DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SMT. JASWANT KAUR, MOHALI

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

section 271(1)(c) of the Act, it was not necessary for the Assessing officer to add or to disallow something to attract the penalty provisions. Further, as per the Explanation 4

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. PARAMJIT SINGH, MOHALI

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

section 271(1)(c) of the Act, it was not necessary for the Assessing officer to add or to disallow something to attract the penalty provisions. Further, as per the Explanation 4

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. KULWANT SINGH, MOHALI

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

section 271(1)(c) of the Act, it was not necessary for the Assessing officer to add or to disallow something to attract the penalty provisions. Further, as per the Explanation 4

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SMT. MANJIT KAUR, CHANDIGARH

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

section 271(1)(c) of the Act, it was not necessary for the Assessing officer to add or to disallow something to attract the penalty provisions. Further, as per the Explanation 4

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. KULWANT SINGH, MOHALI

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

section 271(1)(c) of the Act, it was not necessary for the Assessing officer to add or to disallow something to attract the penalty provisions. Further, as per the Explanation 4

DCIT, CIRCLE, YAMUNANAGAR vs. M/S SYMBIOSIS PHARMACEUTICALS PVT. LTD., YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, appeal is dismissed

Bench: The Due Date As Prescribed In Section 139(1) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 Whereas The Assessee Has Filed Its Return Of Income After The Due Date.

Section 80AC clearly indicate that the return of income for claim of deduction u/s 80IC must be furnished on or before the due date specified u/s 139(1) of the Act; and that since the assessee could not justify its claim, the deduction claimed ITA 326/CHD/2019 A.Y. 2014-15 4 u/s 80IC was being disallowed

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(1)(va) of the Act is strictly in accordance with law and clearly comes under the prima facie adjustment as envisaged under

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

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

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 588/Chd/2018 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2012-13 The DCIT C-V, Ludhiana बनाम M/s Hero Cycles Ltd. Hero Nagar, G.T. Road Ludhiana स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAACH4073P अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 473/Chd/2018 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2012-13 M/s Hero Cycles Ltd. Hero Nagar, G.T. Road Ludhiana बनाम The ACIT C-V, Ludhiana स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAACH4073P

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

M/S SJVN LTD. ( FORMERLY SATLUJ JAL VIDYUT NIGAM LIMITED),SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, SHIMLA

Section 37(1) does not apply on the facts of this case.” 1 1 . I n v i e w

ACIT, CIRCLE, SHIMLA vs. M/S SATLUJ JAL VIDYUT NIGAM LIMITED, SHIMLA

Section 37(1) does not apply on the facts of this case.” 1 1 . I n v i e w

M/S SJVN LTD. ( FORMERLY SATLUJ JAL VIDYUT NIGAM LIMITED),SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, SHIMLA

Section 37(1) does not apply on the facts of this case.” 1 1 . I n v i e w

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(1)(va) of the Act is strictly in accordance with law and clearly comes under the prima facie adjustment as envisaged under section 143(1

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

4. In ITA 324/CHD/2022, the Assessee’s return was processed by the CPC and order under section 143(1) was passed wherein the disallowance

ARYANS EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST REGD, MOHALI,MOHALI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1136/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2025-26 Aryans Educational & The Cit (Exemptions), Charitable Trust, Regd.Mohali Vs Chandigarh, C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate, # 527, Sector 10-D, Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabta7550L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.09.2025

4 accepting the donations. Hence, it is not hit by Section 13(1)(c) as well as 13(1)(d) of the Act. The Tribunal has directed the AO to grant benefit of Section 11 and 12 of the Act. In other words, if 85% of the income derived by the assessee Trust is being applied towards its objective

CHANDIGARH EDUCATIONAL TRUST,MOHALI vs. PR.CIT-CENTRAL,GURGAON, AT CHANDIGARH

4) of section 13 of the Act gives the specific situation where notwithstanding what is there in section 13(1)(c) of the Act, exemption under section 11 & 12 of the Act will be denied only on part of the income and that the assessee was not covered by this sub section. The reliance was placed on the following case

CHANDIGARH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,MOHALI vs. PR.CIT(CENTRAL)-GURGAON, AT CHANDIGARH

4) of section 13 of the Act gives the specific situation where notwithstanding what is there in section 13(1)(c) of the Act, exemption under section 11 & 12 of the Act will be denied only on part of the income and that the assessee was not covered by this sub section. The reliance was placed on the following case

SHRI GURU RAM DASS EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,MOHALI vs. PR.CIT(CENTRAL) GURGAON, AT CHANDIGARH

4) of section 13 of the Act gives the specific situation where notwithstanding what is there in section 13(1)(c) of the Act, exemption under section 11 & 12 of the Act will be denied only on part of the income and that the assessee was not covered by this sub section. The reliance was placed on the following case

SHOBHA SHARMA,SIRSA vs. ITO-WARD-3, SIRSA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

disallowance of claim of deduction by Rs. 29,87,000/- u/s 54F of the Act. 2.1 That finding and conclusion that "assessee had not furnished a return of income for the instant assessment year under section 139(1) of the Act and even under section 139(4