SIR AUROBINDO SOCIO ECONOMIC & MANAGEMENT RESEARCH INSTITUTE,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, C-1 (E), CHANDIGARH

In the result, whereas the assessee's appeal in ITA

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

Section 11(1) of the Income Tax Act and was not doing charitable activities; that so, the status of ITA 1348 & 1375/CHD/2019 A.Y. 2015-16 4 charitable activities was being denied to the assessee and the income of the assessee was being assessed as an AOP. The AO made addition of surplus of Rs.2,92,18,989/-. 6. By virtue

DCIT, C-1 (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SHRI AUROBINDO SOCIO ECONOMIC & MANAGEMENT RESEARCH INSTITUTE, LUDHINA

In the result, whereas the assessee's appeal in ITA

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

Section 11(1) of the Income Tax Act and was not doing charitable activities; that so, the status of ITA 1348 & 1375/CHD/2019 A.Y. 2015-16 4 charitable activities was being denied to the assessee and the income of the assessee was being assessed as an AOP. The AO made addition of surplus of Rs.2,92,18,989/-. 6. By virtue

SUDARSHAN JEANS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLHAPUR vs. ITO, AMBALA

The appeal stand allowed

Bench: SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

disallowed excess depreciation & additional depreciation of Rs.58.42 Lacs. The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the assessment against which the assessee is in further appeal before us. Our findings and Adjudication 5. From the facts, it clearly emerges that the assessee was subjected to regular scrutiny u/s 143(3) on 01-05-2018. One of the issues as identified therein was claim

M/S SUPERFINE KNITTERS LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, LUDHIANA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Superfine Knitters Ltd., Vs. The Acit, 269, Industrial Area-A, Circle-7, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. Pan No. Aadcs4217P

disallowance made on account of excess depreciation claimed by applying rate of 10% amounting to Rs. 85,855/- is therefore deleted. 30. As for the assessee’s claim for additional depreciation, the denial of the same by the CIT(Appeals) for the reason that it was made during re-assessment proceedings, does not prevent us from entertaining the same

DCIT,CIRCLE-I, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA vs. ADINATH TEXTILES LIMITED, LUDHIANA

In the result both the appeal filed by the Revenue and Cross objection filed by the Assessee are dismissed

Bench: the appeal is finally heard or disposed off.

1,65,25,000/- were made in respect of purchases made during the year under consideration. So, even the assessee had filed confirmed copy of account, ITR and Bank statement of party and, thus, no adverse view needed to be drawn. Similarly, in respect of ‘Klaap Vyappar Pvt. Ltd.’, the payment have been made in respect of purchases made during