DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH vs. UNIPRO TECHNO INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the order of the ld CIT(A) is confirmed and the grounds of appeal taken by the Revenue are dismissed

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

250 solely on the basis of and following decisions of the Hon’ble ITAT in previous Assessment Years 2011-12, AY 2012-13 and AY 2013-14 as they were related to proceedings undertaken u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, ignoring the fact that further appeal of the Department is still pending before

A.B. SUGARS LIMITED,PUNJAB vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

250, after including sale of steam to sugar unit of Rs. 27,98,35,586 by Power Unit & after deduction of expenses of Baggasse used from sugar unit by power unit for production of steam amounting to Rs. 44,62,26,899 as per the separate segment reporting/ profit & loss submitted by Us and after verification of complete data & documents

A.B. SUGARS LIMITED,PUNJAB vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

250, after including sale of steam to sugar unit of Rs. 27,98,35,586 by Power Unit & after deduction of expenses of Baggasse used from sugar unit by power unit for production of steam amounting to Rs. 44,62,26,899 as per the separate segment reporting/ profit & loss submitted by Us and after verification of complete data & documents

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) (iii). In para 4

SCOTT EDIL ADVANCE RESEARCH LABORATORIES AND EDUCATION LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

4. The only point to be considered is whether the valuation rendered by the DVO\nis to be taken into account or not. It has been argued by the learned counsel for\nthe revenue that the assessing officer was justified in referring the matter to the\nDVO for an opinion with regard to the fair market value of the property

MAXPORT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

section 158BD calling upon assessee to file return of undisclosed income\nfor block period 1-4-1989 to 28-1-2000 - Thereafter, valuation of cost of construction of\nbuildings constructed by assessee-firm was referred to DVO, for valuation under section\n133(6) - Assessing Officer added difference in valuation of cost of construction adopted\nby assessee-firm

SANJEEV AGGARWAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 , CHANDIGARH

section 158BD calling upon assessee to file return of undisclosed income\nfor block period 1-4-1989 to 28-1-2000 - Thereafter, valuation of cost of construction of\nbuildings constructed by assessee-firm was referred to DVO, for valuation under section\n133(6) - Assessing Officer added difference in valuation of cost of construction adopted\nby assessee-firm

DCIT, C-1(1) , CHANDIGARH vs. M/S FIDELITY INFORMATION SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, the cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

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

disallowed the foreign travel expenses which clearly form part of the operating expenses and the cost base and on which the assessee has reported the revenues after considering the mark up of 16.60%. Such an action on part of the AO is clearly in breach of letter and spirit of the APA which has been entered into by CBDT

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.

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeal before us is filed under section 253 of the Income Tax Act, as amended from time to time. The Respondent is a Cooperative Bank. 2. The Appellant Income Tax Department has raised following grounds of appeal in the Form No. 36. i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances

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

The appeal is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member)

4 books as "cash paid as per voucher" without providing the names of recipients or purposes of payment. Since the firm failed to give proper explanations during both assessment and appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) considered these expenses non- genuine and upheld the disallowance. 5.2 Regarding vehicle expenses, the AO had disallowed 1/5th of the total amount assuming personal

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)

250(6) of the Act. The first appellate proceedings were conducted under section 246A of the Act. 2. Factual Matrix Proceedings before Ld. AO 2.1 The assessee filed its return of income on 06/01/2012 showing income of Rs. 21,67,28,910/-. The assessee is engaged in manufacturing of Auto Parts and Washing Machine Parts. 2.2 The assessment in this

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)

250(6) of the Act. The first appellate proceedings were conducted under section 246A of the Act. 2. Factual Matrix Proceedings before Ld. AO 2.1 The assessee filed its return of income on 06/01/2012 showing income of Rs. 21,67,28,910/-. The assessee is engaged in manufacturing of Auto Parts and Washing Machine Parts. 2.2 The assessment in this

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)

250(6) of the Act. The first appellate proceedings were conducted under section 246A of the Act. 2. Factual Matrix Proceedings before Ld. AO 2.1 The assessee filed its return of income on 06/01/2012 showing income of Rs. 21,67,28,910/-. The assessee is engaged in manufacturing of Auto Parts and Washing Machine Parts. 2.2 The assessment in this

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)

250(6) of the Act. The first appellate proceedings were conducted under section 246A of the Act. 2. Factual Matrix Proceedings before Ld. AO 2.1 The assessee filed its return of income on 06/01/2012 showing income of Rs. 21,67,28,910/-. The assessee is engaged in manufacturing of Auto Parts and Washing Machine Parts. 2.2 The assessment in this

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)

250(6) of the Act. The first appellate proceedings were conducted under section 246A of the Act. 2. Factual Matrix Proceedings before Ld. AO 2.1 The assessee filed its return of income on 06/01/2012 showing income of Rs. 21,67,28,910/-. The assessee is engaged in manufacturing of Auto Parts and Washing Machine Parts. 2.2 The assessment in this

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)

250(6) of the Act. The first appellate proceedings were conducted under section 246A of the Act. 2. Factual Matrix Proceedings before Ld. AO 2.1 The assessee filed its return of income on 06/01/2012 showing income of Rs. 21,67,28,910/-. The assessee is engaged in manufacturing of Auto Parts and Washing Machine Parts. 2.2 The assessment in this

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)

250(6) of the Act. The first appellate proceedings were conducted under section 246A of the Act. 2. Factual Matrix Proceedings before Ld. AO 2.1 The assessee filed its return of income on 06/01/2012 showing income of Rs. 21,67,28,910/-. The assessee is engaged in manufacturing of Auto Parts and Washing Machine Parts. 2.2 The assessment in this

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)

250(6) of the Act. The first appellate proceedings were conducted under section 246A of the Act. 2. Factual Matrix Proceedings before Ld. AO 2.1 The assessee filed its return of income on 06/01/2012 showing income of Rs. 21,67,28,910/-. The assessee is engaged in manufacturing of Auto Parts and Washing Machine Parts. 2.2 The assessment in this

M/S HEADMASTER SALOON PVT.LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT-CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH

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

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

250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which is hereinafter referred to as the “impugned order”. The present second appeal is filed in terms of Section 253 of the Act. The relevant Assessment Year is 2014-15 corresponding to previous year 01/04/2013 to 31/03/2014. FACTUAL MATRIX 2. The assessee company is in the business of Saloon. They operate with