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

250\nThus, total disallowance works out to Rs. 31,25,91,729/-.\nLess: Disallowance already made by the assessee: Rs. 22,86,36,462/-\nDisallowance to be made: Rs. 8,39,55,267/-\n41. The A.O. made various disallowance of interest under section 14A\nand Section 36(1

IND SWIFT LABORATORIES LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal is allowed, as indicated

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

1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) under section 250 is bad both in the eye of law and on facts. 2. i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the NFAC has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the addition

M/S JAIN AMAR CLOTHING PVT. LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-III, LUDHIANA

In the result, the ground no

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

250/- so confirmed by the ld CIT(A). 9.3 It was further submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the order of the AO by relying upon the statement u/s 131 of Shri Naval Jain, ex-director of M/s Mega City Sales Pvt Ltd Shri Manoj kumar, ex-director of M/s Ajnabi Vanijya Pvt Ltd and Shri Shiv Kumar

THE CHAPLAH CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL SERVICE SOCIETY LTD,VPO CHOULI vs. LD. DCIT , CPC, CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: The Tribunal Against The Order Dt 25.04.2023 Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi.

250 of the Act only when the staff of the assessee visited the counsel to enquire about the case and thereafter steps were taken to file the appeal immediately. I note that the Assessee is a very small institution being operated for the benefit of its agriculturists and poor people and has hardly any set up to handle the matters

THE KANGRA CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,DHARAMSHALA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PALAMPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

250 of the Act by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi is against law and facts on the file in as much as he was not justified to uphold the action of the Ld. Assessing Officer in levying a penalty of Rs. 66,38,400/- without specifying the limb of Section 271(1

M/S SHINE & SIND SECURITY SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT,CPC/ITO-WARD-3(5), CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

section 250 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi in Appeal No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/ 2021-22/ 1034565760(1) dated 02.08.2021 is contrary to law and facts of the case. 2. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) gravelly erred in not following the judgments

M/S STYLAM INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. ADIT,CPC/DCIT-CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

section 250 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi in Appeal No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/ 2021-22/ 1034565760(1) dated 02.08.2021 is contrary to law and facts of the case. 2. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) gravelly erred in not following the judgments

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

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

section 250 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi in Appeal No. ITBA/ NFAC/S/250/2021 -22/1035926336( 1) dated 27.09.2021 is contrary to law and facts of the case. 2. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) gravelly erred in not following the judgments

ASIAN INDUSTRIES,SOLAN vs. ITO, WARD, BADDI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

250 of Income Tax Act, 1961 by the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi is against law and facts on the file in as much as Hon'ble CIT(A) has confirmed the disallowance made u/s 36(l)(va) vide intimation u/s 143(1) dated 29.02.2020. As per the latest amendment made by Finance Bill 2021 in the section

SANDEEP PURI,PATIALA vs. ITO WARD -4,, PATIALA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

250/- as against returned income of Rs. 43,61,190/- and accordingly denies its liability to pay tax, cess and interest demand there on. 2. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in making adjustments u/s 143(1

M/S OVER AND ABOVE SOFTWARE AND INFRASTRUCTURE SOLUTION (OASIS),MOHALI vs. ITO, WARD 6(1),, MOHALI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

250/- as against returned income of Rs. 43,61,190/- and accordingly denies its liability to pay tax, cess and interest demand there on. 2. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in making adjustments u/s 143(1

ATUL GLOBAL PVT.LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ITO-WARD-1(1), LUDHIANA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

250/- as against returned income of Rs. 43,61,190/- and accordingly denies its liability to pay tax, cess and interest demand there on. 2. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in making adjustments u/s 143(1

PERIDOT KNITWEARS PRIVATE LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. ITO WARD -7(5),, LUDHIANA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

250/- as against returned income of Rs. 43,61,190/- and accordingly denies its liability to pay tax, cess and interest demand there on. 2. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in making adjustments u/s 143(1

M/S PACIFIC ENGINEERS,MOHALI vs. ADIT,CPC, BENGALURU/ITO WARD 6(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

250/- as against returned income of Rs. 43,61,190/- and accordingly denies its liability to pay tax, cess and interest demand there on. 2. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in making adjustments u/s 143(1

DOUBLE KNITWEAR,LUDHIANA vs. ITO WARD 3(1), LUDHIANA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

250/- as against returned income of Rs. 43,61,190/- and accordingly denies its liability to pay tax, cess and interest demand there on. 2. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in making adjustments u/s 143(1

DS MULTIMEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT,CPC/ITO WARD-1, PANCHKULA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

250/- as against returned income of Rs. 43,61,190/- and accordingly denies its liability to pay tax, cess and interest demand there on. 2. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in making adjustments u/s 143(1

CHERRY CHIK HATCHERIES PRIVATE LIMITED,MALERKOTLA vs. ITO WARD - 1,, MALERKOTLA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

250/- as against returned income of Rs. 43,61,190/- and accordingly denies its liability to pay tax, cess and interest demand there on. 2. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in making adjustments u/s 143(1

M/S PACIFIC ENGINEERS,MOHALI vs. ADIT,CPC, BENGALURU/ITO WARD 6(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

250/- as against returned income of Rs. 43,61,190/- and accordingly denies its liability to pay tax, cess and interest demand there on. 2. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in making adjustments u/s 143(1

RAMJEE CONCRETES PVT.LTD.,MOHALI vs. ITO-WARD-6(3), CHANDIGARH

The appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid terms

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 205/Chd/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Ramjee Concretes Private Limited, The Ito, बनाम #1238.Sector 91, Ward 6(3), Mohali, Punjab Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aafcr9457E अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Private Limited company engaged in the business of manufacture of ready mix concrete, bricks, cemented blocks and construction work. The return of income was filed declaring an income of Rs. 31,16,630/-, which was processed