INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1, MANDI GOBINDGARH, HQ SIRHIND vs. PARTAP INDUSTRIES LIMITED, RAJPURA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr Krinwant Sahay & Shri Paresh M. Joshiआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 464/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 The Ito, Vs. Partap Industries Limited, बनाम Rajpura Ward-1, New Libra Kothi, Mandi Gobindgarh Railway Road, Sirhind Hq. Sirhind, 140406 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabcp0384Q अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent

disallowance u/s 36(l)(va) would be attracted and provisions of Section 43B, where due date is taken as date of filing of ITR, would not come to the rescue of the assessee. 4.3 It was also submitted that since the tax effect involved in this case was less than the prescribed monetary limit, for filing of further appeal before

INCOME TAX OFFICER , PATIALA vs. SH. SEWA SINGH, PATIALA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr Krinwant Sahay & Shri Paresh M. Joshiआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 696/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 The Ito, Vs. Shri Sewa Singh, बनाम H. No. B-27,Focal Point, Patiala Patiala 147001 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Abjpj5347B अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Virtual Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : None राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Rahul Sohu, Jcit, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 02.07.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 02 .07.2024 आदेश/Order

disallowance u/s 36(l)(va) would be attracted and provisions of Section 43B, where due date is taken as date of filing of ITR, would not come to the rescue of the assessee. 4.3 It was also submitted that since the tax effect involved in this case was less than the prescribed monetary limit, for filing of further appeal before

DCIT, CIRCLE, PATIALA vs. M/S THE BRITISH CO. ED. SCHOOL, PATIALA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

disallowance u/s 36(l)(va) would be attracted and provisions of Section 43B, where due date is taken as date of filing of ITR, would not come to the rescue of the assessee. 4.3 It was further submitted that since the tax effect involved in this case was less than the prescribed monetary limit, for filing of further appeal before

INCOME TAX OFFICER, PATIALA vs. KULWARAN SINGH, PATIALA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

disallowance u/s 36(l)(va) would be attracted and provisions of section 43B, where due date is taken as date of filing of ITR, would not come to the rescue of the assessee. 4.3 It was further submitted that since the tax effect involved in this case was less than the prescribed monetary limit, for filing of further appeal before

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5, PATIALA vs. SH. MOHAR SINGH, PATIALA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

disallowance u/s 36(l)(va) would be attracted and provisions of section 43B, where due date is taken as date of filing of ITR, would not come to the rescue of the assessee. 4.3 It was further submitted that since the tax effect involved in this case was less than the prescribed monetary limit, for filing of further appeal before

INCOME TAX OFFICER, PATIALA vs. GURMEET SINGH PANDHER, PATIALA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

disallowance u/s 36(l)(va) would be attracted and provisions of section 43B, where due date is taken as date of filing of ITR, would not come to the rescue of the assessee. 4.3 It was further submitted that since the tax effect involved in this case was less than the prescribed monetary limit, for filing of further appeal before

ITO, WARD-5, PATIALA vs. SH. KAWALJEET SINGH, PATIALA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

disallowance u/s 36(l)(va) would be attracted and provisions of section 43B, where due date is taken as date of filing of ITR, would not come to the rescue of the assessee. 5.3 It was further submitted that since the tax effect involved in this case was less than the prescribed monetary limit, for filing of further appeal before

ITO, WARD-5, PATIALA vs. SH. KAWALJEET SINGH, PATIALA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

disallowance u/s 36(l)(va) would be attracted and provisions of section 43B, where due date is taken as date of filing of ITR, would not come to the rescue of the assessee. 5.3 It was further submitted that since the tax effect involved in this case was less than the prescribed monetary limit, for filing of further appeal before

ITO, WARD-5, PATIALA vs. SH. KAWALJEET SINGH, PATIALA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

disallowance u/s 36(l)(va) would be attracted and provisions of section 43B, where due date is taken as date of filing of ITR, would not come to the rescue of the assessee. 5.3 It was further submitted that since the tax effect involved in this case was less than the prescribed monetary limit, for filing of further appeal before

JANTA LAND PROMOTERS PVT LTD,MOHALI vs. THE PRINICIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CHANDIGARH-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

disallowance can be made by invoking such repealed provision. 26. Per contra, the Ld. DR relied upon paragraph 5.1 & 5.2 of the Ld. PCIT order (reproduced above) and supported the case of the Revenue. 27. We have heard the rival contentions of both parties and perused the material available on record. For invoking the provisions relating to specified domestic transactions