KHANDELIA OIL & GENERAL MILLS LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ADDL. CIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue and the Cross Appeal of the Assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

40A(2)(b) of the Act by unduly emphasizing on the imputed costs of bank loans and without appreciating the fact that the interest payment was made to related-parties. 4. The Id. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 19,84,563/- made by the AO on account of diversion of funds by the assessee

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

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

depreciation. 6.5 In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case the addition made by the Assessing Officer is liable to be deleted. 7. Ground No. 6 relates to addition of Rs. 1,72,20,000/- on account of land deal. 7.1 During the search, a sale deed dt. 31/08/2009 entered between the assessee and one Smt. Pavit

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

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

depreciation. 6.5 In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case the addition made by the Assessing Officer is liable to be deleted. 7. Ground No. 6 relates to addition of Rs. 1,72,20,000/- on account of land deal. 7.1 During the search, a sale deed dt. 31/08/2009 entered between the assessee and one Smt. Pavit

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

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

depreciation. 6.5 In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case the addition made by the Assessing Officer is liable to be deleted. 7. Ground No. 6 relates to addition of Rs. 1,72,20,000/- on account of land deal. 7.1 During the search, a sale deed dt. 31/08/2009 entered between the assessee and one Smt. Pavit

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

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

depreciation. 6.5 In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case the addition made by the Assessing Officer is liable to be deleted. 7. Ground No. 6 relates to addition of Rs. 1,72,20,000/- on account of land deal. 7.1 During the search, a sale deed dt. 31/08/2009 entered between the assessee and one Smt. Pavit

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

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

depreciation. 6.5 In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case the addition made by the Assessing Officer is liable to be deleted. 7. Ground No. 6 relates to addition of Rs. 1,72,20,000/- on account of land deal. 7.1 During the search, a sale deed dt. 31/08/2009 entered between the assessee and one Smt. Pavit

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS, SHIMLA

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

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

depreciation. 6.5 In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case the addition made by the Assessing Officer is liable to be deleted. 7. Ground No. 6 relates to addition of Rs. 1,72,20,000/- on account of land deal. 7.1 During the search, a sale deed dt. 31/08/2009 entered between the assessee and one Smt. Pavit

SH. AJAY GOEL,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

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

depreciation. 6.5 In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case the addition made by the Assessing Officer is liable to be deleted. 7. Ground No. 6 relates to addition of Rs. 1,72,20,000/- on account of land deal. 7.1 During the search, a sale deed dt. 31/08/2009 entered between the assessee and one Smt. Pavit

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

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

depreciation. 6.5 In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case the addition made by the Assessing Officer is liable to be deleted. 7. Ground No. 6 relates to addition of Rs. 1,72,20,000/- on account of land deal. 7.1 During the search, a sale deed dt. 31/08/2009 entered between the assessee and one Smt. Pavit

SH. GURINDER MAKKAR,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-3, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

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

40A(3) of the Act. 6.1 It was submitted that during the course of survey action as well as during the course of assessment proceedings, no other source of income has been identified and all the income which accrues to assessee is on account of its regular business of manufacturing and selling of hosiery goods and fabrics which the assessee

M/S KAPSONS FASHION PVT. LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, C-2(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt.Diva Singh & Smt.Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.1014 To 1016/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2013-14

b) CAM charges paid to M/s Para Re-facilities for the month of March, 2010 amounting to Rs.1,24,782/-. 17. The AO accordingly disallowed the said expenditure holding them to be prior period expenses. The same was upheld by the Ld.CIT(A) stating that the assessee was following mercantile system of accounting and therefore the prior period expenses could

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

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

40A(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 despite being given ample opportunity to do so?” 7.4 As the matter stands adjudicated, following the ratio laid down which is squarely applicable to the appeals before us, the grounds raised by the Revenue on this issue are hereby dismissed. 8. Issue of disallowance of Section 80IB on NOIDA Unit

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

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

40A(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 despite being given ample opportunity to do so?” 7.4 As the matter stands adjudicated, following the ratio laid down which is squarely applicable to the appeals before us, the grounds raised by the Revenue on this issue are hereby dismissed. 8. Issue of disallowance of Section 80IB on NOIDA Unit

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

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

40A(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 despite being given ample opportunity to do so?” 7.4 As the matter stands adjudicated, following the ratio laid down which is squarely applicable to the appeals before us, the grounds raised by the Revenue on this issue are hereby dismissed. 8. Issue of disallowance of Section 80IB on NOIDA Unit

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

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

40A(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 despite being given ample opportunity to do so?” 7.4 As the matter stands adjudicated, following the ratio laid down which is squarely applicable to the appeals before us, the grounds raised by the Revenue on this issue are hereby dismissed. 8. Issue of disallowance of Section 80IB on NOIDA Unit

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

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

40A(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 despite being given ample opportunity to do so?” 7.4 As the matter stands adjudicated, following the ratio laid down which is squarely applicable to the appeals before us, the grounds raised by the Revenue on this issue are hereby dismissed. 8. Issue of disallowance of Section 80IB on NOIDA Unit

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

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

40A(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 despite being given ample opportunity to do so?” 7.4 As the matter stands adjudicated, following the ratio laid down which is squarely applicable to the appeals before us, the grounds raised by the Revenue on this issue are hereby dismissed. 8. Issue of disallowance of Section 80IB on NOIDA Unit

M/S HEADMASTER SALOON PVT.LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT-CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

7% Services 2400000 0 DHI Services Asian 3175630 0 Roots Retails 7694211 4799737 60% Other 1474 9292475 -100% Total Income 90677824 86463970 5% Expenses FY 2013-14 FY 2012-13 Growth Material 9054868 11346209 20% consumed Other direct 17572938 16765132 5% expenses Stock in trade 6669112 2621019 154% Changes in stock -154806 1249482 -112% in trade Total material