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

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

THE ASSISTANT EXCISE & TAXATION COMMISSIONER ,NAHAN vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE, SHIMLA

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.903 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2007-08 The Assistant Excise & बनाम The Additional Cit, Taxation Commissioner, Tds Range, Nahan Shimla "थायीलेखासं./Pan/Tan No: Ptla12468B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

206(1C) of the Act and the fact that the provisions of section 271CA have been inserted by the Finance Act 2006 w.e.f. 1.4.2007, it was held that the ITA Nos. 903 to 905-Chd-2019 - Assistant Excise & Taxation Commissioner Nahan & Othrs 5 assessee was in default for non-collection of Tax at Source and accordingly, he levied penalty

THE ASSISTANT EXCISE & TAXATION COMMISSIONER ,SHIMLA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE, SHIMLA

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.903 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2007-08 The Assistant Excise & बनाम The Additional Cit, Taxation Commissioner, Tds Range, Nahan Shimla "थायीलेखासं./Pan/Tan No: Ptla12468B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

206(1C) of the Act and the fact that the provisions of section 271CA have been inserted by the Finance Act 2006 w.e.f. 1.4.2007, it was held that the ITA Nos. 903 to 905-Chd-2019 - Assistant Excise & Taxation Commissioner Nahan & Othrs 5 assessee was in default for non-collection of Tax at Source and accordingly, he levied penalty

THE ASSISTANT EXCISE & TAXATION COMMISSIONER ,SHIMLA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE, SHIMLA

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.903 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2007-08 The Assistant Excise & बनाम The Additional Cit, Taxation Commissioner, Tds Range, Nahan Shimla "थायीलेखासं./Pan/Tan No: Ptla12468B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

206(1C) of the Act and the fact that the provisions of section 271CA have been inserted by the Finance Act 2006 w.e.f. 1.4.2007, it was held that the ITA Nos. 903 to 905-Chd-2019 - Assistant Excise & Taxation Commissioner Nahan & Othrs 5 assessee was in default for non-collection of Tax at Source and accordingly, he levied penalty

THE ASSISTANT EXCISE & TAXATION COMMISSIONER ,NAHAN vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE, SHIMLA

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.903 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2007-08 The Assistant Excise & बनाम The Additional Cit, Taxation Commissioner, Tds Range, Nahan Shimla "थायीलेखासं./Pan/Tan No: Ptla12468B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

206(1C) of the Act and the fact that the provisions of section 271CA have been inserted by the Finance Act 2006 w.e.f. 1.4.2007, it was held that the ITA Nos. 903 to 905-Chd-2019 - Assistant Excise & Taxation Commissioner Nahan & Othrs 5 assessee was in default for non-collection of Tax at Source and accordingly, he levied penalty

DCIT-CC-III, LUDHIANA vs. M/S SEL TEXTILE LTD, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

206 /CHD/2021 A.Y. 2013-14 Page 7 of 8 It is further submitted that the disallowance u/s 14A does not fall within 1 ambit of definition of 'undisclosed income' as per provision of section

J. K. EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JAMMU vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

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

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

section 164 of the IT Act, 1961 and the exemption u/s 11 cannot be denied and the whole of the excess income over expenditure of the trust cannot be added back and assessed as the income during the year under consideration. In this connection, attention was invited to assessment order in connection with AY 2014-15 where the so- called

J.K.EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

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

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

section 164 of the IT Act, 1961 and the exemption u/s 11 cannot be denied and the whole of the excess income over expenditure of the trust cannot be added back and assessed as the income during the year under consideration. In this connection, attention was invited to assessment order in connection with AY 2014-15 where the so- called

J.K. EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JAMMU & KASHMIR vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION)-CIRCLE-1,, CHANDIGARH

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

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

section 164 of the IT Act, 1961 and the exemption u/s 11 cannot be denied and the whole of the excess income over expenditure of the trust cannot be added back and assessed as the income during the year under consideration. In this connection, attention was invited to assessment order in connection with AY 2014-15 where the so- called

SARASWATI AGRO CHEMICALS (INDIA) PVT. LTD,MOHALI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), MOHALI

In the result, the transfer pricing adjustment so made by the AO and confirmed by the ld CIT(A) amounting to Rs 89,22,420/- is hereby set-aside and the ground of appeal is allowed

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

section 92BA which implies and supported with the help of case laws that it stands deleted since inception. The ld CIT(A) was also apprised that same Ld. A.O under similar facts in subsequent A.Y 2015-16 have neither made any reference to TPO nor have made any addition in this regard. The CIT(A) has taken cognisance

ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE -1, LUDHIANA vs. M/S AARTI INTERNATIONAL LTD., LUDHIANA

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed in light of aforesaid directions

Bench: Cit(A)?

disallowances. Further, during the appellate proceedings, the assessee took an additional ground of appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) vide its letter dated 04.10.2016 stating that TUFS subsidy of Rs. 10,39,49,181/- which has been received by the assessee from the Ministry of Textiles is exempt from tax and should be reduced from the assessed income

M/S PUNJAB TOURISM DEVELOPMENET CORPORATION LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ao)

section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for setting aside the same but his application u/s 34 of Arbitration and Concilation Act, 1996 was rejected vide arbitration case no. 62/2003 dt. 11/11/2019. In the absence of copy of original Arbitration Award before Ld. AO, Ld. CIT(A) and even before us it is indeed difficult to decipher whether

M/S PUNJAB TOURISM DEVELOPMENET CORPORATION LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ao)

section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for setting aside the same but his application u/s 34 of Arbitration and Concilation Act, 1996 was rejected vide arbitration case no. 62/2003 dt. 11/11/2019. In the absence of copy of original Arbitration Award before Ld. AO, Ld. CIT(A) and even before us it is indeed difficult to decipher whether

M/S PUNJAB TOURISM DEVELOPMENET CORPORATION LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ao)

section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for setting aside the same but his application u/s 34 of Arbitration and Concilation Act, 1996 was rejected vide arbitration case no. 62/2003 dt. 11/11/2019. In the absence of copy of original Arbitration Award before Ld. AO, Ld. CIT(A) and even before us it is indeed difficult to decipher whether

M/S PUNJAB TOURISM DEVELOPMENET CORPORATION LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ao)

section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for setting aside the same but his application u/s 34 of Arbitration and Concilation Act, 1996 was rejected vide arbitration case no. 62/2003 dt. 11/11/2019. In the absence of copy of original Arbitration Award before Ld. AO, Ld. CIT(A) and even before us it is indeed difficult to decipher whether

SH. ARVAIL SINGH,SIRSA vs. PCIT, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

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

section 2 of section 56, clause(iv) in section 57 and clause (b) in Section 145A w.e.f. 01.04.2010. From the assessment year 2010-11 onwards, the amount of compensation or enhanced compensation is taxable as "income from other sources" after allowing deduction of a sum equal to 50% of such income in the year of receipt The Hon'ble Apex