BABA HIRA SINGH BHATTAL INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY,LEHRAGAGA vs. DCIT, (E), C-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal is allowed

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

depreciation on the assets whose value has already been shown as written off. 8. While upholding the addition made by the AO, the ld. CIT(A) held, following the CIT(A)’s order for the earlier years, that in those years, the ld. CIT(A) had upheld a part of the assessee's submission, to the extent that the excess

EXOTIC REALTORS AND DEVELOPERS,CHANDIGARH vs. PR.CIT-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

144B of the Income Tax Act. In addition to this the assessee firm has gone through further rigours of proceedings under section 263. The Ld. AR further contended that in prior A.Y 2017-18 the assessee’s firm was scrutinized too by same officer and nothing adversial was found against them save and except minor addition of rs. 4486/- that

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)

144B. 3.1 The AO concluded that the assessee was existing for profit and functioning on commercial principles, leading to the denial of the benefit of exemption under Section 11 of the Income-tax Act. The original surplus of Rs. 8,35,76,594.11/- was consequently taxed as an Association of Persons (AOP). 3.2 The key findings and resulting financial actions

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH vs. FRONTIER AGROTECH PRIVATE LIMITED, CHANDIGARH

Bench: The Appeal Is Heard Or Is Disposed Off.

depreciation, interest and tax (PBDIT) ratio, a substantial refund claim, large current liabilities reflected in the balance sheet, non-disclosure of adjustments under the Income Computation and Disclosure Standards, and a mismatch between stock reported in successive years. Notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) were issued, and in response the assessee submitted books, ledgers, and explanations on multiple

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)

depreciation in any year), as on the first day of the previous year in which the substantial expansion is undertaken." 9. The circular makes it clear that section 80IC of the Act was inserted to give effect to the new package announced by the Union Cabinet. The circular further clarifies that this section provides for deduction for a period

INCOME TAX OFFICER, YAMUNA NAGAR vs. RAJESH KHANNA, YAMUNA NAGAR

In the result, the assessee's appeal in ITA

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

section 144B of the IT Act, 1961, [For e-faceless assessment proceedings) was issued by National Faceless Assessment Centre Income Tax Department. 3.3. Synopsis of all submissions of the assessee relating to the issue and indicating the dates of submission. In response to notice issued u/s 142(1) of the Act dated 25.08.2022, Vide reply dated 05.09.2022, the assessee submitted

RAJESH KHANNA,NEELKANTH PLYWOOD, YAMUNANAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, INCOME TAX OFFICER, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, the assessee's appeal in ITA

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

section 144B of the IT Act, 1961, [For e-faceless assessment proceedings) was issued by National Faceless Assessment Centre Income Tax Department. 3.3. Synopsis of all submissions of the assessee relating to the issue and indicating the dates of submission. In response to notice issued u/s 142(1) of the Act dated 25.08.2022, Vide reply dated 05.09.2022, the assessee submitted

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

144B of the Act was passed on 07.03.2022 against this order another appeal was filed on 31.12.2022, which is pending for adjudication on merits. 3. DECISION: Once an assessment order is revised by Commissioner of Income Tax/ Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, the original order loses its existence, consequently no appeal can survive against such order. Therefore, the appeal against

SUDARSHAN JEANS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLHAPUR vs. ITO, AMBALA

The appeal stand allowed

Bench: SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

144B of the Act on 21-03-2022. The sole grievance of the assessee is denial of claim of depreciation / additional depreciation for Rs.58.42 Lacs. The assessee has filed additional ground No.5 assailing the reopening of assessment. The same read as under: - That the Ld. AO has erred in alw and on facts in reoepning the assessment proceedings

BHAGWATI STEEL PROCESSORS,CHANDIGARH vs. PCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Depreciation and\nDebtor JCBL Plant II were provided/submitted to the Assessing Officer during the\nassessment proceedings u/s 143(3) r.w.s 144B and hence, powers u/s 263 are wrongly\nused by PCIT against the appellant.\n3. That the PCIT has not raised query in the notice regarding part of the\nexplanation to the Section

CEIGALL INDIA LIMITED, LUDHIANA,LUDHIANA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

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

section 263 of the Income Tax Act, I hereby set aside the impugned assessment order dated 20.09.2022, passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of Income Tax Act, 1961. Needless to state, the Assessing Officer shall give the assessee reasonable opportunity of being heard and pass a speaking order after taking into consideration the explanation and supporting evidence submitted