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)

section 115BBE of the income Tax Act on account of alleged unexplained investment in the Hotel Building. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in making the reference to the Departmental Valuer, for estimate cost of construction of the hotel building, without any incriminating evidence during the course of search from

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)

section 115BBE of the income Tax Act on account of alleged unexplained investment in the Hotel Building. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in making the reference to the Departmental Valuer, for estimate cost of construction of the hotel building, without any incriminating evidence during the course of search from

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)

section 115BBE of the income Tax Act on account of alleged unexplained investment in the Hotel Building. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in making the reference to the Departmental Valuer, for estimate cost of construction of the hotel building, without any incriminating evidence during the course of search from

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

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

150 (Guj) C1T vs. Sathyanarayan P. Rathi ii) ITA No. 2826/Mum/2013 dated 5.11.2014 Shri Ganpatraj A Sanghavi vs. ACIT iii) 221 Taxman 436 (Guj) CIT vs. Pradeep Shantilal Patel (section 44AF) iv) ITA No. 116/Ahd/2011 dated 30.5.2014 Narpat Singh vs. 1TO v) 355 ITR 290 (Guj) CIT vs. Bholanath Poly Fab (P) Ltd. vi) 152 ITD 874 (Ahd) Dineshbhai Dhansukhlal

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

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

150 (Guj) C1T vs. Sathyanarayan P. Rathi ii) ITA No. 2826/Mum/2013 dated 5.11.2014 Shri Ganpatraj A Sanghavi vs. ACIT iii) 221 Taxman 436 (Guj) CIT vs. Pradeep Shantilal Patel (section 44AF) iv) ITA No. 116/Ahd/2011 dated 30.5.2014 Narpat Singh vs. 1TO v) 355 ITR 290 (Guj) CIT vs. Bholanath Poly Fab (P) Ltd. vi) 152 ITD 874 (Ahd) Dineshbhai Dhansukhlal

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

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

150 (Guj) C1T vs. Sathyanarayan P. Rathi ii) ITA No. 2826/Mum/2013 dated 5.11.2014 Shri Ganpatraj A Sanghavi vs. ACIT iii) 221 Taxman 436 (Guj) CIT vs. Pradeep Shantilal Patel (section 44AF) iv) ITA No. 116/Ahd/2011 dated 30.5.2014 Narpat Singh vs. 1TO v) 355 ITR 290 (Guj) CIT vs. Bholanath Poly Fab (P) Ltd. vi) 152 ITD 874 (Ahd) Dineshbhai Dhansukhlal

SH. AMAN SETH,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, W-1(1), LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

section 36(l)(iii)." Further, in the case of CIT Vs Abhishek Industries Ltd. quoted above, the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court held that: - "Once it is borne out from the records that the assessee had borrowed certain funds on which liability to pay tax is being incurred and on the other hand, certain amounts had been advanced

THE SHAHABAD COOP. SUGAR MILLS,SHAHABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE, KURUKSHETRA

The appeal is disposed off accordingly as aforesaid

Bench: Us:

150 (KER)[2018]) dated 02.07.2018 that the effect of Sections 2(24)(x) and 36(1)(va) of the IT Act, 1961 would make available deductions only if contributions are paid within the due dates prescribed in the respective statutes. The non-obstante clause of Section 43B of the IT Act has no effect in so far as employees contribution

TYNOR ORTHOTICS PRIVATE LIMITED,MOHALI vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 6(1), MOHALI, MOHALI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

150/-, adding disallowances of Rs.85,00,000 excess salary and Rs.3,88,300/- software expenses. Penalty proceedings under Section 270A

M/S JAIN AMAR CLOTHING PRIVATE LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT-CC-3, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.

disallowed under section 37 of the Act. 3.2 In response the assessee filed reply on 21/12/2019 and stated that as per Clause 8 of the lease deed the assessee will be responsible for any wear and tear, maintenance and other repairs of the building. Thus, the loss on account of fire was claimed as revenue loss and not the capital

PUKHRAJ SINGH GUJRAL,CHANDIGARH vs. CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Final Hearing

Section 143(1) was issued on 26.03.2021, but the FTC was filed on 02.02.2021. Thus, the respondent is supposed to have provided the due credit to the FTC of the petitioner. However, the FTC was rejected by the respondent, which is not proper and the same is not in accordance with law. Therefore the impugned order is liable

PUNJAB AGRICULTUAL UNIVERSITY,LUDHIANA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS, CHANDIGARH

In the result, Assessee’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Krinwant Sahay & Shri Paresh M. Joshi, Judical Member आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 661/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Punjab Agriculture University, Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of बनाम Thapar Hall, Income Tax (Exemptions), Ferozepur Road, Chandigarh Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaabp0216H अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 492/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Punjab Agriculture University, Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Thapar Hall, बनाम Income Tax (Exemptions), Ferozepur Road, Chandigarh Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaabp0216H अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent (Hybrid Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate, राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 09.12.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.12 .2024 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, A.M.: The Appeal In These Cases Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 09.05.2022 For Assessment Year 2018-19 Order

disallowed the. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) having accepted that the assessee is covered under the ambit of section 10(23C) (Hi ab) but only on the basis of mistake of the counsel in filling the correct section while filing the return of income, has not allowed the said deduction and which is against the facts and circumstances

PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY,LUDHIANA vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

In the result, Assessee’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Krinwant Sahay & Shri Paresh M. Joshi, Judical Member आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 661/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Punjab Agriculture University, Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of बनाम Thapar Hall, Income Tax (Exemptions), Ferozepur Road, Chandigarh Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaabp0216H अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 492/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Punjab Agriculture University, Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Thapar Hall, बनाम Income Tax (Exemptions), Ferozepur Road, Chandigarh Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaabp0216H अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent (Hybrid Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate, राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 09.12.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.12 .2024 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, A.M.: The Appeal In These Cases Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 09.05.2022 For Assessment Year 2018-19 Order

disallowed the. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) having accepted that the assessee is covered under the ambit of section 10(23C) (Hi ab) but only on the basis of mistake of the counsel in filling the correct section while filing the return of income, has not allowed the said deduction and which is against the facts and circumstances

SAHIBZADA TIMBER AND PLY PRIVATE LIMITED ,MOHALI vs. DCIT, ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 699/Chd/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2019-20 M/s Sahibzada Timber & Ply Private Limited B41-42, Phase-3, Indl. Aera, SAS Nagar Mohali, Punjab बनाम The DCIT Central Circle-2 Chandigarh स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAQCS2239G अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Mohit Dhiman, C.A राजस्व की ओर से/ Revenue by : Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR Shri Dharam Vir, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of He

section 50C which had been accepted by the Id. Assessing Officer, and thus no addition could be made to sale consideration. 6) That the Id. CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming the disallowance of expenses of Rs. 15,411/-out of Rs. 3,25,881/- claimed by the Appellant.” 3. Briefly the facts of the case are that during

THE PUNJAB STATE CO-OPERATIVE HOUSE BUILDING FEDERATION LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH

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

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 136/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Punjab State Co-Op. Vs. The Dcit / Acit, बनाम Circle 1(1), House Building Federation Chandigarh Ltd. Sco 150-152, Sector 34A Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaaat0759L अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent

150-152, Sector 34A Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./PAN No: AAAAT0759L अपीलाथ"/ APPELLANT ""यथ"/ REPSONDENT ( PHYSICAL HERING ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Atul Goyal, CA राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 25.06.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement

THE PUNJAB STATE CO-OPERATIVE HOUSE BUILDING FEDERATION LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH

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

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 136/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Punjab State Co-Op. Vs. The Dcit / Acit, बनाम Circle 1(1), House Building Federation Chandigarh Ltd. Sco 150-152, Sector 34A Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaaat0759L अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent

150-152, Sector 34A Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./PAN No: AAAAT0759L अपीलाथ"/ APPELLANT ""यथ"/ REPSONDENT ( PHYSICAL HERING ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Atul Goyal, CA राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 25.06.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement

AMBER ENTERPRISES INDIA LIMITED, RAJPURA,PUNJAB vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATIALA, PUNJAB

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

disallowance of deduction u/s 35(2AB). in 4. That the PCIT has failed to appreciate that the AO concerned had made requisite inquiries u/s 133(6) during the course of assessment proceedings from DSIR and had also received reply in that context and since the concerned department had replied to the AO concerned, no fault can be attributed

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”.

disallowed. Keeping in view, the above facts, the income of the Society for the purpose of section 11 is computed as under :- Particulars Income 1. Gross receipts 113416023 2. Expenditure- Total expenditure 43285738 70130285 75474465/- Rs. 3,21,88,727/- (Depreciation claimed on building under construction