DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. PARAMJIT SINGH, MOHALI

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

270A shall be imposed upon the assessee in respect of the income referred to in sub-section (1). (3) The provisions of sections 274 and 275 shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the penalty referred to in this section.” 23. Prior to substitution of sub section (1) of section 115BBE w.e.f. 14.2017, the section

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. KULWANT SINGH, MOHALI

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

270A shall be imposed upon the assessee in respect of the income referred to in sub-section (1). (3) The provisions of sections 274 and 275 shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the penalty referred to in this section.” 23. Prior to substitution of sub section (1) of section 115BBE w.e.f. 14.2017, the section

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. KULWANT SINGH, MOHALI

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

270A shall be imposed upon the assessee in respect of the income referred to in sub-section (1). (3) The provisions of sections 274 and 275 shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the penalty referred to in this section.” 23. Prior to substitution of sub section (1) of section 115BBE w.e.f. 14.2017, the section

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SMT. JASWANT KAUR, MOHALI

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

270A shall be imposed upon the assessee in respect of the income referred to in sub-section (1). (3) The provisions of sections 274 and 275 shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the penalty referred to in this section.” 23. Prior to substitution of sub section (1) of section 115BBE w.e.f. 14.2017, the section

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. PARAMJIT SINGH, MOHALI

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

270A shall be imposed upon the assessee in respect of the income referred to in sub-section (1). (3) The provisions of sections 274 and 275 shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the penalty referred to in this section.” 23. Prior to substitution of sub section (1) of section 115BBE w.e.f. 14.2017, the section

VARDHMAN SPECIAL STEELS LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA

1% of the average value of these investments\namounting to Rs.1,78,86,781.75, which came to Rs.1,78,870/-. Since the\nassessee had already disallowed Rs.556/-, the remaining Rs.1,78,314/-\nwas added back to the taxable income. The AO also started penalty\nproceedings under Section 270A

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)

disallowable =Rs.85,00,000+ Rs.11,22,04,500 Rs.12,07,04,500/- Therefore, an amount of Rs.12,07,04,500/- is being added to the income of the assessee. Hence, I am satisfied that the assessee company has under reported income is in consequence of any misreported thereof for which the penalty provisions of section 270A

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)

disallowable =Rs.85,00,000+ Rs.11,22,04,500 Rs.12,07,04,500/- Therefore, an amount of Rs.12,07,04,500/- is being added to the income of the assessee. Hence, I am satisfied that the assessee company has under reported income is in consequence of any misreported thereof for which the penalty provisions of section 270A

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)

disallowable =Rs.85,00,000+ Rs.11,22,04,500 Rs.12,07,04,500/- Therefore, an amount of Rs.12,07,04,500/- is being added to the income of the assessee. Hence, I am satisfied that the assessee company has under reported income is in consequence of any misreported thereof for which the penalty provisions of section 270A

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)

disallowable =Rs.85,00,000+ Rs.11,22,04,500 Rs.12,07,04,500/- Therefore, an amount of Rs.12,07,04,500/- is being added to the income of the assessee. Hence, I am satisfied that the assessee company has under reported income is in consequence of any misreported thereof for which the penalty provisions of section 270A

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)

disallowable =Rs.85,00,000+ Rs.11,22,04,500 Rs.12,07,04,500/- Therefore, an amount of Rs.12,07,04,500/- is being added to the income of the assessee. Hence, I am satisfied that the assessee company has under reported income is in consequence of any misreported thereof for which the penalty provisions of section 270A

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)

disallowable =Rs.85,00,000+ Rs.11,22,04,500 Rs.12,07,04,500/- Therefore, an amount of Rs.12,07,04,500/- is being added to the income of the assessee. Hence, I am satisfied that the assessee company has under reported income is in consequence of any misreported thereof for which the penalty provisions of section 270A

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)

disallowable =Rs.85,00,000+ Rs.11,22,04,500 Rs.12,07,04,500/- Therefore, an amount of Rs.12,07,04,500/- is being added to the income of the assessee. Hence, I am satisfied that the assessee company has under reported income is in consequence of any misreported thereof for which the penalty provisions of section 270A

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)

disallowable =Rs.85,00,000+ Rs.11,22,04,500 Rs.12,07,04,500/- Therefore, an amount of Rs.12,07,04,500/- is being added to the income of the assessee. Hence, I am satisfied that the assessee company has under reported income is in consequence of any misreported thereof for which the penalty provisions of section 270A

M/S SHREE GANESH JEWELLERS LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE V(1), LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

disallowed out of aforesaid expenses and added to the income of the assessee.” 2.1 Further our reference was drawn to the findings of the AO in the order passed under section 270A of the Act wherein the relevant findings are stated at para 4 to 6 of the order and the contents thereof read as under: “4. As per section

BANUR BROTHER ,PATIALA vs. ITO-WARD-1, AMBALA

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed as and by way of remand to Ld

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

270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for misreporting the income, and U/s 272A(1)(d) of the IT. Act for non compliance of notice sent to the assessee online electronically in E-proceedings facility through assessee's account in e- filing website of Income Tax Department.” 6. A bare and simple perusal of Ld. AO order clearly shows that

ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. WARYAM STEEL CASTING PRIVATE LIMITED, KANGANWAL ROAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the Cross appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

270A, 271B, and 272A(1)(d) were initiated for under-reporting income, failure to file an audit report, and non-compliance with statutory notices, respectively. Interest under sections 234A, 234B, and 234C was also charged. 4. Against the order of the Ld. AO the assessee went in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned

WARYAM STEEL CASTINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the Cross appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

270A, 271B, and 272A(1)(d) were initiated for under-reporting income, failure to file an audit report, and non-compliance with statutory notices, respectively. Interest under sections 234A, 234B, and 234C was also charged. 4. Against the order of the Ld. AO the assessee went in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned