M/S G.G AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRIES,BARNALA vs. DCIT-CC, PATIALA

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: This Tribunal As & By Way Of Second Appeal Under The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”). The Relevant Assessment Year Is Assessment Year 2018-19. The Corresponding Previous Year Is From 01.04.2017 To 31.03.2018. The Assessee Is Aggrieved By An Order Bearing No. Itba/Rec/M/154/2023-24/1057512359(1) Dated 30.10.2023 Under Section 150/250(6) Of The Act In First

disallowed and added back to the 3 income of appellant. 8.1 That the assessee being aggrieved by the impugned order (supra) has now preferred an appeal before us and in Form No.36 has raised following grounds of appeal which are as under : 1. The Ld. CIT (A) has passed the order under section 154

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)

154(SC). 7. The assessee's Cross Objections (supra) for assessment year 2014-15 read as under : ITA 347/CHD/2024 & C.O. 17/CHD/2024 A.Y.2018-19 6 (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department {CIT(A), ITD)} [NFAC] has erred both on facts and in law in restricting the disallowance under Section

DCIT, C-5, LUDHIANA vs. M/S HERO CYCLES LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed and the Cross

disallowance of Rs. 1,95,20,496/- vide order dt. 14/02/2017 passed under section 154 of the Act. 5. Being

MADHAV KRG LTD,MANDI GOBINDGARH vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE PATIALA, PATIALA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

Section 154 by the AO on account of adjustment on account of ICDS amounting to Rs. 3,52,475/-. 2. During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee company filed its return of income declaring total income of Rs. 62,51,16,364/-. Subsequently, a communication dt. 03/09/2019 was received from CPC Portal for proposed adjustment

TARSEM CHAND RANA,UNA vs. JURISDICTIONAL ASSESSING OFFICER, ITO WARD 98, UNA, RANGE CODE 37, UNA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1085/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Tarsem Singh Rana, Ito, बनाम H.No. 4, Kathoh, Ward 98, Khurwain, Una Vs. Bangana H.P. 174321 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aawpr5715R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Hybrid Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Ajit Kumar Jha, Advocate (Virtual Mode) राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit, Sr.Dr

disallow the employee contribution of Rs. 8,87,438/- under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, with reference to Sections

GEETA SHARMA,SUNAM vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , PATIALA

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

disallowance under Section 10(37) of the Act. It was stated that tax has been calculated on income of Rs.3,79,320/- and [agriculture income of Rs.2,50,000/- only] but not on assessed income of Rs.2,98,60,842/-. 15.2 In the aforesaid Show Cause Notice dated 05.02.2024 it was further alleged that“you had e-filed your return

M/S GOYAL AUTOMOTIVE PVT. LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA

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

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A), Ludhiana & Thereafter The Matter Was Transfer To Nfac, Delhi Wherein The Appeal Of The Assessee Was Dismissed On Statistical Ground Without Considering The Merits Of The Case.

section 154 r.w.s 143(1) was passed on 06/01/2020 wherein certain adjustments were made by the CPC in terms of addition of Rs. 16,37,453/- on account of non- payment of Employees as well as Employers contribution to ESI Fund within the due date and disallowance

M/S STANDARD CORPORATION INDIA LTD.,BARNALA vs. DCIT-CC, PATIALA

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

disallowed in terms of Section 154 of the Act and added back to the income of the assessee as and by way of impugned

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)

disallowance u/s 14A made by him. The Ld. AO has failed to calculate the MAT credit u/s 115JB and 6. considered the credit available to the company while creating the demand on the above addition. 7. The appellant craves leave for reserving the right to amend, modify or add any ground (s) of appeal at any time or during

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)

disallowance u/s 14A made by him. The Ld. AO has failed to calculate the MAT credit u/s 115JB and 6. considered the credit available to the company while creating the demand on the above addition. 7. The appellant craves leave for reserving the right to amend, modify or add any ground (s) of appeal at any time or during

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)

disallowance u/s 14A made by him. The Ld. AO has failed to calculate the MAT credit u/s 115JB and 6. considered the credit available to the company while creating the demand on the above addition. 7. The appellant craves leave for reserving the right to amend, modify or add any ground (s) of appeal at any time or during

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)

disallowance u/s 14A made by him. The Ld. AO has failed to calculate the MAT credit u/s 115JB and 6. considered the credit available to the company while creating the demand on the above addition. 7. The appellant craves leave for reserving the right to amend, modify or add any ground (s) of appeal at any time or during

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)

disallowance u/s 14A made by him. The Ld. AO has failed to calculate the MAT credit u/s 115JB and 6. considered the credit available to the company while creating the demand on the above addition. 7. The appellant craves leave for reserving the right to amend, modify or add any ground (s) of appeal at any time or during

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)

disallowance u/s 14A made by him. The Ld. AO has failed to calculate the MAT credit u/s 115JB and 6. considered the credit available to the company while creating the demand on the above addition. 7. The appellant craves leave for reserving the right to amend, modify or add any ground (s) of appeal at any time or during

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)

disallowance u/s 14A made by him. The Ld. AO has failed to calculate the MAT credit u/s 115JB and 6. considered the credit available to the company while creating the demand on the above addition. 7. The appellant craves leave for reserving the right to amend, modify or add any ground (s) of appeal at any time or during

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)

disallowance u/s 14A made by him. The Ld. AO has failed to calculate the MAT credit u/s 115JB and 6. considered the credit available to the company while creating the demand on the above addition. 7. The appellant craves leave for reserving the right to amend, modify or add any ground (s) of appeal at any time or during

M/S GLAXOSMITHKLINE ASIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

disallowance under Section 37(1) of the Act." It was held similarly by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Whirlpool of India Limited 381 ITR 154

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

Bench: Us In Terms Of Section 253 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The Assessee Being Aggrieved By The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) Dt. 11/03/2018 Which Is Hereinafter Referred To As The Impugned Order, Before This Tribunal In Form No. 36 Has Interalia Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

154, for any assessment year beginning on or before the 1st day of April, 2001. Explanation. For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that notwith- standing anything to the contrary contained in this Act, the provisions of this section shall apply and shall be deemed to have always applied in a case where the income, not forming part

HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,PANCHKULA, HARYANA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANCHKULA , HARYANA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

disallowance relating to the amount of interest on arrears of sales-Tax the said issue was highly debatable and it ceased to be primafacie inadmissible and therefore section 143(1)(a) would not be applicable.\n10. Now, as stated hereinabove, at the time when the assessee submitted the return of income for the assessment year 1992-93 declaring 'Nil' income