ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SML ISUZU LTD., CHANDIGARH

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

depreciation allowance or any other allowance under the Act has been computed. [Para 5] In the instant case, after the service of the notice under section 148, the assessee had filed its objections for reopening the assessment to the effect that in the light of the binding decision of High Court and the decision of the Tribunal there

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)

depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this Section and in sections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year) : Provided that where an assessment under Sub-section (3) of Section 143 or this Section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall

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)

section 144 due to non response by the tax consultant so appointed by him. It was submitted that since June 2018, he was ill and has been diagnosed with Cancer in August 2018 and thereafter, he has been admitted in PGI Chandigarh and IGMC Shimla many times during this period and is still under treatment. It was submitted that

M/S SUPERFINE KNITTERS LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, LUDHIANA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Superfine Knitters Ltd., Vs. The Acit, 269, Industrial Area-A, Circle-7, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. Pan No. Aadcs4217P

section, the audit by the Comptroller and Auditor- General is principally intended for the purposes of satisfying him with regard to the sufficiency of the rules and procedures prescribed for the purpose of securing an effective check on the assessment, collection and proper allocation of Revenue. He is entitled to examine the accounts in order to ascertain whether the rules

DCIT, C-1 (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH vs. THE INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ENGINEERS SOCIETY, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

section 13(2)(c) &\n13(3)(c) of the Act. \"\nHon'ble Mumbai Bench in the case of The Cancer Aid Research Foundation\nByculla Municipal School Building vs Director of Income Tax (Exemp) in ITA No.\n1782/Mum/2014 vide order dated 16.07.2014 wherein it has been held as under:\n\"There is no bar in buying such cars except that

ACIT, LUDHIANA vs. M/S AVON CYCLES LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is

Bench: Ms.Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptathe A.C.I.T., Vs. M/S Avon Cycles Ltd., Circle-5, G.T. Road, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. Pan: Aabca4140R & C.O.No.6/Chd/2016 In M/S Avon Cycles Ltd., Vs. The A.C.I.T., G.T. Road, Circle-5, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. Pan: Aabca4140R (Appellant) (Respondent)

190/- Interest disallowed Rs. 13,56,748/- on debt equity ratio 4 & C.O.No.6/Chd/2016 A.Y.2012-13 7. The Ld. counsel for assessee stated that the old investment in land had already been dealt with by the I.T.A.T. in its order relating to preceding years and, therefore, no disallowance of interest under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act on account

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 because

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

section 80IB of The Income Tax Act, 1961." 8.3 The Assessing Officer in the assessment order for A.Y. 2006-07 has observed on the issue of allowance of deduction u/s 80IB for Noida Unit which has been purchased by the assessee during the year. The facts are same and the observations of the Assessing Officer are relevant and reproduced

ACIT, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS. BECTORS FOOD SPECIALTIES PVT. LTD., LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

section 80IB of The Income Tax Act, 1961." 8.3 The Assessing Officer in the assessment order for A.Y. 2006-07 has observed on the issue of allowance of deduction u/s 80IB for Noida Unit which has been purchased by the assessee during the year. The facts are same and the observations of the Assessing Officer are relevant and reproduced

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

section 80IB of The Income Tax Act, 1961." 8.3 The Assessing Officer in the assessment order for A.Y. 2006-07 has observed on the issue of allowance of deduction u/s 80IB for Noida Unit which has been purchased by the assessee during the year. The facts are same and the observations of the Assessing Officer are relevant and reproduced

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

section 80IB of The Income Tax Act, 1961." 8.3 The Assessing Officer in the assessment order for A.Y. 2006-07 has observed on the issue of allowance of deduction u/s 80IB for Noida Unit which has been purchased by the assessee during the year. The facts are same and the observations of the Assessing Officer are relevant and reproduced

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

section 80IB of The Income Tax Act, 1961." 8.3 The Assessing Officer in the assessment order for A.Y. 2006-07 has observed on the issue of allowance of deduction u/s 80IB for Noida Unit which has been purchased by the assessee during the year. The facts are same and the observations of the Assessing Officer are relevant and reproduced

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

section 80IB of The Income Tax Act, 1961." 8.3 The Assessing Officer in the assessment order for A.Y. 2006-07 has observed on the issue of allowance of deduction u/s 80IB for Noida Unit which has been purchased by the assessee during the year. The facts are same and the observations of the Assessing Officer are relevant and reproduced

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

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

190 viii) 29.05.2014 4985 4685 300 ix) 03.06.2014 4900 4581 319 x) 06.06.2014 4912 4615 297- xi 16.06.2014 4940 4681 259 xii) 23.06.2014 5149 4636 513 xiii) 27.06.2014 5459 5246 213 4.1 From the perusal of tabulation above it is submitted that there are no parameter of fixed price of commodity in the same date. It is submitted that even

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)

190 Pcs 5.00 Supporting Iron 35 Ashima 035 L-Clamp I730PCS Powder 1.00 Industries dtd. 15.09.2006 (Small) 740 Pcs Coating 2.00 L-Clamp(Big) 400 Pcs 5.00 C-Channel 590 Pcs 5.00 Cuppaler 150 Pcs 5.00 Run Fix 325 Pcs 5.00 Supporting Iron 36. Ashima 036 L- 1330Pcs Powder 1.00 Industries dtd. 16.09.2006 Clamp(Small) 1515Pcs Coating 2.00 L-Clamp

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)

190 Pcs 5.00 Supporting Iron 35 Ashima 035 L-Clamp I730PCS Powder 1.00 Industries dtd. 15.09.2006 (Small) 740 Pcs Coating 2.00 L-Clamp(Big) 400 Pcs 5.00 C-Channel 590 Pcs 5.00 Cuppaler 150 Pcs 5.00 Run Fix 325 Pcs 5.00 Supporting Iron 36. Ashima 036 L- 1330Pcs Powder 1.00 Industries dtd. 16.09.2006 Clamp(Small) 1515Pcs Coating 2.00 L-Clamp