NARESH KUMAR KAMBOJ,ZIRAKPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , PANCHKULA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg

29. The case of the revenue is that the package given to the workmen is a VRS package and it would fall within Section 10(10C)(viii) and accordingly, taxable if the receipt exceeds the exempted limit. The case of the petitioner is that the severance package received by them would fall within Section 10(10B) and shall

SH. MARTIN EKKA S/O SH. LALSAY EKKA,PANCHKULA vs. ITO, WARD -1, PANCHKULA

In the result, the ground no

Bench: SH. SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member)

29. The case of the revenue is that the package given to the workmen is a VRS package and it would fall within Section 10(10C)(viii) and accordingly, taxable if the receipt exceeds the exempted limit. The case of the petitioner is that the severance package received by them would fall within Section 10(10B) and shall

DAYAL SINGH,VILL FATEHPUR PO BUREWALA vs. ITO WARD-1, PANCHKULA

In the result, the ground no

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 519/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 बनाम Dayal Singh, The Ito, Vill Fatehpur Ward -1, Po Burewala Panchkula Distt.Amabla 134204 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Acdps7697G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Y.R. Saini, Adv. राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 11.11.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03.12.2024 आदेश/Order The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 20.03.2024 Passed By The Ld. Addl. / Jcit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assess Ee In This Appeal H As Taken Foll Owing Groun Ds Of Appeal: 1 That In The F Acts & Circumstance Of The Case The Id. Addl/Jcit (A)-9 Mumbai Of Cit (A)( Nfac) Has Erred In Law By Placing Reliance On Judgement Of Hon'Ble Apex Court In The Case Of Maji Sinneman Vs Reddy

29. The case of the revenue is that the package given to the workmen is a VRS package and it would fall within Section 10(10C)(viii) and accordingly, taxable if the receipt exceeds the exempted limit. The case of the petitioner is that the severance package received by them would fall within Section 10(10B) and shall

SATINDER PAUL THROUGH L/H NEELAM SAINI,PINJORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PANCHKULA

In the result, the ground no

Bench: SH. SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member)

29. The case of the revenue is that the package given to the workmen is a VRS package and it would fall within Section 10(10C)(viii) and accordingly, taxable if the receipt exceeds the exempted limit. The case of the petitioner is that the severance package received by them would fall within Section 10(10B) and shall

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

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

29,90,386/- u/s 14A /Rule 8D by taking the interest element ofRs. 2,19,62,710/- and further made the disallowance @ 0.5% on average investments amounting to Rs. 6,11,844/-. The total disallowance made was Rs. 36,02,230/-. The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 08.08.2011 had deleted the disallowance made u/s 14A / Rule 8D by following

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

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

29,90,386/- u/s 14A /Rule 8D by taking the interest element ofRs. 2,19,62,710/- and further made the disallowance @ 0.5% on average investments amounting to Rs. 6,11,844/-. The total disallowance made was Rs. 36,02,230/-. The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 08.08.2011 had deleted the disallowance made u/s 14A / Rule 8D by following

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

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

29,90,386/- u/s 14A /Rule 8D by taking the interest element ofRs. 2,19,62,710/- and further made the disallowance @ 0.5% on average investments amounting to Rs. 6,11,844/-. The total disallowance made was Rs. 36,02,230/-. The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 08.08.2011 had deleted the disallowance made u/s 14A / Rule 8D by following

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

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

29,90,386/- u/s 14A /Rule 8D by taking the interest element ofRs. 2,19,62,710/- and further made the disallowance @ 0.5% on average investments amounting to Rs. 6,11,844/-. The total disallowance made was Rs. 36,02,230/-. The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 08.08.2011 had deleted the disallowance made u/s 14A / Rule 8D by following

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

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

29,90,386/- u/s 14A /Rule 8D by taking the interest element ofRs. 2,19,62,710/- and further made the disallowance @ 0.5% on average investments amounting to Rs. 6,11,844/-. The total disallowance made was Rs. 36,02,230/-. The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 08.08.2011 had deleted the disallowance made u/s 14A / Rule 8D by following

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

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

29,90,386/- u/s 14A /Rule 8D by taking the interest element ofRs. 2,19,62,710/- and further made the disallowance @ 0.5% on average investments amounting to Rs. 6,11,844/-. The total disallowance made was Rs. 36,02,230/-. The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 08.08.2011 had deleted the disallowance made u/s 14A / Rule 8D by following

HARYANA BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION, SECTOR 17

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed

29-30, Sector 4,\nPanchkula, Haryana\nThe DCIT\nबनाम\nExemptions,\nVs.\nChandigarh\nस्थायी लेखा सं./ PAN NO: AAATH6995H\nअपीलार्थी/Appellant\nप्रत्यर्थी/Respondent\n( PHYSICAL HEARING )\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by :\nSh. Nikhil Goyal, Advocate,\nSh. Ashok Goyal, CA and\nSh. Sifatfreet Singh, CA\nराजस्व की ओर से/ Revenue by : Sh. Manav Bansal, CIT DR\nसुनवाई की तारीख/Date

HARYANA BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION, CHANDIGARH

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed

29-30, Sector 4,\nPanchkula, Haryana\nThe DCIT\nबनाम\nExemptions,\nVs.\nChandigarh\nस्थायी लेखा सं./ PAN NO: AAATH6995H\nअपीलार्थी/Appellant\nप्रत्यर्थी/Respondent\n( PHYSICAL HEARING )\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by :\nSh. Nikhil Goyal, Advocate,\nSh. Ashok Goyal, CA and\nSh. Sifatfreet Singh, CA\nराजस्व की ओर से/ Revenue by : Sh. Manav Bansal, CIT DR\nसुनवाई की तारीख/Date

HARYANA BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed

29-30, Sector 4,\nPanchkula, Haryana\nThe DCIT\nबनाम | Exemptions,\nVs.\nChandigarh\n\nस्थायी लेखा सं./ PAN NO: AAATH6995H\nअपीलार्थी/Appellant\nप्रत्यर्थी/Respondent\n\n( PHYSICAL HEARING )\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by :\nSh. Nikhil Goyal, Advocate,\nSh. Ashok Goyal, CA and\nSh. Sifatfreet Singh, CA\nराजस्व की ओर से/ Revenue by : Sh. Manav Bansal, CIT DR\nसुनवाई की तारीख

HARYANA BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION, CHANDIGARH

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed

29-30, Sector 4,\nPanchkula, Haryana\nThe DCIT\nExemptions,\nVs.\nChandigarh\n\nस्थायी लेखा सं./ PAN NO: AAATH6995H\nअपीलार्थी/Appellant\nप्रत्यर्थी/Respondent\n\n( PHYSICAL HEARING )\n\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. Nikhil Goyal, Advocate,\nSh. Ashok Goyal, CA and\nSh. Sifatfreet Singh, CA\nराजस्व की ओर से/ Revenue by : Sh. Manav Bansal, CIT DR\n\nसुनवाई की

DCIT, C-V, LUDHIANA vs. M/S HERO CYCLES LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 588/Chd/2018 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2012-13 The DCIT C-V, Ludhiana बनाम M/s Hero Cycles Ltd. Hero Nagar, G.T. Road Ludhiana स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAACH4073P अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 473/Chd/2018 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2012-13 M/s Hero Cycles Ltd. Hero Nagar, G.T. Road Ludhiana बनाम The ACIT C-V, Ludhiana स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAACH4073P

10,213/-by the Ld. CIT(A) made by the AO u/s 14A of the IT Act. 29. The facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income whereby it suo-moto considered a disallowance of Rs. 1,02,82,974/- under Rule 8D(2)(ii) and Rs. 2,94,48,717/- under Rule

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)

29,889/- as profits of the assessee. 28.20. We also notice that against Rs. 2.50 crores grant in aid @ 15% an amount of Rs. 37,50,000/- is disallowed. Whereas against Rs. 35 lakh subsidy from APEDA @ 15% an amount of Rs. 5,25,000/- is disallowed. The aggregate disallowance towards depreciation is Rs. 42,75,000/-. 28.21. We also

RAMJEE CONCRETES PVT.LTD.,MOHALI vs. ITO-WARD-6(3), CHANDIGARH

The appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid terms

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 205/Chd/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Ramjee Concretes Private Limited, The Ito, बनाम #1238.Sector 91, Ward 6(3), Mohali, Punjab Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aafcr9457E अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

29 of this Act and that any rate or tax levied upon profits calculated in a manner other than that provided by that section could not be disallowed under this sub-clause. Similarly, this subclause is inapplicable, and a deduction should be allowed, where a tax is imposed by a district board on business with reference to 'estimated income

M/S CHANDIGARH LAWN TENNIS ASSOCIATION,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year : 2013-14 Chandigarh Lawn Tennis Vs. The Ito (Exemptions), Association, Ward, Chandigarh Sector 10, Chandigarh Pan No. Aaatc4943J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sh. Y.K. Sud, Ca Respondent By : Smt. Chanderkanta, Addl. Cit (On 22.3.2018) & Sh.Yoginder Mittal, Sr. Dr (On 13.7.2018) Date Of Hearing : 22.03.2018 & 13.7.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2018

disallowance of exemption u/s 11 claimed by the assessee. 3. Brief facts relating to the issue as culled out from the order of CIT(A) are that the assessee, M/s Chandigarh Lawn Tennis Association (hereinafter referred to as ‘CLTA’) is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act. The assessee is also registered as a charitable entity vide order dated