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

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, FOCAL POINT

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)

depreciation and taxes is at Rs. 174.93 crores. Thus even the internal accruals is much more than the amount considered by the Ld. AO for calculating this disallowance. 7. The free funds available with the assessee company as on 31/3/2013 at Rs. 456.47 crores & Rs. 553.57 crores as on 31/3/2014. 8. The Ld. A.O. has not established any nexus

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)

depreciation and taxes is at Rs. 174.93 crores. Thus even the internal accruals is much more than the amount considered by the Ld. AO for calculating this disallowance. 7. The free funds available with the assessee company as on 31/3/2013 at Rs. 456.47 crores & Rs. 553.57 crores as on 31/3/2014. 8. The Ld. A.O. has not established any nexus

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)

depreciation and taxes is at Rs. 174.93 crores. Thus even the internal accruals is much more than the amount considered by the Ld. AO for calculating this disallowance. 7. The free funds available with the assessee company as on 31/3/2013 at Rs. 456.47 crores & Rs. 553.57 crores as on 31/3/2014. 8. The Ld. A.O. has not established any nexus

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)

depreciation and taxes is at Rs. 174.93 crores. Thus even the internal accruals is much more than the amount considered by the Ld. AO for calculating this disallowance. 7. The free funds available with the assessee company as on 31/3/2013 at Rs. 456.47 crores & Rs. 553.57 crores as on 31/3/2014. 8. The Ld. A.O. has not established any nexus

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)

depreciation and taxes is at Rs. 174.93 crores. Thus even the internal accruals is much more than the amount considered by the Ld. AO for calculating this disallowance. 7. The free funds available with the assessee company as on 31/3/2013 at Rs. 456.47 crores & Rs. 553.57 crores as on 31/3/2014. 8. The Ld. A.O. has not established any nexus

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)

depreciation and taxes is at Rs. 174.93 crores. Thus even the internal accruals is much more than the amount considered by the Ld. AO for calculating this disallowance. 7. The free funds available with the assessee company as on 31/3/2013 at Rs. 456.47 crores & Rs. 553.57 crores as on 31/3/2014. 8. The Ld. A.O. has not established any nexus

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)

depreciation and taxes is at Rs. 174.93 crores. Thus even the internal accruals is much more than the amount considered by the Ld. AO for calculating this disallowance. 7. The free funds available with the assessee company as on 31/3/2013 at Rs. 456.47 crores & Rs. 553.57 crores as on 31/3/2014. 8. The Ld. A.O. has not established any nexus

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA, - vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LTD, -

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)

depreciation and taxes is at Rs. 174.93 crores. Thus even the internal accruals is much more than the amount considered by the Ld. AO for calculating this disallowance. 7. The free funds available with the assessee company as on 31/3/2013 at Rs. 456.47 crores & Rs. 553.57 crores as on 31/3/2014. 8. The Ld. A.O. has not established any nexus

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)

depreciation on vehicle to the extent of Rs. 9,11,4884/- without any justification. 15. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw any grounds of appeal before the final hearing. 2.1 The following additional Grounds have also been taken by the Assessee: 1. That the approval u/s 153D was granted by the JCIT without application

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)

depreciation on vehicle to the extent of Rs. 9,11,4884/- without any justification. 15. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw any grounds of appeal before the final hearing. 2.1 The following additional Grounds have also been taken by the Assessee: 1. That the approval u/s 153D was granted by the JCIT without application

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)

234 Pcs Coating 5.00 Iron 178 Pcs 5.00 Coupler Plate 258 Pcs 5.00 Run Fix roiling 846 Pcs 5.00 Ceiling Fixing 21 021 Pendulum 348 Pcs Powder 19.40 Ashima dtd.22.08.2006 5.00 Supporting 225 Pcs Coating Industries 5.00 Iron 36 Pcs 5.00 Celling Fixing 48 Pcs 5.00 Run Fix 80 Pcs Wall Console 22. 022 Ashima Coupler Plate 169 Pcs Powder

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)

234 Pcs Coating 5.00 Iron 178 Pcs 5.00 Coupler Plate 258 Pcs 5.00 Run Fix roiling 846 Pcs 5.00 Ceiling Fixing 21 021 Pendulum 348 Pcs Powder 19.40 Ashima dtd.22.08.2006 5.00 Supporting 225 Pcs Coating Industries 5.00 Iron 36 Pcs 5.00 Celling Fixing 48 Pcs 5.00 Run Fix 80 Pcs Wall Console 22. 022 Ashima Coupler Plate 169 Pcs Powder

IND SWIFT LABORATORIES LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal is allowed, as indicated

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

234 shows the corporate guarantee of the assessee. The ledger account of Halcyon for the period from 01.04.2012 to 13.03.2013, relevant portion at APB-245 shows a debit entry of Rs 25 crore on 04.06.2012 with the recital of Fund Transfer Through RTGS, by way of Bank Journal. These documents show that the corporate guarantee ITA 350/CHD/2023

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

234 of the Paper book-l and further, it was\nbrought to our notice that the AO, while framing the assessment of Sh. Rajesh\nKumar has made substantive addition in his case and, as such, it was argued\n15\nthat no such addition could be made in this context and relied upon the\nfindings

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

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

234 of the Paper book-l and further, it was brought to our notice that the AO, while framing the assessment of Sh. Rajesh Kumar has made substantive addition in his case and, as such, it was argued that no such addition could be made in this context and relied upon the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) at pages

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

234 of the Paper book-l and further, it was brought to our notice that the AO, while framing the assessment of Sh. Rajesh Kumar has made substantive addition in his case and, as such, it was argued\nthat no such addition could be made in this context and relied upon the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) at pages

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

234 of the Paper book-l and further, it was\nbrought to our notice that the AO, while framing the assessment of Sh. Rajesh\nKumar has made substantive addition in his case and, as such, it was argued\nthat no such addition could be made in this context and relied upon the\nfindings of the Ld. CIT(A) at pages