M/S ASHA TECHNOLOGIES,SIRMOUR vs. ADDL. CIT, SOLAN

In the result, both the above appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed as aforesaid in respect of impugned orders dt

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

2. Mod Furniture, assessee has shown cash payment of Rs.18,000/- on 21.06.2006, Rs. 13,172/- on 24.06.2006, Rs. 16,032/- on 1.07.2006 and Rs. 6,610/- on 2.07.2006. On the other hand in regular books of account provided, during assessment proceedings, these cash payments are reflected on 15.03.2007, 14.03.2007, 2.02.2007 and on 6.02.2007 respectively. It means cash was paid

M/S INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT FUND,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 644 & 645/Chd/2018 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2014-15 Infrastructure Development Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax बनाम Fund (Exemptions) Circle-2, Sco-71-17 Sector-17C Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aaal10136K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 528 /Chd/2017 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Infrastructure Development Acit, बनाम Fund Circle-2 (Exemptions), Sco-71-17 Sector-17C Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aaal10136K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri A. K. Jindal, Ca, Smt. Ratan Kaur & Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Chandrajeet Singh, Cit(Dr) Smt. C. Chandrakanta, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 05.03.2020 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31/07/2020

disallowance of accumulation of income claimed under section 11(2) of the I.T. Act which is highly unjustified and uncalled for. 2. A) That the ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts of the case in upholding the non acceptance of Form No. 10 submitted during the course ITA No. 644 & 645/Chd/2018-& 528/2017 Infrastructure Development Fund, Chandigarh

M/S INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT FUND,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, (EXEMPTIONS), C-2, CHANDIGARH

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 644 & 645/Chd/2018 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2014-15 Infrastructure Development Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax बनाम Fund (Exemptions) Circle-2, Sco-71-17 Sector-17C Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aaal10136K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 528 /Chd/2017 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Infrastructure Development Acit, बनाम Fund Circle-2 (Exemptions), Sco-71-17 Sector-17C Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aaal10136K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri A. K. Jindal, Ca, Smt. Ratan Kaur & Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Chandrajeet Singh, Cit(Dr) Smt. C. Chandrakanta, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 05.03.2020 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31/07/2020

disallowance of accumulation of income claimed under section 11(2) of the I.T. Act which is highly unjustified and uncalled for. 2. A) That the ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts of the case in upholding the non acceptance of Form No. 10 submitted during the course ITA No. 644 & 645/Chd/2018-& 528/2017 Infrastructure Development Fund, Chandigarh

M/S INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT FUND,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, (EXEMPTIONS), C-2, CHANDIGARH

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 644 & 645/Chd/2018 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2014-15 Infrastructure Development Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax बनाम Fund (Exemptions) Circle-2, Sco-71-17 Sector-17C Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aaal10136K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 528 /Chd/2017 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Infrastructure Development Acit, बनाम Fund Circle-2 (Exemptions), Sco-71-17 Sector-17C Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aaal10136K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri A. K. Jindal, Ca, Smt. Ratan Kaur & Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Chandrajeet Singh, Cit(Dr) Smt. C. Chandrakanta, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 05.03.2020 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31/07/2020

disallowance of accumulation of income claimed under section 11(2) of the I.T. Act which is highly unjustified and uncalled for. 2. A) That the ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts of the case in upholding the non acceptance of Form No. 10 submitted during the course ITA No. 644 & 645/Chd/2018-& 528/2017 Infrastructure Development Fund, Chandigarh

THE HABROL COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL SERVICE SOCIETY LIMITED,LAGRU vs. ITO DHARAMSHALA, DHARAMSHALA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 158/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 The Habrol Cooperative Vs. The Ito, बनाम Dharamshala Agricultural Service Society Limited, Vill. Lagru Khundian Distt.Kangra Hp 176031 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aadat1205A अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hering ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 08.08.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2024 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, A.M.:

disallowing deduction under chapter VI -A in respect of section 80P of the Income Tax Act 1961, as assessee is providing banking /credit facilities to its members and covered u/s sec 80P (2)(a)(1) without considering the facts of the case which is highly arbitrary, illegal, unwarranted & uncalled for. 3) That the assessee has filed rectification but same

ACIT, C-7, LUDHIANA vs. M/S CEIGALL INDIA LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: The Appeal Is Finally Heard Or Disposed Off.

10A or Section 10B of the Act and cannot b taxed separately under Section 56 of the Act. " 2. The Hon'ble High Court while pronouncing this judgment relied upon on many judgments for holding the above preposition; copy of the judgment is being enclosed herewith. 3. It is submitted that the Ld. Assessing Officer by applying the net profit

RAJESHWAR SHARMA,MOHALI vs. ITO, W-6(2), MOHALI

The appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 870/Chd/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Sh. Rajeshwar Sharma, The I.T.O., बनाम Ward 6(2), House No.584, Sectro 59, Mohali Phase-4, Mohali "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Amdps4641Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A)-2, Chandigarh Dated 28.3.2018

section 10(10A) of the Act and denied the exemption claimed by the assessee on this account. 8. We have considered the rival submissions and have also gone through the record. Though in strict terms, it may not be said that the amount received by the assessee was on account of commutation of pension, however, the fact on the file

DHARAM SINGH RAWAT,MOHALI vs. ITO, W-6(3), MOHALI

The appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 870/Chd/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Sh. Rajeshwar Sharma, The I.T.O., बनाम Ward 6(2), House No.584, Sectro 59, Mohali Phase-4, Mohali "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Amdps4641Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A)-2, Chandigarh Dated 28.3.2018

section 10(10A) of the Act and denied the exemption claimed by the assessee on this account. 8. We have considered the rival submissions and have also gone through the record. Though in strict terms, it may not be said that the amount received by the assessee was on account of commutation of pension, however, the fact on the file

KARAN PAL SINGH,MOHALI vs. ITO, W-6(2), MOHALI

The appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 870/Chd/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Sh. Rajeshwar Sharma, The I.T.O., बनाम Ward 6(2), House No.584, Sectro 59, Mohali Phase-4, Mohali "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Amdps4641Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A)-2, Chandigarh Dated 28.3.2018

section 10(10A) of the Act and denied the exemption claimed by the assessee on this account. 8. We have considered the rival submissions and have also gone through the record. Though in strict terms, it may not be said that the amount received by the assessee was on account of commutation of pension, however, the fact on the file

M/S GLOBE PRECISION INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,SOLAN vs. DCIT, PARWANOO

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2012-13

10A or 10B of the Act [Section 80- IB(5)].” 5. Ld. DR fairly admitted that the issue is squarely covered by the above decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court. It was, however, submitted that the issue be restored to the file of the Assessing officer for verification as to whether the assessees have actually carried

M/S GLOBE PRECISION INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,SOLAN vs. DCIT, PARWANOO

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2012-13

10A or 10B of the Act [Section 80- IB(5)].” 5. Ld. DR fairly admitted that the issue is squarely covered by the above decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court. It was, however, submitted that the issue be restored to the file of the Assessing officer for verification as to whether the assessees have actually carried

ITO, CIRCLE, PARWANOO vs. M/S GLOBE PRECISION INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., BADDI

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2012-13

10A or 10B of the Act [Section 80- IB(5)].” 5. Ld. DR fairly admitted that the issue is squarely covered by the above decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court. It was, however, submitted that the issue be restored to the file of the Assessing officer for verification as to whether the assessees have actually carried

ITO, CIRCLE, PARWANOO vs. M/S GLOBE PRECISION INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., BADDI

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2012-13

10A or 10B of the Act [Section 80- IB(5)].” 5. Ld. DR fairly admitted that the issue is squarely covered by the above decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court. It was, however, submitted that the issue be restored to the file of the Assessing officer for verification as to whether the assessees have actually carried

ARUN DHIR,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 97/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Arun Dhir, Vs The Dcit, House No.1150, Sector 21-B, Circle-1, Chandigarh. Sector 17,Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aarpd0180F अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Pankaj Bhalla, C.A. Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.09.2025

2 assessee is entitled for deduction u/s 10(10A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 amounting to Rs.34,01,898/-. 3. The brief facts of the case are that assessee has originally filed his return of income on 03.08.2013 declaring an income of Rs.1,38,06,938/-. This return was revised on 16.08.2014 declaring an income of Rs.1

ASSOCIATED BIOTECH vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PARWANOO

In the result, the appeal of the assessee, therefore, stands allowed

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

2,70,15,483/-, under section 80IC, without appreciating the fact that the act allows deduction of 100% for first five years substantial expansion. 4. The sole issue raised in this appeal relates to the action of the CIT(A) in disallowing the claim of deduction @ 100% us 80IC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short

M/S SHREE BALAJI ENTERPRISES,BADDI vs. ITO, BADDI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee, therefore, stands

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2014-15

2. The sole issue raised in these appeals relates to the action of the CIT(A) in disallowing the claim of deduction @ 100% us 80IC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') on account of substantial expansion of the Unit. 4. During the course of hearing before us, it was brought to our notice that the issue

M/S ZENITH INTERNATIONAL,SOLAN vs. DCIT, CIRCLE , PARWANOO

In the result, the appeals of the assessee, therefore, stands

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2014-15

2. The sole issue raised in these appeals relates to the action of the CIT(A) in disallowing the claim of deduction @ 100% us 80IC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') on account of substantial expansion of the Unit. 4. During the course of hearing before us, it was brought to our notice that the issue

M/S DIGITAL SYSTEMS INC,BADDI vs. ITO, PARWANOO

In the result, the appeal of the assessee, therefore, stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2014-15

disallowing the claim of deduction @ 100% us 80IC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') on account of substantial expansion of the Unit. ITA No. 1700/Chd/2017- M/s Digital System Inc, HP 2 4. None was present on behalf of the assessee. However, during the course of hearing before us, it was brought to our notice that

M/S ISKON REMEDIES,OGLI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, SHIMLA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee, therefore, stands

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2014-15

2. The sole issue raised in these appeals relates to the action of the CIT(A) in disallowing the claim of deduction @ 100% us 80IC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') on account of substantial expansion of the Units. 4. During the course of hearing before us, it was brought to our notice that the issue