DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

145 Sector-64 SAS Nagar, Mohali begins February 2012 School site purchased from Shipra Estate Ltd on installment basis April 2012 to (a) Payment of instatllments to Shipra August 2014 Estates Ltd. (b) Planning & seeking approvals from GMADA for construction of School Building September 2014 Construction of School building in Shipra to March 2016 Estate Ltd. Zirakpur April 2016 Working

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

145 Sector-64 SAS Nagar, Mohali begins February 2012 School site purchased from Shipra Estate Ltd on installment basis April 2012 to (a) Payment of instatllments to Shipra August 2014 Estates Ltd. (b) Planning & seeking approvals from GMADA for construction of School Building September 2014 Construction of School building in Shipra to March 2016 Estate Ltd. Zirakpur April 2016 Working

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

145 Sector-64 SAS Nagar, Mohali begins February 2012 School site purchased from Shipra Estate Ltd on installment basis April 2012 to (a) Payment of instatllments to Shipra August 2014 Estates Ltd. (b) Planning & seeking approvals from GMADA for construction of School Building September 2014 Construction of School building in Shipra to March 2016 Estate Ltd. Zirakpur April 2016 Working

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

145 Sector-64 SAS Nagar, Mohali begins February 2012 School site purchased from Shipra Estate Ltd on installment basis April 2012 to (a) Payment of instatllments to Shipra August 2014 Estates Ltd. (b) Planning & seeking approvals from GMADA for construction of School Building September 2014 Construction of School building in Shipra to March 2016 Estate Ltd. Zirakpur April 2016 Working

M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

145 Sector-64 SAS Nagar, Mohali begins February 2012 School site purchased from Shipra Estate Ltd on installment basis April 2012 to (a) Payment of instatllments to Shipra August 2014 Estates Ltd. (b) Planning & seeking approvals from GMADA for construction of School Building September 2014 Construction of School building in Shipra to March 2016 Estate Ltd. Zirakpur April 2016 Working

M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

145 Sector-64 SAS Nagar, Mohali begins February 2012 School site purchased from Shipra Estate Ltd on installment basis April 2012 to (a) Payment of instatllments to Shipra August 2014 Estates Ltd. (b) Planning & seeking approvals from GMADA for construction of School Building September 2014 Construction of School building in Shipra to March 2016 Estate Ltd. Zirakpur April 2016 Working

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

145 Sector-64 SAS Nagar, Mohali begins February 2012 School site purchased from Shipra Estate Ltd on installment basis April 2012 to (a) Payment of instatllments to Shipra August 2014 Estates Ltd. (b) Planning & seeking approvals from GMADA for construction of School Building September 2014 Construction of School building in Shipra to March 2016 Estate Ltd. Zirakpur April 2016 Working

DCIT,CIRCLE-1(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SCHOOL( MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

145 Sector-64 SAS Nagar, Mohali begins February 2012 School site purchased from Shipra Estate Ltd on installment basis April 2012 to (a) Payment of instatllments to Shipra August 2014 Estates Ltd. (b) Planning & seeking approvals from GMADA for construction of School Building September 2014 Construction of School building in Shipra to March 2016 Estate Ltd. Zirakpur April 2016 Working

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)

3) of section 73, the allowance or the part of the allowance to which effect has not been given, as the case may be, shall be added to the amount of the allowance for depreciation for the following previous year and deemed to be part of that allowance, or if there is no such allowance for that previous year

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

KHANNA INFRABUILD PRIVATE LIMITED ,LUDHIANA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE)-2, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

In the result, the ground of appeal is allowed

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

145(3) of the Act. Now, since the very basis of rejection of books of accounts is not sustainable as discussed above, we see no basis for denying the current year business loss and carry forward of the same for set off in subsequent years. Hence, the ground of appeal is allowed. 20. In Ground No. 11 & 12, the assessee

KHANNA INFRABUILD PRIVATE LIMITED ,LUDHIANA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE)-2 LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

In the result, the ground of appeal is allowed

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

145(3) of the Act. Now, since the very basis of rejection of books of accounts is not sustainable as discussed above, we see no basis for denying the current year business loss and carry forward of the same for set off in subsequent years. Hence, the ground of appeal is allowed. 20. In Ground No. 11 & 12, the assessee

KHANNA INFRABUILD PRIVATE LIMITED 2000-1A, SUKHDEV NAGAR FEROZEPUR ROAD, LUDHIANA,LUDHIANA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

In the result, the ground of appeal is allowed

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

145(3) of the Act. Now, since the very basis of rejection of books of accounts is not sustainable as discussed above, we see no basis for denying the current year business loss and carry forward of the same for set off in subsequent years. Hence, the ground of appeal is allowed. 20. In Ground No. 11 & 12, the assessee

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

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 145(3) and estimated the gross profit by applying the average of last three years, resulting in an addition of Rs. 23,08,56,610/-. 3 Based on these findings, the AO finally assessed the total income at Rs. 46,36,77,743/- and initiated separate penalty proceedings. 4. Against the order of the AO the Assessee went

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA vs. ROSHA ALLOYS PVT. LTD., MANDI GOBINDGARH

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,\nwhereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed

depreciation\nallowance or any other\nallowance or deduction\nfor such assessment year\n(hereafter in this section\nand in sections 148 to 153\nreferred relevant\nyear).\nto\nas the\nassessment\nUp to Finance Act 2020\n147. If the 5 [Assessing] Officer [has\nreason to believe”] that any income\nchargeable to tax has escaped\nassessment for any assessment year

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(5), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH vs. AVTAR SINGH, VILLAGE- KAIMBWALA

section\n28 or section 41 or section 59;\n53[(va) any sum chargeable to income-tax under clause (iiia) of section 28 ;]\n54[(vb) any sum chargeable to income-tax under clause (iiib) of section 28 ;]\n55[(vc) any sum chargeable to income-tax under clause (iiic) of section 28 ;]\n56[(vd)] the value of any benefit or perquisite taxable

INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICE BARNALA vs. LAKHVIR SINGH, GRAIN MARKET, BARNALA

section 1048 [or by an electoral trust]].\nExplanation. For the purposes of this sub-clause, \"trust\" includes any other\nlegal obligation ;)\n(iii) the value of any perquisite or profit in lieu of salary taxable under clauses (2)\nand (3) of section 17;\n42[(iiia) any special allowance or benefit, other than perquisite included under sub-\nclause (iii), specifically granted