THE JABO MAJRO CO-OPERATIVE LABOUR AND CONSTRUCTION SOCIETY LTD.,MALERKOTLA vs. ITO, MALERKOTLA

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

Section 43(B) of the Act. We, therefore, find that no substantial question of law is involved in this appeal and consequently, we dismiss this appeal. Urgent xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.” In the light of the aforesaid discussion we do not accept

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

43 taxmann.com 300 (Del) • Pt. Kanahya Lal Punj Charitable Trust Vs. Director of Income Tax [2008] 297 ITR 66 (Del) • Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s Audh Educational Society [2011] 203 Taxman 0166 (All.) • Tekprolu Bapanaiah, Vidyadharma Nidhi Trust Vs. CIT [1987] 167 ITR 482 399(AP). 5.16 The Ld. Pr CIT was of the view that once the provisions

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

43 taxmann.com 300 (Del) • Pt. Kanahya Lal Punj Charitable Trust Vs. Director of Income Tax [2008] 297 ITR 66 (Del) • Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s Audh Educational Society [2011] 203 Taxman 0166 (All.) • Tekprolu Bapanaiah, Vidyadharma Nidhi Trust Vs. CIT [1987] 167 ITR 482 399(AP). 5.16 The Ld. Pr CIT was of the view that once the provisions

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

43 taxmann.com 300 (Del) • Pt. Kanahya Lal Punj Charitable Trust Vs. Director of Income Tax [2008] 297 ITR 66 (Del) • Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s Audh Educational Society [2011] 203 Taxman 0166 (All.) • Tekprolu Bapanaiah, Vidyadharma Nidhi Trust Vs. CIT [1987] 167 ITR 482 399(AP). 5.16 The Ld. Pr CIT was of the view that once the provisions

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.

1 to 3 relate to a single issue i.e. the challenge of the Department against the action of the ld. CIT(A) in deleting the disallowance of Rs.1,43,23,507/- made by the AO u/s 80IC of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In the assessment proceedings, the AO, referring to the provisions of Section

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

disallowance, along with Rs.\n1,78,314/-under Section 14A, to the revised returned income of\nRs.14,69,49,564/-, resulting in a total income of Rs.14,79,43,888/-.\nHowever, after setting off earlier year losses of Rs.87,88,41,731/-,\ntaxable income became nil. For MAT purposes, book profit was revised\nto Rs.27,14,69,750/-. The assessment

SANJEEV KUMAR KATHURIA,YAMUNA NAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 , YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

disallowance under section 40A(3) of the Act amounting to Rs. 12,09,560/-. 4. Subsequently, the assessment records were called for and examined by the Ld. PCIT, Panchkula and a show cause under section 263 dt. 12/12/2023 was issued by the Ld. PCIT and the contents thereof read as under: “Perusal of assessment record reveals that you had sold

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

1. Whether upon facts and circumstances of the case in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in restricting the addition from Rs. 36,02,230/-to Rs. 5,31,145/- thereby deleting the disallowance of Rs. 30,71,085/- made by invoking the provisions of section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by simply relying on the submissions

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

1. Whether upon facts and circumstances of the case in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in restricting the addition from Rs. 36,02,230/-to Rs. 5,31,145/- thereby deleting the disallowance of Rs. 30,71,085/- made by invoking the provisions of section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by simply relying on the submissions

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

1. Whether upon facts and circumstances of the case in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in restricting the addition from Rs. 36,02,230/-to Rs. 5,31,145/- thereby deleting the disallowance of Rs. 30,71,085/- made by invoking the provisions of section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by simply relying on the submissions

ACIT, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS. BECTORS FOOD SPECIALTIES PVT. LTD., LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

1. Whether upon facts and circumstances of the case in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in restricting the addition from Rs. 36,02,230/-to Rs. 5,31,145/- thereby deleting the disallowance of Rs. 30,71,085/- made by invoking the provisions of section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by simply relying on the submissions

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

1. Whether upon facts and circumstances of the case in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in restricting the addition from Rs. 36,02,230/-to Rs. 5,31,145/- thereby deleting the disallowance of Rs. 30,71,085/- made by invoking the provisions of section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by simply relying on the submissions

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

1. Whether upon facts and circumstances of the case in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in restricting the addition from Rs. 36,02,230/-to Rs. 5,31,145/- thereby deleting the disallowance of Rs. 30,71,085/- made by invoking the provisions of section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by simply relying on the submissions

ITO-WARD-2(1), LUDHIANA vs. M/S GLORY KNITWEARS PVT.LTD, LUDHIANA

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

Bench: The Filing Of Return Wherever Employee'S Contribution Is Disallowed For Once & All If Payment Is Delayed Beyond The Prescribed Time.

disallowance of Rs. 4425/- made by the A.O. on account of late payments towards EPF and ESI under section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the ‘Act’), however, before furnishing the return of income under section 139(1) of the Act. 4. During the course of hearing the Ld. Counsel for the Assessee

ITO-WARD-2(1), LUDHIANA vs. M/S GLORY KNITWEARS PVT.LTD, LUDHIANA

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

Bench: The Filing Of Return Wherever Employee'S Contribution Is Disallowed For Once & All If Payment Is Delayed Beyond The Prescribed Time.

disallowance of Rs. 78,242/- made by the A.O. on account of late payments towards EPF and ESI under section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the ‘Act’), however, before furnishing the return of income under section 139(1) of the Act. 4. During the course of hearing the Ld. Counsel for the Assessee

TEJ PAL GUPTA,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRLE - 1, CHANDIGARH

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

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 382/Chd/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sh. Tej Pal Gupta, The Dcit, बनाम H. No. 346, Cpc, Sector 21, Bengaluru Panchkula "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaupg1545N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 43(B) of the Act. We, therefore, find that no substantial question of law is involved in this appeal and consequently, we dismiss this appeal. Urgent xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.” In the light of the aforesaid discussion we do not accept

M/S CONTINENTAL ENGINEERING & POWER PVT.LTD.,MOHALI vs. ADIT,CPC/ACIT,CIRCLE-6(1), CHANDIGARH

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

Section 43(B) of the Act. We, therefore, find that no substantial question of law is involved in this appeal and consequently, we dismiss this appeal. Urgent xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.” In the light of the aforesaid discussion we do not accept

SH. AMRIK SINGH GAREWAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -1, CHANDIGARH

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

Bench: Shri A.D. Jainआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 543/Chd/2022 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sh. Amrik Singh Garewal, Dcit, Cpc, Bangluru बनाम 223-224, Ind Area Phasae-1, Current Jao, Dcit, Chandigarh 160028 Circle-1,Chandigarh

Section 43(B) of the Act. We, therefore, find that no substantial question of law is involved in this appeal and consequently, we dismiss this appeal. Urgent xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.” In the light of the aforesaid discussion we do not accept