S.P. SINGLA CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

153A of the Act dated 31.03.2015, which was carried out in consequent to search conducted under Section 132 of the Act on the assessee group of cases i.e. first search. The only basis made by AO treating the same as incriminating material i.e. the statement of Shri Gurinder Kumar Garg, Chartered Accountant, we noted that the statement of Shri Gurinder

ACIT, CC-2, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S TJR PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., CHANDIGARH

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

1. That the order of Learned C.I.T. (Appeals) is bad and against the facts and Law. 2. That the assessment completed u/s 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is against the provisions of the law as neither any search was conducted on the company nor any Panchnama was prepared in the name of the company. 3. That

M/S TJR PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, CC-2, CHANDIGARH

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

1. That the order of Learned C.I.T. (Appeals) is bad and against the facts and Law. 2. That the assessment completed u/s 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is against the provisions of the law as neither any search was conducted on the company nor any Panchnama was prepared in the name of the company. 3. That

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

153A in the\nabsence of any incriminating material found during the course of\nsearch relatable to the assessee and the assessment year in question.\"\n2)\nWhere an assessment has been completed under section\n143(1) or 143(3), and no incriminating material was found during the\nsearch pertaining to the searched person for the relevant assessment\nyear, and the time

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

153A in the\nabsence of any incriminating material found during the course of\nsearch relatable to the assessee and the assessment year in question.\"\n2)\nWhere an assessment has been completed under section\n143(1) or 143(3), and no incriminating material was found during the\nsearch pertaining to the searched person for the relevant assessment\nyear, and the time

ROSHA ALLOYS P LIMITED, AMLOH ROAD, VILLAGE TURAN, MANDI GOBINDGARH,PUNJAB vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, LUDHIANA, PUNJAB

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

153A in the\nabsence of any incriminating material found during the course of\nsearch relatable to the assessee and the assessment year in question.\"\n2)\nWhere an assessment has been completed under section\n143(1) or 143(3), and no incriminating material was found during the\nsearch pertaining to the searched person for the relevant assessment\nyear, and the time

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

153A in the\nabsence of any incriminating material found during the course of\nsearch relatable to the assessee and the assessment year in question.\"\n2)\nWhere an assessment has been completed under section\n143(1) or 143(3), and no incriminating material was found during the\nsearch pertaining to the searched person for the relevant assessment\nyear, and the time

M/S TJR PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, CC-2, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

section 153A of the Act is without jurisdiction. 5. That the learned C.I.T.(A) has wrongly upheld additions made in the assessment order which are not based on any corroborative and relevant incriminating material stated to have been unearthed during the course of search by the Assessing Officer, though no search has taken place and therefore, the Order of Assessment

M/S TJR PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, CC-2, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

Section 153A of the Act is without jurisdiction. 5. That the additions made in the assessment Order are not based on any corroborative and relevant incriminating material stated to have been unearthed during the course of any search by the Assessing Officer, though no search has taken place on the appellant and therefore, the Order of Assessment is wholly illegal

SAS INFONET PRIVATE LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT ACIT(CEN)-2, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the present appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: the AO.

1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) vide order u/s 250(6) dated 28.06.2024 has erred in confirming action of the AO vide order u/s 153A r.w.s 143(3)in treating the revenue from business and profession to the tune of Rs. 231500/- as income from other sources. 2. That

SAS INFONET PRIVATE LIMITED ,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT ACIT(CEN)-2, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the present appeal of the Assessee is allowed

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

1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) vide order u/s 250(6) dated 28.06.2024 has erred in confirming action of the AO vide order u/s 153A r.w.s 143(3)in treating the revenue from business and profession to the tune of Rs. 231500/- as income from other sources. 2. That

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)

153A is devoid of any valid reasoning. In view of the direct judgment of Apex Court, Delhi High Court. (vi) Reliance in being place on the judgement of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Concorde Capital Management Company Ltd. reported in (2011) 334 ITR 346, that when no incriminating documents were found during course of search

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)

153A is devoid of any valid reasoning. In view of the direct judgment of Apex Court, Delhi High Court. (vi) Reliance in being place on the judgement of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Concorde Capital Management Company Ltd. reported in (2011) 334 ITR 346, that when no incriminating documents were found during course of search

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)

153A is devoid of any valid reasoning. In view of the direct judgment of Apex Court, Delhi High Court. (vi) Reliance in being place on the judgement of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Concorde Capital Management Company Ltd. reported in (2011) 334 ITR 346, that when no incriminating documents were found during course of search

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATIALA vs. DSG PAPERS PVT. LTD., PATIALA

In the result, respective appeals are disposed off in light of aforesaid direction

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

153A on 18/01/2021. 5. The notices u/s 142(1) for the first time was issued by the AO on 17.09.2021, 18.09.2021 and 19.09.2021 and a time of only two to three days was given to file the reply and, to which, the assessee responded, that it was difficult to file the voluminous details, within the shortest possible time

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATIALA vs. DSG PAPERS PVT. LTD., PATIALA

In the result, respective appeals are disposed off in light of aforesaid\ndirection

153A on 18/01/2021.\n5. The notices u/s 142(1) for the first time was issued by the AO on 17.09.2021, 18.09.2021 and 19.09.2021 and a time of only two to three days was given to file the reply and, to which, the assessee responded, that it was difficult to file the voluminous details, within the shortest possible time

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATIALA vs. DSG PAPERS PVT. LTD., PATIALA

In the result, respective appeals are disposed off in light of aforesaid\ndirection

153A on 18/01/2021.\n5. The notices u/s 142(1) for the first time was issued by the AO on\n17.09.2021, 18.09.2021 and 19.09.2021 and a time of only two to three days\nwas given to file the reply and, to which, the assessee responded, that it was\ndifficult to file the voluminous details, within the shortest possible time

DSG PAPERS PVT LTD #6, GREEN VIEW COLONY,PATIALA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE PATIALA, PATIALA

In the result, respective appeals are disposed off in light of aforesaid\ndirection

153A on 18/01/2021.\n5. The notices u/s 142(1) for the first time was issued by the AO on 17.09.2021, 18.09.2021 and 19.09.2021 and a time of only two to three days was given to file the reply and, to which, the assessee responded, that it was difficult to file the voluminous details, within the shortest possible time