DCIT, C-1, LUDHIANA vs. M/S GOLD STAR AMCO STEELS PVT. LTD., LUDHIANA

In the results, the book results as duly audited need to be accepted and the addition so made is hereby directed to be deleted

Bench: 30Th Of September 2013 And, As Such, Framing Of Assessment By The Assessing Officer Without Observing Mandatory

144 dt. 09/03/2015 wherein the assessed income was determined at Rs. 3,54,58,572/- as against the returned loss of Rs. 2,46,67,816/-. 6. While passing the assessment order, the AO made an addition of Rs. 32,50,000/- under Section 68 of the Act on account of share application money received by the assessee during

TARSEM BHARTI,SHIMLA vs. ITO, WARD-2, SHIMLA

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

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

depreciation as so made in the return of income. Notice under section 143(2) and 142(1) followed by show cause dt. 03/12/2018 was issued to the assessee and thereafter, the assessment was completed under section 144

VISHAL PAPER TECH (INDIA) LIMITED,DERABASSI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-2(1), CHANDIGARH

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

144 read with Section 263 of the Income Tax Act. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that against the original assessment order dated 17.11.2017, assessee was aggrieved on account of denial of additional depreciation

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)

144 of Income Tax Act were invoked by the AO and net rate as estimated and separate addition on account of un-satisfactory explanation regarding addition of capital by partners were made. It was submitted that the assessment order was accepted by the assessee and no further appeal was filed. The Ld. CIT in his order under section

NAHAR POLY FILMS LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 458/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-2016 Nahar Poly Films Limited, Vs. The Dcit, बनाम 375, Industrial Area-A, Circle-1, Ludhiana 141003 Aayakar Bhawan, Rishi Nagar, Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaacn5708K अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Navdeep Sharma, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 29.05.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.08.2024 आदेश/Order Per Dr. Krinwant Sahay, A.M.:

Section 14 A (2) are not applicable in the case here in. 3. That the Worthy CIT(A) / National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, erred in law and on facts in not directing the Ld Assessing Officer, not to make disallowance u/s 14A by applying rule 8D at Rs. 46,04,492/- and without assuming the proper jurisdiction. Directions

HARBHAGWAN HARBHAJAN LAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CL. 1(1), CHANDIGARH

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

Section 144. While the AO applied a net profit rate of 8% on gross turnover, including scrap sales, relevant factors such as past assessed gross profit rates, depreciation

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)

144 (Gujrat) as per copy placed at pages 212 to 214 of JS-II wherein it is held as under: INCOME TAX : Where Assessing Officer issued reopening notice under section 148A(b) on ground that a search conducted upon a party revealed that said party provided accommodation entries in form of loan to assessee, since Assessing Officer failed to consider

BHUPINDER SINGH SON OF SH. GURMUKH SINGH ,PUNJAB vs. THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CHANDIGARH-1, C.R BUILDING HIMALAYA MARG, SECTOR 17-E, CHANDIGARH, PUNJAB

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

144 dt. 03/06/2019 was passed. 2.5 It is contended that the delay of 586 days w.e.f 20.05.2022 was bonafide, just and same be condoned. Appeal was filed on 26/12/2023. Assessee regrets delays too. Affidavit of previous counsel Shri Rohit Vashishat is placed on record on page 105 and 106 of paper book. We have perused the same. 3. Delay sufficiently

SBS BIOTECH UNIT II,SIRMOUR 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)

144 (25% of 16,85,84,575)] is escaped income of the assessee. Further in case other unexplained income of the assessee comes to light during the course of assessment proceedings, then such unexplained income will be added to the total assessed income at the culmination of assessment proceedings. Considering the factual matrix, statutory provisions and legal principles, the undersigned

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

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

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, , AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

144 Rs. 40,05,038 Domestic Traveling & Convey- Rs. 3,840,407 Rs. 1,104,566 other Foreign Traveling exp-others Rs. 4,770,256 Rs. 1,023,622 TOTAL Rs. 277,90,068 Rs. 113,73,255 2.12 That Ld. AO has observed that this allocation of expenses is not in consonance with the ratio of turnover between

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

144 Rs. 40,05,038 Domestic Traveling & Convey- Rs. 3,840,407 Rs. 1,104,566 other Foreign Traveling exp-others Rs. 4,770,256 Rs. 1,023,622 TOTAL Rs. 277,90,068 Rs. 113,73,255 2.12 That Ld. AO has observed that this allocation of expenses is not in consonance with the ratio of turnover between

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

144 Rs. 40,05,038 Domestic Traveling & Convey- Rs. 3,840,407 Rs. 1,104,566 other Foreign Traveling exp-others Rs. 4,770,256 Rs. 1,023,622 TOTAL Rs. 277,90,068 Rs. 113,73,255 2.12 That Ld. AO has observed that this allocation of expenses is not in consonance with the ratio of turnover between

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4,, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

144 Rs. 40,05,038 Domestic Traveling & Convey- Rs. 3,840,407 Rs. 1,104,566 other Foreign Traveling exp-others Rs. 4,770,256 Rs. 1,023,622 TOTAL Rs. 277,90,068 Rs. 113,73,255 2.12 That Ld. AO has observed that this allocation of expenses is not in consonance with the ratio of turnover between

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

144 Rs. 40,05,038 Domestic Traveling & Convey- Rs. 3,840,407 Rs. 1,104,566 other Foreign Traveling exp-others Rs. 4,770,256 Rs. 1,023,622 TOTAL Rs. 277,90,068 Rs. 113,73,255 2.12 That Ld. AO has observed that this allocation of expenses is not in consonance with the ratio of turnover between

DCIT CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LTD, LUDHIANA

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

144 Rs. 40,05,038 Domestic Traveling & Convey- Rs. 3,840,407 Rs. 1,104,566 other Foreign Traveling exp-others Rs. 4,770,256 Rs. 1,023,622 TOTAL Rs. 277,90,068 Rs. 113,73,255 2.12 That Ld. AO has observed that this allocation of expenses is not in consonance with the ratio of turnover between