO WARD-4, PATIALA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

133A of the Income Tax\nAct, 1961 was conducted at business premises of the assessee on 27.9.2018.\nDuring the course of survey operation, certain incriminating documents have\nbeen found which have been impounded. From the impounding material, it has\nbeen gathered that the assessee is being grossly understating his income and on\nthe other hand, the assessee is investing

VIMAL ALLOYS PRIVATE LIMITED, MANDI GOBINDGARH,PUNJAB vs. JAO THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE, PATIALA, PUNJAB

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

133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. During the search proceedings as one of the group concern of the WWG namely M/s. Futuristic Metal Trading Pvt ltd.(FMTPL), was surveyed by the department wherein an excel sheet namely ‘Cash & CH report 14.11.17.xlsx’ was found from the premises of the FMTPL, and the said excel sheet received was examined

M/S SINGH CONSTRUCTION CO.,PATIALA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE, PATIAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

133A was carried out at the business premises of the assessee on 18/02/2009. Subsequently, the assessee filed its return of income declaring total income of Rs. 1,03,53,180/- on 30/09/2009 which was processed under section 143(1) and thereafter selected for scrutiny and thereafter order under section 143(3) was passed on 08/12/2011 wherein the AO invoked

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA vs. AARTI INTERNATIONAL LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

section 133A was conducted on 14.03.2018. The assessee filed its return of income for AY 2018- 19 on 04.10.2018, declaring income of Rs. 7,91,78,480/-. The return was processed u/s 143(1) and later it was selected for scrutiny u/s 143(2). Thereafter, notices and detailed questionnaires u/s 142(1) were issued, to which the assessee made online

LAKHVIR KAUR,MOHALI vs. DCIT/ACIT(CEN)-2, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the above appeals of the Assessee are\nallowed

depreciation and interest on car loan.\n7. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld.\nAdditional Commissioner of Income Tax, Range Central failed to\napply due application of mind in giving approval u/s 153D of the\nAct and as such the order deserves to be quashed on this ground\nalone.\n8. That the appellant craves leave

LAKHVIR KAUR,MOHALI, CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT/ACIT(CEN)-2 CHD, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the above appeals of the Assessee are\nallowed

depreciation and interest on car loan.\n7. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld.\nAdditional Commissioner of Income Tax, Range Central failed to\napply due application of mind in giving approval u/s 153D of the\nAct and as such the order deserves to be quashed on this ground\nalone.\n8. That the appellant craves leave

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA vs. GPG CATTLE FEED PVT. LTD., MOGA

In the result, the Revenue appeal is partly allowed and the Cross Objection of\nthe assessee is dismissed

133A had been conducted at\nthe premises of the assessee on 25.04.2018. During the course of the survey, physical\nverification of stock was carried out, and an excess stock amounting to Rs.2,00,00,000/-\nwas found over and above the stock recorded in the regular books of accounts. On\nbeing confronted with the discrepancies, the assessee surrendered an amount

SH. MOHIT MITTAL PROP. MITTAL ENTERPRISES,LUDHIANA, PUNJAB vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1 LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA, PUNJAB

In the result, appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

133A have been carried in very peaceful and cordial atmosphere and the additional income has been offered voluntarily to buy peace of mind without any pressure as far. 6. Contrary to this, there is nothing possessed by the Revenue. 7. On the other hand ld. DR contended that the Revenue Authorities have specifically held that these are unexplained incomes

SHRI. TARSEM GOYAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.149/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sh. Rajeev Goyal Pr. Commissioner Of Income बनाम M/S R.K. Associates, Tax, Rohtak B.G. Complex Near Ganesh Dharam Kanta, Sirsa -125055, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aibpg7289A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

133A of the Act was carried out at the business premises on 10.9.2015. During the course of survey, some excess cash, unaccounted loans and ITA Nos. 149 to 152, 154 & 157-c-2021 Rajeev Goyal & others 22 advances to various parties, unexplained investment in furniture and fixtures were found. The assessee voluntarily offered surrender of additional income

SH. PARSHOTAM GOYAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.149/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sh. Rajeev Goyal Pr. Commissioner Of Income बनाम M/S R.K. Associates, Tax, Rohtak B.G. Complex Near Ganesh Dharam Kanta, Sirsa -125055, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aibpg7289A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

133A of the Act was carried out at the business premises on 10.9.2015. During the course of survey, some excess cash, unaccounted loans and ITA Nos. 149 to 152, 154 & 157-c-2021 Rajeev Goyal & others 22 advances to various parties, unexplained investment in furniture and fixtures were found. The assessee voluntarily offered surrender of additional income

PRIYANKA,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.149/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sh. Rajeev Goyal Pr. Commissioner Of Income बनाम M/S R.K. Associates, Tax, Rohtak B.G. Complex Near Ganesh Dharam Kanta, Sirsa -125055, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aibpg7289A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

133A of the Act was carried out at the business premises on 10.9.2015. During the course of survey, some excess cash, unaccounted loans and ITA Nos. 149 to 152, 154 & 157-c-2021 Rajeev Goyal & others 22 advances to various parties, unexplained investment in furniture and fixtures were found. The assessee voluntarily offered surrender of additional income

SHRI RAJEEV GOYAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.149/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sh. Rajeev Goyal Pr. Commissioner Of Income बनाम M/S R.K. Associates, Tax, Rohtak B.G. Complex Near Ganesh Dharam Kanta, Sirsa -125055, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aibpg7289A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

133A of the Act was carried out at the business premises on 10.9.2015. During the course of survey, some excess cash, unaccounted loans and ITA Nos. 149 to 152, 154 & 157-c-2021 Rajeev Goyal & others 22 advances to various parties, unexplained investment in furniture and fixtures were found. The assessee voluntarily offered surrender of additional income

M/S PARDEEP ISPAT(P) LTD.,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.149/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sh. Rajeev Goyal Pr. Commissioner Of Income बनाम M/S R.K. Associates, Tax, Rohtak B.G. Complex Near Ganesh Dharam Kanta, Sirsa -125055, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aibpg7289A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

133A of the Act was carried out at the business premises on 10.9.2015. During the course of survey, some excess cash, unaccounted loans and ITA Nos. 149 to 152, 154 & 157-c-2021 Rajeev Goyal & others 22 advances to various parties, unexplained investment in furniture and fixtures were found. The assessee voluntarily offered surrender of additional income