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)

64-65, Sector 17-A, Chandigarh Ward 2(3), Chandigarh "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAFCP2906A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Vineet Krishan, Advocate राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 21/05/2024 उदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 31/07/2024 आदेश/Order

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

SH. MOHIT MITTAL PROP. MITTAL ENTERPRISES,LUDHIANA, PUNJAB vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1 LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA, PUNJAB

In the result, appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

64,470/-. A survey action under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act was conducted upon the business premises of the assessee on 05.03.2020. During the course of survey operation, assessee had made surrender of Rs.1,50,00,000/- which included Rs.48,48,280/- incurred on account of renovation of office building and Rs.52,01,761/- on account of alleged

SHRI BALBIR SINGH VERMA,SHIMLA vs. PR.CIT, SHIMLA

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

depreciation, maintenance costs, and insurance for vehicles, one of which was a Toyota Fortuner. The AO suspected that the vehicles might have been used partly for personal purposes and not entirely for business. As a result, and in line with decisions made in previous years, the AO disallowed an amount of Rs.60,000 on an ad-hoc basis from

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)

section 35AD, it is very much clear that the deduction is allowable of the expenditure, which is capitalized in the books of accounts and the same is allowable in the previous year, in which the commencement of business takes place and ‘hotel’ is one of the ‘specified category'. Further, if the assessee claims such deduction," then no depreciation is allowed

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)

section 35AD, it is very much clear that the deduction is allowable of the expenditure, which is capitalized in the books of accounts and the same is allowable in the previous year, in which the commencement of business takes place and ‘hotel’ is one of the ‘specified category'. Further, if the assessee claims such deduction," then no depreciation is allowed

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)

section 35AD, it is very much clear that the deduction is allowable of the expenditure, which is capitalized in the books of accounts and the same is allowable in the previous year, in which the commencement of business takes place and ‘hotel’ is one of the ‘specified category'. Further, if the assessee claims such deduction," then no depreciation is allowed

NAHAR INDUSTRIAL ENTERPRISES LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, C-7, LUDHIANA

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

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri R.L Negiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1554/Chd/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 Nahar Industrial Enterprises The Acit, Circle-7, बनाम Limited, Focal Point, Aayakar Bhawan, Ludhiana Rishi Nagar, Ludhiana Tan No: Aaccn3563A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

section 115JB of the Act inter alia making addition of Rs. 60,86,81,068/- on account of repurchase of Foreign Currency Convertible Bonds (FCCB). The assessee challenged the assessment order before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) after hearing the assessee partly allowed the appeal and held that out of Rs. 60.83 crore an amount

KANDI FRIENDS EDUCATIONAL TRUST,ROPAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSION OF INCOME TAX, CL. 1, EXEMPTION, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

Section 11 which prohibits claim of depreciation on such capital asset whose cost was claimed towards application of income. In other words, if 85% of ITA Nos. 797 & 798/CHD/2024 A.Y.2014-15 & 2015-16 27 the income of the Trust is applied on its objective, then it will not be taxable. Hence, if a capital asset is being purchased from that money

KANDI FRIENDS EDUCATIONAL TRUST,ROPAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

Section 11 which prohibits claim of depreciation on such capital asset whose cost was claimed towards application of income. In other words, if 85% of ITA Nos. 797 & 798/CHD/2024 A.Y.2014-15 & 2015-16 27 the income of the Trust is applied on its objective, then it will not be taxable. Hence, if a capital asset is being purchased from that money

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, 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

M/S NECTAR LIFESCIENCE LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 92C of the Act to the TPO for determining the arms length price in respect of specific domestic transaction undertaken by the assessee. The TPO after examining the transfer pricing adjustment and analyzing the specific domestic transaction with associated enterprises, proceeded to bench mark the power from eligible unit to non eligible unit specifically supply of electricity and steam

NARENDER KAUR,KURUKSHETRA, HARYANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 , KURUKSHETRA

section 56, a deduction of a sum equal to fifty per cent. of such\nincome and no deduction shall be allowed under any other clause of this\nsection.\"\n21. The Assessing Officer in I. T. A. No. 132 of 2018 where the assessee had\nreceived Rs.11,30,561 as interest income, held that the interest payment\nreceived on compensation/enhanced compensation

SH. AJIT SINGH,PINJORE vs. ITO, WARD-1, PANCHKULA

section 56, a deduction of a sum equal to fifty per cent. of such\nincome and no deduction shall be allowed under any other clause of this\nsection.\"\n21. The Assessing Officer in I. T. A. No. 132 of 2018 where the assessee had\nreceived Rs.11,30,561 as interest income, held that the interest payment\nreceived on compensation/enhanced compensation

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

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

depreciation)\nRs.6,35,92,364/-\nNet surplus as per Income & Expenditure account\nRs.2,64,44,805/-\nDisallowance of payment made to Global Educational\nConsultants\nRs.1,37,80,000/-\nDisallowance of payment made to Shubhdeep Consultants\nowance of personal vehicle expenses\nRs.2,57,67,8001-\nTaxable Income\nRs.11,21,084/-\nRs.6,71,13,689/-\nITA No.52/CHD/2023

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

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 to as the\nrelevant\nyear).\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

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

depreciation\nallowance or any other\nallowance or deduction\nfor such assessment year\n(hereafter in this section\nand in sections 148 to 153\nreferred to as the\nrelevant assessment\nyear).\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