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

section 14 of the Act read Rule 8D of the Income Tax\nRules is deleted.\nThe aforesaid order has been followed by the ITAT in the\n Assessment Year's i.e. 2009-10 and 2011-12, we, therefore do not see\nany valid ground to interfere with the findings of the Ld. CIT (A) who\nrightly deleted the disallowance made

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)

1) were issued alongwith questionnaire, and after taking into consideration the submission filed by the assessee and carrying out the necessary verification/ examination, the assessment proceedings were completed under section 143(3) r.w.s 143(3A) &143(3B) of the Act, wherein the assessed income was determined at Rs. 88,44,429/- after making the disallowance under section

VIRGO ALUMINUM LTD.,SIRMOUR vs. PR. C.I.T., CIRCLE, PATIALA

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 438/Chd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18

66,70,246/- to M/s. Metalmine Enterprise Pvt. Ltd. during the Assessment Year 2017-18 and that these amounts were brought forward balances of the preceding years. It was also explained that these were the old outstanding balances on account of sales which were written off. ITA No. 438/CH D / 2 0 2 2 Assessment Year : 2 0 1

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 80IC of the Act has been held to be allowable to the assessee and has been so allowed by the Tribunal. The Department’s appeal against the said Tribunal order for assessment year 2013-14 has attained finality. There is no change whatsoever in the facts and circumstances for the year under consideration. Therefore, the said CBDT ITA 326/CHD/2019

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)

disallowance under section 36(1)(iii) of interest to the extent of interest not taken. ० Post 'Abhishek Industries' (supra), according to 'Bright Enterprises' (dated 24.7.2015) (supra) [on having considered 'Abhishek Industries' (supra) and having followed 'SA Builders' (supra)], to allow the interest as deduction under section 36(1)(iii), the real test is that it was commercial expediency which

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)

66,38,400/- without specifying the limb of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act under which penalty proceedings had been initiated and penalty levied.” 4. Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessee is a cooperative bank registered under the Cooperative Society Act and covered under the category of “Non Scheduled Bank” as defined in the Banking

RAMJEE CONCRETES PVT.LTD.,MOHALI vs. ITO-WARD-6(3), CHANDIGARH

The appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid terms

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 205/Chd/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Ramjee Concretes Private Limited, The Ito, बनाम #1238.Sector 91, Ward 6(3), Mohali, Punjab Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aafcr9457E अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

disallowances sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) are deleted.” In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed.” 9.1 Accordingly, ground Nos. 1 to 5 stand allowed. 10.0 As far as the issue of Educational Cess being deductible expenditure is concerned, we agree with the contention of the Ld. AR that the issue is covered in assessee’s favour

KANDI FRIENDS EDUCATIONAL TRUST,ROPAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSION OF INCOME TAX, CL. 1, EXEMPTION, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

1)(c) read with Section 13(3) and 164(2) of the Income Tax Act. ITA Nos. 797 & 798/CHD/2024 A.Y.2014-15 & 2015-16 10 10.1 While impugning the disallowances, ld. counsel for the assessee took us through the Paper Book. He submitted that details of honorarium paid to different individuals in all these years is being placed on page

KANDI FRIENDS EDUCATIONAL TRUST,ROPAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

1)(c) read with Section 13(3) and 164(2) of the Income Tax Act. ITA Nos. 797 & 798/CHD/2024 A.Y.2014-15 & 2015-16 10 10.1 While impugning the disallowances, ld. counsel for the assessee took us through the Paper Book. He submitted that details of honorarium paid to different individuals in all these years is being placed on page

KARNAIL SINGH,UK vs. JCIT (OSD) INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

disallowed. It was submitted that non acceptance of the taxable amount does not means that the assessee has concealed particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. It was submitted that during the course of assessment proceedings, all details as directed by the AO were filed reflecting the true nature and character of income and there

KARNAIL SINGH,UK vs. JCIT (OSD) INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

disallowed. It was submitted that non acceptance of the taxable amount does not means that the assessee has concealed particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. It was submitted that during the course of assessment proceedings, all details as directed by the AO were filed reflecting the true nature and character of income and there

KARNAIL SINGH,UK vs. JCIT (OSD) INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

disallowed. It was submitted that non acceptance of the taxable amount does not means that the assessee has concealed particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. It was submitted that during the course of assessment proceedings, all details as directed by the AO were filed reflecting the true nature and character of income and there

KARNAIL SINGH,UK vs. JCIT (OSD) INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

disallowed. It was submitted that non acceptance of the taxable amount does not means that the assessee has concealed particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. It was submitted that during the course of assessment proceedings, all details as directed by the AO were filed reflecting the true nature and character of income and there

KARNAIL SINGH,UK vs. JCIT (OSD) INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

disallowed. It was submitted that non acceptance of the taxable amount does not means that the assessee has concealed particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. It was submitted that during the course of assessment proceedings, all details as directed by the AO were filed reflecting the true nature and character of income and there

KARNAIL SINGH,UK vs. JCIT (OSD) INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

disallowed. It was submitted that non acceptance of the taxable amount does not means that the assessee has concealed particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. It was submitted that during the course of assessment proceedings, all details as directed by the AO were filed reflecting the true nature and character of income and there

DCIT, C-1(1) , CHANDIGARH vs. M/S FIDELITY INFORMATION SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, the cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

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

Section 37(1) of the Act. There cannot be any dispute regarding the said proposition and the same will apply equally for the impugned assessment year. 12. As far as verification of cost base for the impugned assessment year as to whether the same includes the foreign travel expenses and on which mark up has been charged by the assessee

ITO, WARD, PALAMPUR vs. THE KANGRA CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, KANGRA

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

Bench: Us Is Filed Under Section 253 Of The Income Tax Act, As Amended From Time To Time. The Respondent Is A Cooperative Bank.

66,53,09,400/-, and (iii) interest on Income-tax refund amounting Rs. 14,86,111/-. 3.2 The order of AO is dt. 29/09/2021 DIN No. is ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2021- 22/1035999175(1). 4. The Respondent herein being aggrieved as aforesaid preferred first appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein they interalia has raised following grounds: "1. Disallowance under section

EASTMAN INTERNATIONAL,LUDHIANA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

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

66,03,454/- under Section 41(1), alleging that certain liabilities were not reflected in the assessee’s ledger accounts compared to the balances shown by the creditors. The assessee provided reconciliations and confirmations, which demonstrate that there was no cessation or extinguishment of liability. The differences were due to timing mismatches, duly explained and supported by documentary evidence

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)

section 36(1)(iii) is bad in law and illegal and ought to be deleted as in the books of account assessee has shown advances for different properties. That the Ld. AO has disallowed proportionate interest paid on secured / unsecured loans contending that no interest has been charged on advance paid for properties. The order to the effect that