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

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

disallowance of Rs. 14,15,10,213/- made by the A.O. by\ninvoking the provisions of Section 14A of the Income

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

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed

15).\nAdditionally, the Appellant is covered by the provisions of section 10(46),\nwhich provides exemption to statutory bodies established under law and duly\nnotified by the Central Government. The nature of the receipts and their\napplication have been consistently disclosed in the accounts, which reflect the\nBoard's compliance with statutory provisions.\n2.3 The statutory cess credited

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

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed

15).\nAdditionally, the Appellant is covered by the provisions of section 10(46),\nwhich provides exemption to statutory bodies established under law and duly\nnotified by the Central Government. The nature of the receipts and their\napplication have been consistently disclosed in the accounts, which reflect the\nBoard's compliance with statutory provisions.\n2.3 The statutory cess credited

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

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed

15).\nAdditionally, the Appellant is covered by the provisions of section 10(46),\nwhich provides exemption to statutory bodies established under law and duly\nnotified by the Central Government. The nature of the receipts and their\napplication have been consistently disclosed in the accounts, which reflect the\nBoard's compliance with statutory provisions.\n\n2.3 The statutory cess credited

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

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed

15).\nAdditionally, the Appellant is covered by the provisions of section 10(46),\nwhich provides exemption to statutory bodies established under law and duly\nnotified by the Central Government. The nature of the receipts and their\napplication have been consistently disclosed in the accounts, which reflect the\nBoard's compliance with statutory provisions.\n\n2.3 The statutory cess credited

ITO, WARD, PALAMPUR vs. THE KANGRA CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, KANGRA

In the result, appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Us Is Filed Under Section 253 Of The Income Tax Act, As Amended From Time To Time. The Respondent Is A Cooperative Bank.

15. In the foregoing in so far as broad issue whether no disallowance under section 14A can be made if the assessee

DSM SINOCHEM PHARMACEUTICALS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NAWANSHAHR vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 253/ चंडीगढ़/2016(िन.व. 2011-12)

disallowance of interest expenditure under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. The facts germane to the issue are identical to the issue raised in ground no.5 of the appeal for AY 2011-12. 26. The ld. DR admitted that the issue raised in grounds of appeal for AY 2014- 15

M/S DSM SINOCHEM PHARMACEUTICALS INDIA PVT. LTD. ,TOANSA vs. DCIT, C-1(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 253/ चंडीगढ़/2016(िन.व. 2011-12)

disallowance of interest expenditure under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. The facts germane to the issue are identical to the issue raised in ground no.5 of the appeal for AY 2011-12. 26. The ld. DR admitted that the issue raised in grounds of appeal for AY 2014- 15

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANCHKULA CIRCLE, PANCHKULA, PANCHKULA vs. HARYANA STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LIMITED, PANCHKULA

In the result, the present appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

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

15,902 under section 80P(2)(d) in respect of dividend received from investments in co-operative institutions. The AO disallowed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANCHKULA CIRCLE, PANCHKULA, PANCHKULA vs. HARYANA STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LTD, PANCHKULA

In the result, the present appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

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

15,902 under section 80P(2)(d) in respect of dividend received from investments in co-operative institutions. The AO disallowed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANCHKULA CIRCLE, PANCHKULA, PANCHKULA vs. HARYANA STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LTD, PANCHKULA

In the result, the present appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

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

15,902 under section 80P(2)(d) in respect of dividend received from investments in co-operative institutions. The AO disallowed

M/S APEX BUILDERS, LUDHIANA vs. ITO, W-2(1), LUDHIANA

The appeal is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member)

disallowance of Rs.16,33,037/- under Section 40A(3). The AO observed that the assessee made cash purchases exceeding Rs.20,000/- in a day to a single party, thus violating the provision. Although the assessee claimed that the payments were made to transporters which were within the higher limit of Rs.35,000/-. The Ld. CIT(A) had called

M/S BARNALA BUILDERS AND CONSULTANT,ZIRAKPUR vs. DCIT/ACIT (CEN)-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

section 143(1)(a) can be construed as a `disallowance of expenditure indicated in the audit report not taken into account in computing the total income in the return’. Point 20(b) of the audit report in Form 3CA has columns – Serial number; Nature of fund; Sum received from employees; Due date for payment; The actual amount paid

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. ESSIX BIOSCIENCES LIMITED, MANIMAJRA

In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

15, the aforesaid Tribunal order be followed and for the year under consideration also, the disallowance under Section 14A of the Act be ordered

ITO, W-2, BARNALA vs. THE TRUCK OPERATOR UNION, BARNALA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt.Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavthe Ito बनाम The Truck Operator Union, Ward-2, Barnala Dhanaula Road, Barnala "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaaat6497M

disallowance made by the AO. We do not find any merit in the appeal of the Revenue and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.” 15. There is thus no dispute on the legal proposition as so laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court regarding consideration of business expediency and other relevant factors before invoking the rigors of section

M/S VARDHMAN TEXTILES LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, C-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 14A of the Act r.w. Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules and making disallowance ignoring the stand taken by the assessee. As per ground no. 3 the amended provisions of Rule 8D, effective from 02/06/2016 have been misapplied. 14.1 The AO disallowed a net amount of Rs. 17,98,15

M/S VARDHMAN TEXTILES LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, C-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 14A of the Act r.w. Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules and making disallowance ignoring the stand taken by the assessee. As per ground no. 3 the amended provisions of Rule 8D, effective from 02/06/2016 have been misapplied. 14.1 The AO disallowed a net amount of Rs. 17,98,15

ACIT,CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA vs. M/S VARDHMAN TEXTILES LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 14A of the Act r.w. Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules and making disallowance ignoring the stand taken by the assessee. As per ground no. 3 the amended provisions of Rule 8D, effective from 02/06/2016 have been misapplied. 14.1 The AO disallowed a net amount of Rs. 17,98,15

DCIT, C-1, LUDHIANA vs. M/S VARDHMAN TEXTILES LIMITED, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 14A of the Act r.w. Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules and making disallowance ignoring the stand taken by the assessee. As per ground no. 3 the amended provisions of Rule 8D, effective from 02/06/2016 have been misapplied. 14.1 The AO disallowed a net amount of Rs. 17,98,15