MUKESH MALHOTRA ,SHIMLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SHIMLA, SHIMLA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

275/-, thereafter the case of the assessee was reopened under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by issuing a notice under section 148 dated 26.06.2015. In response, the assessee submitted that the original return filed may be treated as the return filed in response to the notice under section 148.In addition to hotel business and other sources

MUKESH MALHOTRA,SHIMLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , SHIMLA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

275/-, thereafter the case of the assessee was reopened under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by issuing a notice under section 148 dated 26.06.2015. In response, the assessee submitted that the original return filed may be treated as the return filed in response to the notice under section 148.In addition to hotel business and other sources

MUKESH MALHOTRA ,SHIMLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , SHIMLA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

275/-, thereafter the case of the assessee was reopened under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by issuing a notice under section 148 dated 26.06.2015. In response, the assessee submitted that the original return filed may be treated as the return filed in response to the notice under section 148.In addition to hotel business and other sources

MUKESH MALHOTRA ,SHIMLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , SHIMLA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

275/-, thereafter the case of the assessee was reopened under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by issuing a notice under section 148 dated 26.06.2015. In response, the assessee submitted that the original return filed may be treated as the return filed in response to the notice under section 148.In addition to hotel business and other sources

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

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

disallowed. The following decisions are also to the same effect : i) M/s Beauty Tex ITA 508/JP/2016 ii) Shri Heera Lal Chuni Lal Jain V ITO, order dated 01.01.2016, passed in ITA No.4547/Mum/2014 iii) M/s Imperial Imp & Exp V ITO, order dated 18.03.2016, passed in ITA No. 5427/Mum/2015 iv) ITO V Shri Sanjay V Dhruv, order dated

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

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

disallowed. The following decisions are also to the same effect : i) M/s Beauty Tex ITA 508/JP/2016 ii) Shri Heera Lal Chuni Lal Jain V ITO, order dated 01.01.2016, passed in ITA No.4547/Mum/2014 iii) M/s Imperial Imp & Exp V ITO, order dated 18.03.2016, passed in ITA No. 5427/Mum/2015 iv) ITO V Shri Sanjay V Dhruv, order dated

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

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

disallowed. The following decisions are also to the same effect : i) M/s Beauty Tex ITA 508/JP/2016 ii) Shri Heera Lal Chuni Lal Jain V ITO, order dated 01.01.2016, passed in ITA No.4547/Mum/2014 iii) M/s Imperial Imp & Exp V ITO, order dated 18.03.2016, passed in ITA No. 5427/Mum/2015 iv) ITO V Shri Sanjay V Dhruv, order dated

THE HP STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING & CONSUMERS FEDERATION LIMITED,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, SHIMLA

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

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

disallowance of an amount of Rs. 22,93,002/- towards so called expenditure which may have incurred on the income earned on dividend that also non observing the prescribed procedures for providing ample opportunity and within the tie limit provisions of section 275

M/S IOL CHEMICALS AND PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ADDL. CIT, R-I, LUDHIANA

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

disallowance of Rs. 26,81,157/- made by the A.O. under section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’). 4. Facts of the case in brief are that the assessee filed its return of income on 29/09/2011 declaring loss of Rs. 26,41,16,886/- under the normal provisions

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

disallowance of gratuity payment has not been provided; (v) The computation of tax demand arrived at Rs.91,49,290/- as per notice of demand under section 156 is not provided. 1. Deviation from consistency by the Learned AO 1.4 This action of the Learned AO, completely violates the principles of consistency, appreciated by the Hon'ble Courts in various decisions

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

disallowance of gratuity payment has not been provided; (v) The computation of tax demand arrived at Rs.91,49,290/- as per notice of demand under section 156 is not provided. 1. Deviation from consistency by the Learned AO 1.4 This action of the Learned AO, completely violates the principles of consistency, appreciated by the Hon'ble Courts in various decisions

M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

disallowance of gratuity payment has not been provided; (v) The computation of tax demand arrived at Rs.91,49,290/- as per notice of demand under section 156 is not provided. 1. Deviation from consistency by the Learned AO 1.4 This action of the Learned AO, completely violates the principles of consistency, appreciated by the Hon'ble Courts in various decisions

DCIT,CIRCLE-1(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SCHOOL( MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

disallowance of gratuity payment has not been provided; (v) The computation of tax demand arrived at Rs.91,49,290/- as per notice of demand under section 156 is not provided. 1. Deviation from consistency by the Learned AO 1.4 This action of the Learned AO, completely violates the principles of consistency, appreciated by the Hon'ble Courts in various decisions

M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

disallowance of gratuity payment has not been provided; (v) The computation of tax demand arrived at Rs.91,49,290/- as per notice of demand under section 156 is not provided. 1. Deviation from consistency by the Learned AO 1.4 This action of the Learned AO, completely violates the principles of consistency, appreciated by the Hon'ble Courts in various decisions

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

disallowance of gratuity payment has not been provided; (v) The computation of tax demand arrived at Rs.91,49,290/- as per notice of demand under section 156 is not provided. 1. Deviation from consistency by the Learned AO 1.4 This action of the Learned AO, completely violates the principles of consistency, appreciated by the Hon'ble Courts in various decisions

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

disallowance of gratuity payment has not been provided; (v) The computation of tax demand arrived at Rs.91,49,290/- as per notice of demand under section 156 is not provided. 1. Deviation from consistency by the Learned AO 1.4 This action of the Learned AO, completely violates the principles of consistency, appreciated by the Hon'ble Courts in various decisions

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

disallowance of gratuity payment has not been provided; (v) The computation of tax demand arrived at Rs.91,49,290/- as per notice of demand under section 156 is not provided. 1. Deviation from consistency by the Learned AO 1.4 This action of the Learned AO, completely violates the principles of consistency, appreciated by the Hon'ble Courts in various decisions

AMAN THUKRAL,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA

Accordingly, Additional Ground No. 1 is allowed for statistical

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

disallowance of 50% of bonus expenses amounting to Rs. 3,92,138/- out of total bonus payment of Rs. 7,84,275/-, which was confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A). Since the issue arises from the assessment order and the relevant facts are already available on record, the additional ground is admitted for adjudication

MARKANDA OIL STORE,SHAHABAD HARYANA vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KURUKSHETRA

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

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

275,000/- as well as disallowance of interest on unsecured loans amounting to Rs. 2,49,460/- as well as the fact that the Ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay and the appeal has been dismissed at the very threshold without deciding the matter on the merits of the case. 2. Briefly the facts of the case