M/S HERO CYCLES LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, C-V, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed and the\nappeal of the assessee is allowed

disallowance of interest under section 14A\nand Section 36(1) (iii). In para 4 the AO made disallowance of interest

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, PATIALA, PATIALA vs. PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED, PATIALA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

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

disallowed under the provisions of Section 36(1)(va) r/w section 43B and of the Act. 6. In response, the assessee

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, PATIALA vs. PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED, PATIALA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

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

disallowed under the provisions of Section 36(1)(va) r/w section 43B and of the Act. 6. In response, the assessee

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

disallowance of interest\nexpenditure on notional basis amounting to Rs.8,16,010/- on\ninvestments under the provisions of Section 36

M/S BARNALA BUILDERS AND CONSULTANT,ZIRAKPUR vs. DCIT/ACIT (CEN)-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

disallowance of Rs. 2,46,952/- made under section 143(1) by the CPC on account of assessee’s failure to pay the employees contribution of PF / ESI within the prescribed due date as per the Section 36

IND SWIFT LABORATORIES LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal is allowed, as indicated

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

disallowed under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. 26. The ld. CIT(DR), on the other hand, has sought

ARVINDER PAUL JIT SINGH GILL,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO, WARD 2(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

disallowance made under section 143(1) by the CPC on account of assessee’s failure to pay the employees’ contribution of PF / ESI within the prescribed due date as per Section 36

M/S BHUSHAN POWER AND STEEL LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT/ACIT (CEN.)-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahay

disallowance made under section 143(1) by the CPC on account of assessee’s failure to pay the employees’ contribution of PF / ESI within the prescribed due date as per Section 36

ACIT, CIRCLE, PANCHKULA vs. M/S HARYANA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LTD., PANCHKULA

In the result, we upheld the

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

disallowance of interest p ay ments to NCRPB which is not as per law, because the same is not allowable to the assessee as per section 36

SH. AMAN SETH,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, W-1(1), LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

disallowance of Rs. 8,61,473/- under section 36(1)(iii) made by Ld. AO and sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) is illegal

DCIT, C-1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S RANA POLYCOT LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1050/Chd/2018 &

disallowances have been made by the AO with the aid of Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act on the ground

DCIT, C-1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S RANA POLYCOT LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1050/Chd/2018 &

disallowances have been made by the AO with the aid of Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act on the ground

DCIT, C-1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S RANA POLYCOT LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1050/Chd/2018 &

disallowances have been made by the AO with the aid of Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act on the ground

DCIT, C-1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S RANA POLYCOT LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1050/Chd/2018 &

disallowances have been made by the AO with the aid of Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act on the ground

THE SHAHABAD COOP. SUGAR MILLS,SHAHABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE, KURUKSHETRA

The appeal is disposed off accordingly as aforesaid

Bench: Us:

section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which is hereinafter referred to as the impugned order. 2. The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal in Form No. 36 before us: 1. That the Ld. CIT(A), Karnal is not justified in disallowing

M/S APEX BUILDERS, LUDHIANA vs. ITO, W-2(1), LUDHIANA

The appeal is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member)

disallowance under Section 36(1)(iii) was deleted, and the disallowance for personal use was restricted to one-tenth. Other

M/S S.R. INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

disallowance of interest under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act in relation to the average capital work-in-progress

THE KANGRA CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,DHARAMSHALA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PALAMPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

section 36(1)(viia) of the Act and reference was drawn to para 7.1 of the impugned assessment order wherein the assessee bank was asked to explain as to “why the expenditure claimed on provision for NPA may not be disallowed

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)

disallowance of interest can be made." 9. The assessee company had already capitalized the interest at Rs. 1485020/- suomotto in the books of account, which has been increased by the Ld. A.O. while calculating the capitalization of interest. 10. If your honour held that the interest is to be capitalized as per proviso to section 36