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)

depreciation current year income year 2012-13 25199906 7429889 17770017 2013-14 7027382 0 7027382 Total 32227288 7429889 24797399 Losses to be carried forward Rs. 2,47,97,399/-. Assessed. Issue requisite documents. Charge Interest u/s 234A/B/C, if any. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act is being initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income

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

Depreciation disallowed and excess of income 2,82,41,720 over expenditure Total Taxable Income 10,47,74,451 5. The assessee has taken eight grounds of appeal in assessment year 2014-15 and ten grounds of appeal in assessment year 2015-16. In brief, its grievance revolves around the additions noticed by us in the above table and rest

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

Depreciation disallowed and excess of income 2,82,41,720 over expenditure Total Taxable Income 10,47,74,451 5. The assessee has taken eight grounds of appeal in assessment year 2014-15 and ten grounds of appeal in assessment year 2015-16. In brief, its grievance revolves around the additions noticed by us in the above table and rest

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)

97,834/- to be unsustainable and the same is, accordingly, deleted, while accepting Ground No.13. 64.1 According to Ground No.14, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the disallowance of depreciation on vehicle to the extent of Rs.9,11,484/- 64.2 It is seen that the disallowance of Rs.9,11,484/-, representing depreciation on vehicle, has been made

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)

97,834/- to be unsustainable and the same is, accordingly, deleted, while accepting Ground No.13. 64.1 According to Ground No.14, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the disallowance of depreciation on vehicle to the extent of Rs.9,11,484/- 64.2 It is seen that the disallowance of Rs.9,11,484/-, representing depreciation on vehicle, has been made

THE SIKH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,PATIALA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE, PATIALA

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Against Assessment Order Dt. 30/03/2013 Which Was Passed By Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patiala Range, Patiala, Punjab Which Order Is Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao’S Order”.

97,07,767/- ( 6,33,47,767/- - 1,36,40,000/-) has actually not been applied for the purposes of construction of buildings and to avail the benefit of section 11 of the I.T. Act, 1961..” b) Expenditure not eligible for exemption on account of donation paid by the society: During the course of assessment proceedings, it was noticed that

JCIT(OSD), C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. THE SIKH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, PATIALA

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Against Assessment Order Dt. 30/03/2013 Which Was Passed By Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patiala Range, Patiala, Punjab Which Order Is Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao’S Order”.

97,07,767/- ( 6,33,47,767/- - 1,36,40,000/-) has actually not been applied for the purposes of construction of buildings and to avail the benefit of section 11 of the I.T. Act, 1961..” b) Expenditure not eligible for exemption on account of donation paid by the society: During the course of assessment proceedings, it was noticed that

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

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)

97,26,846/-. 22.3 That the expenditure incurred in relation to the investment was required to be added back to the income of the assessee as per section 14A of the I.T. Act, 1961. 22.4 That the Assessee was provided opportunity vide order sheet entry dated 12/12/2016 to explain why disallowance u/s 14A in the respect of the expenditure

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)

97,26,846/-. 22.3 That the expenditure incurred in relation to the investment was required to be added back to the income of the assessee as per section 14A of the I.T. Act, 1961. 22.4 That the Assessee was provided opportunity vide order sheet entry dated 12/12/2016 to explain why disallowance u/s 14A in the respect of the expenditure

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)

97,26,846/-. 22.3 That the expenditure incurred in relation to the investment was required to be added back to the income of the assessee as per section 14A of the I.T. Act, 1961. 22.4 That the Assessee was provided opportunity vide order sheet entry dated 12/12/2016 to explain why disallowance u/s 14A in the respect of the expenditure

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)

97,26,846/-. 22.3 That the expenditure incurred in relation to the investment was required to be added back to the income of the assessee as per section 14A of the I.T. Act, 1961. 22.4 That the Assessee was provided opportunity vide order sheet entry dated 12/12/2016 to explain why disallowance u/s 14A in the respect of the expenditure

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)

97,26,846/-. 22.3 That the expenditure incurred in relation to the investment was required to be added back to the income of the assessee as per section 14A of the I.T. Act, 1961. 22.4 That the Assessee was provided opportunity vide order sheet entry dated 12/12/2016 to explain why disallowance u/s 14A in the respect of the expenditure

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)

97,26,846/-. 22.3 That the expenditure incurred in relation to the investment was required to be added back to the income of the assessee as per section 14A of the I.T. Act, 1961. 22.4 That the Assessee was provided opportunity vide order sheet entry dated 12/12/2016 to explain why disallowance u/s 14A in the respect of the expenditure

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)

97,26,846/-. 22.3 That the expenditure incurred in relation to the investment was required to be added back to the income of the assessee as per section 14A of the I.T. Act, 1961. 22.4 That the Assessee was provided opportunity vide order sheet entry dated 12/12/2016 to explain why disallowance u/s 14A in the respect of the expenditure

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)

97,26,846/-. 22.3 That the expenditure incurred in relation to the investment was required to be added back to the income of the assessee as per section 14A of the I.T. Act, 1961. 22.4 That the Assessee was provided opportunity vide order sheet entry dated 12/12/2016 to explain why disallowance u/s 14A in the respect of the expenditure

VIRGO ALUMINUM LTD.,SIRMOUR vs. PR. C.I.T., CIRCLE, PATIALA

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 438/Chd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18

97,20,580/- after claiming deduction u/s 80-IC amounting to Rs.3,24,45,802/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS for the following reasons:- "Large deductions claimed u/s 80IA/80IAB/80IAC/80IB/80IC/80IBA/ 80ID/80IE/10A/10AA in comparison to preceding year". 4. The scrutiny assessment u/s 143(3) of the IT. Act, 1961 was completed on 27.12.2019 at an income of Rs.7

SHRI MOHAN LAL GUPTA,SHIMLA vs. PR.CIT-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

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

97,23,134/- after reducing the transfer expenses and indexed cost. The assessee had claimed deduction u/s 54F of Rs. 1,94,80,694/- and declared capital gain at Rs. 2,42,440/-. In response to this office letter dated 04/05/2016, assessee has filed purchase deed of immovable property at New Shimla which shows actual cost