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

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

disallowance for corresponding purchases, no addition could be made under Section 68 in as much as it is not in dispute that the creditors outstanding related to purchases and the trading results were accepted by the AO. We are, therefore, of the opinion that no substantial question of law arises for consideration in this case. The appeal is accordingly dismissed

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

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

disallowance for corresponding purchases, no addition could be made under Section 68 in as much as it is not in dispute that the creditors outstanding related to purchases and the trading results were accepted by the AO. We are, therefore, of the opinion that no substantial question of law arises for consideration in this case. The appeal is accordingly dismissed

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

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

disallowance for corresponding purchases, no addition could be made under Section 68 in as much as it is not in dispute that the creditors outstanding related to purchases and the trading results were accepted by the AO. We are, therefore, of the opinion that no substantial question of law arises for consideration in this case. The appeal is accordingly dismissed

INCOME TAX OFFICE, LUDHIANA vs. RIPPAN DHIR, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 298/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Ito, Rippan Dhir, Ludhiana बनाम 247, New Hira Nagar St No. 2, Vs. Kakowal Road, Ludhiana 141008 "थायी लेखा सं./ Pan No: Agapd1957D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Physical Hearing) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : None राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Sh. Rajat Kumar Kureel, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 05.01.2026 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.01.2026 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am :

section 251 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. That, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate the fact that the addition disallowance

ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SML ISUZU LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, the impugned order is sustained and 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 43B to the assessing officer and acted in violation of powers of the Ld. CIT(A) as amended through the amendment brought in clause (a) sub-section 1 of section 251

INCOME TAX OFFICER, KURUKSHETRA vs. JASVIR SINGH, VILLAGE DIWANA TEHSIL PEHOWA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 665/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Ito, Jasvir Singh, Kurukshetra बनाम Village Diwana Tehsil Pehowa, Vs. Distt. Kurukshetra 136128 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Cnqps4895G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 26.06.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.08.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am: Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 12.09.2023 Of Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi.

Disallowance of the entire cash purchase results in abnormal trading profit for the assessee which it could never earn. There had never been any tax evasion with these transactions. The primary objective of enacting Section 40A(3) was to put a check on trading transactions with a mind to evade the liability to tax on income earned out of such

ITO, WARD-1, YAMUNA NAGAR vs. M/S JAMNA AUTO INDUSTRIES LTD., YAMUNA NAGAR

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

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

disallowance made by the AO is upheld. 12. Apropos Ground Numbers 3 and 4, the ld. DR has contended that the ld. CIT (A) went wrong in concluding that the assessee had successfully explained the fall in GP rate, over-looking the aspect that the assessee devised a colorable mechanism to divert its profit to its subsidiary entity for claiming

ITO, WARD-1, YAMUNA NAGAR vs. M/S JAMNA AUTO INDUSTRIES LTD., YAMUNA NAGAR

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

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

disallowance made by the AO is upheld. 12. Apropos Ground Numbers 3 and 4, the ld. DR has contended that the ld. CIT (A) went wrong in concluding that the assessee had successfully explained the fall in GP rate, over-looking the aspect that the assessee devised a colorable mechanism to divert its profit to its subsidiary entity for claiming

M/S LUXMI BUILDERS,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the respective appeals and stay applications are disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

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

Section 251 of the Act. 11.9 In this respect, the assessee firm vide submission dated 14.3.2022 stated that the addition made by the AO deserves to be deleted. In the said letter, the arguments made earlier were reiterated. It was argued that it is a settled preposition of law that the power of the CIT (A) to enhance an assessment

M/S GANESH BUILDERS,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the respective appeals and stay applications are disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

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

Section 251 of the Act. 11.9 In this respect, the assessee firm vide submission dated 14.3.2022 stated that the addition made by the AO deserves to be deleted. In the said letter, the arguments made earlier were reiterated. It was argued that it is a settled preposition of law that the power of the CIT (A) to enhance an assessment

PUNJAB STATE COOP. BANK LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, CL-2(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result the impugned order of Ld

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

disallowed the amount Rs.7,43,000/- as income of the assessee by holding as under: The assessee claims NPA as an expenditure under the Income Tax Act 1961. However, it has failed to show the amount as income which has been recovered from the NPAs. Therefore, the amount of Rs.743,000/- is added to the Income of the assessee. Further

GEETA CHATRATH,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

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

disallowance of TDS credit of Rs. 11,908/- deducted on the behalf of assessee's deceased mother-in law of which the assessee is a legal heir and relevant income of deceased is included in the income of the appellant. 4. That the learned Commissioner Income Tax (Appeals) has wrongly ignored requests dated 22.11.2023 and 02.12.2023 for rectification pending with

SHRI BALRAM KRISHAN,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

Section 132 of the Act in Scott Edil Group of cases\non 15.11.2017. Since the facts involved in all these captioned appeals\nare identical and there are common issues, hence the same were heard\ntogether and the same are being disposed of by this common order.\n2. The grounds/issues raised in all the appeals are summarized as\nunder

SCOTT EDIL PHARMACIA LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

Section 132 of the Act in Scott Edil Group of cases\non 15.11.2017. Since the facts involved in all these captioned appeals\nare identical and there are common issues, hence the same were heard\ntogether and the same are being disposed of by this common order.\n2. The grounds/issues raised in all the appeals are summarized as\nunder :\nITA

SCOTT EDIL PHARMACIA LTD.,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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-I, CHANDIGARH , CHANDIGARH vs. MS SCOTT EDIL ADVANCE RESEARCH LABORATORIES EDUCATION LTD., , CHANDIGARH

Section 132 of the Act in Scott Edil Group of cases\non 15.11.2017. Since the facts involved in all these captioned appeals\nare identical and there are common issues, hence the same were heard\ntogether and the same are being disposed of by this common order.\n2. The grounds/issues raised in all the appeals are summarized as\nunder :\nITA

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

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

Section 132 of the Act in Scott Edil Group of cases\non 15.11.2017. Since the facts involved in all these captioned appeals\nare identical and there are common issues, hence the same were heard\ntogether and the same are being disposed of by this common order.\n2. The grounds/issues raised in all the appeals are summarized as\nunder :\nITA