M/S FAMINA KNIT FABS,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, C-3, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

depreciation from the surrendered income. 7 A.Y.2014-15 & A.Y.2013-14 4. That provisions of section 68, 69, 69A, 69B and 69C, 72 and 115BBE

BANGA HOSPITALS PRIVATE LIMITED,MANDI vs. ITO, MANDI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

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

Section 69. The assessee submitted that the balance amount had been paid from its own funds through identifiable bank transactions and that all payments were duly recorded in the books of accounts. The assessee placed reliance on audited financial statements, bank statements, depreciation

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)

depreciation on the said amount @ 5% of Rs. 14,00,000/- amounting to Rs. 70,000/- was disallowed under section 32 r.w.s 43(1) of the Act. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who has since sustained the said findings of the AO. 5. Against the said findings and the direction

M/S FASTWAY TRANSMISSION (P) LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH

In the result the captioned appeals of the assessee are

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

69,02,407/- as lease rental charges and allowing the depreciation u/s 32 as per AO order, which is against the decided law on the subject and the various judgments, which we had cited before him the claim by the appellate of lease rent to the tune of Rs.58,87,16,983/- has been denied in summary manner on certain

M/S FASTWAY TRANSMISSION (P) LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result the captioned appeals of the assessee are

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

69,02,407/- as lease rental charges and allowing the depreciation u/s 32 as per AO order, which is against the decided law on the subject and the various judgments, which we had cited before him the claim by the appellate of lease rent to the tune of Rs.58,87,16,983/- has been denied in summary manner on certain

M/S FASTWAY TRANSMISSION (P) LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH

In the result the captioned appeals of the assessee are

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

69,02,407/- as lease rental charges and allowing the depreciation u/s 32 as per AO order, which is against the decided law on the subject and the various judgments, which we had cited before him the claim by the appellate of lease rent to the tune of Rs.58,87,16,983/- has been denied in summary manner on certain

DCIT, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MARSHAL MACHINES PVT. LTD., LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14

depreciation of Rs. 1,23,61,513/- which can also be set off against the balance taxable income of Rs. 1,06,09,974/- after at after deducting surrendered amount of Rs. 3.50 crore from the returned business income of Rs. 2,43,90,026/-. The AO was not satisfied with the reply of the assessee and not allowing

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA vs. GPG CATTLE FEED PVT. LTD., MOGA

In the result, the Revenue appeal is partly allowed and the Cross Objection of\nthe assessee is dismissed

69, 69A, 69B and 69C as the\ncase may be.\"\nThe Hon'ble Bench further relied upon the Judgment of Khurana Mills Pvt. Ltd. of\nChandigarh Bench and finally held in para 10 as under:-\n“10. In the case of Sant Steel & Alloys (supra) the Hon'ble Tribunal found\non factual basis that the amount received by the assessee

A.B. SUGARS LIMITED,PUNJAB vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

69 taxmann.com 170[SC] viii) Where no inquiry was conducted by the Assessing Officer in passing assessment order after accepting revised return filed by the assessee. Commissioner was well within his powers under Section 263 to direct fresh assessment Virbhadra singh (HUF) vs PCIT [2017] 80 ;uinann.com 113 (Himachal Pradesh). 6. In view of the discussion above at this time

A.B. SUGARS LIMITED,PUNJAB vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

69 taxmann.com 170[SC] viii) Where no inquiry was conducted by the Assessing Officer in passing assessment order after accepting revised return filed by the assessee. Commissioner was well within his powers under Section 263 to direct fresh assessment Virbhadra singh (HUF) vs PCIT [2017] 80 ;uinann.com 113 (Himachal Pradesh). 6. In view of the discussion above at this time

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)

69,800.00 3,53,79,715.00 16,67,90,085.00 10,52,97,615.00 The Assessing Officer further noted that the assessee company was incorporated on 21.11.2012. He in this respect observed that till the time the operation of hotel business of the assessee company commenced, there has been no source of income or availability of own generated funds with

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)

69,800.00 3,53,79,715.00 16,67,90,085.00 10,52,97,615.00 The Assessing Officer further noted that the assessee company was incorporated on 21.11.2012. He in this respect observed that till the time the operation of hotel business of the assessee company commenced, there has been no source of income or availability of own generated funds with

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)

69,800.00 3,53,79,715.00 16,67,90,085.00 10,52,97,615.00 The Assessing Officer further noted that the assessee company was incorporated on 21.11.2012. He in this respect observed that till the time the operation of hotel business of the assessee company commenced, there has been no source of income or availability of own generated funds with

BABA HIRA SINGH BHATTAL INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY,LEHRAGAGA vs. DCIT, (E), C-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal is allowed

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

69,258/- was added back. 31. The ld. CIT(A) observed, while confirming the AO’s order that with the insertion of sub-section (6) to Section 11 of the Act, no depreciation

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

69, 69A, 69B, 69C and 69D, the provisions of Section II5BBE are not attracted in this case. 10. In view of the above, the action of the lower authorities in invoking provisions of Section II5BBE on the surrender income of Rs. 15 lacs is set aside and the AO is directed to compute the said surrendered A.Y.2020-21 9 income under

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

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

69,09,621/-and if the resort is taken as running business enterprise then the assessee would be eligible for depreciation @10% which would result into Rs. 17,00,000/- for the year. 6.3 The Ld. DR supported the orders of the lower authorities and summed up the issues vide letter dt. 24/05/2018. 6.4 Based on the facts and arguments

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

69,09,621/-and if the resort is taken as running business enterprise then the assessee would be eligible for depreciation @10% which would result into Rs. 17,00,000/- for the year. 6.3 The Ld. DR supported the orders of the lower authorities and summed up the issues vide letter dt. 24/05/2018. 6.4 Based on the facts and arguments

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

69,09,621/-and if the resort is taken as running business enterprise then the assessee would be eligible for depreciation @10% which would result into Rs. 17,00,000/- for the year. 6.3 The Ld. DR supported the orders of the lower authorities and summed up the issues vide letter dt. 24/05/2018. 6.4 Based on the facts and arguments