DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, LUDHAINA vs. HOMELAND CITY PROJECT LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

70,00,000/- has been reflected in Annexure- Business & Profession [Sr no. 15 on page 33] attached along with order u/s 143(1) of the Act and it has been stated that the disallowance is being made on account of "Amounts debited to P&L account, to the extent disallowable under Section

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 Rs. 14,15,10,213/- made by the A.O. by\ninvoking the provisions of Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.\n(hereinafter referred to as Act).\n5. Facts of the case in brief are that the assessee filed its return of\nincome on 20/03/2014 declaring an income of Rs. 140,32,08,590/- which\nwas processed

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)

Section 37 that the expression " for the purpose of business" includes expenditure voluntarily incurred for ITA 350/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2017-18 70 commercial expediency, and it is immaterial if a third party also benefits thereby." (iv). The supreme Court further held at placitum 26 at page 8 of the report as under: "The expression "commercial expediency" is an expression of wide

DCIT CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LTD, LUDHIANA

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." 4. The assessee company has suomoto capitalized interest at Rs. 1485020/- in th books of accounts by following Accounting Standards. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) at para 4.3.1 following the judgment of Hon'ble ITAT in the appellants own case of AY 09-10, 10-11 & 12-13 had deleted the addition

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, FOCAL POINT

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." 4. The assessee company has suomoto capitalized interest at Rs. 1485020/- in th books of accounts by following Accounting Standards. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) at para 4.3.1 following the judgment of Hon'ble ITAT in the appellants own case of AY 09-10, 10-11 & 12-13 had deleted the addition

ASSTT. 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." 4. The assessee company has suomoto capitalized interest at Rs. 1485020/- in th books of accounts by following Accounting Standards. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) at para 4.3.1 following the judgment of Hon'ble ITAT in the appellants own case of AY 09-10, 10-11 & 12-13 had deleted the addition

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA, - vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LTD, -

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." 4. The assessee company has suomoto capitalized interest at Rs. 1485020/- in th books of accounts by following Accounting Standards. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) at para 4.3.1 following the judgment of Hon'ble ITAT in the appellants own case of AY 09-10, 10-11 & 12-13 had deleted the addition

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." 4. The assessee company has suomoto capitalized interest at Rs. 1485020/- in th books of accounts by following Accounting Standards. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) at para 4.3.1 following the judgment of Hon'ble ITAT in the appellants own case of AY 09-10, 10-11 & 12-13 had deleted the addition

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA, 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." 4. The assessee company has suomoto capitalized interest at Rs. 1485020/- in th books of accounts by following Accounting Standards. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) at para 4.3.1 following the judgment of Hon'ble ITAT in the appellants own case of AY 09-10, 10-11 & 12-13 had deleted the addition

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." 4. The assessee company has suomoto capitalized interest at Rs. 1485020/- in th books of accounts by following Accounting Standards. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) at para 4.3.1 following the judgment of Hon'ble ITAT in the appellants own case of AY 09-10, 10-11 & 12-13 had deleted the addition

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." 4. The assessee company has suomoto capitalized interest at Rs. 1485020/- in th books of accounts by following Accounting Standards. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) at para 4.3.1 following the judgment of Hon'ble ITAT in the appellants own case of AY 09-10, 10-11 & 12-13 had deleted the addition

SH. GURINDER MAKKAR,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-3, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

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

disallowing depreciation amounting to Rs. 70,000/- on the building. 5. Notwithstanding, the above said grounds of appeal, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has wrongly confirmed the order passed u/s 143(3). 6. That the Ld. CIT(A), Ludhiana has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in invoking the provision of Section

ACIT, CIRCLE, PANCHKULA vs. M/S HARYANA STATE INDUSTRIAL & INFRASTRUCTURE DEV. CORP. LTD., PANCHKULA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

70,000/- to Metro Project is an allowable expenditure made wholly and exclusively for business purpose, ignoring the main object of the Assessee for which it has been constituted and transport service cannot be said to be akin to the Financing activities and developing the Industrial Estates etc. ? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

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

Bench: Us In Terms Of Section 253 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The Assessee Being Aggrieved By The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) Dt. 11/03/2018 Which Is Hereinafter Referred To As The Impugned Order, Before This Tribunal In Form No. 36 Has Interalia Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

70,09,819/- , but no interest has been charged. Assessee society, was asked to explain why interest accrued on this amount be not disallowed. In its response, the counsel on behalf of the assessee society replied as under:- " The amount of interest recoverable is from those co-op Sugar Mills of Bhuna and Panipat also has not return the land

ITO, W-6(3), MOHALI vs. THE STAR CO-OPERATIVE LABOUR & CONSTRUCTION SOCIETY LTD., MOHALI

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

70,481/- by the assessee during the year under consideration is disallowed. 11. The aforesaid order of the Ld. AO is dt. 18/12/2017 under section

KHANNA INFRABUILD PRIVATE LIMITED 2000-1A, SUKHDEV NAGAR FEROZEPUR ROAD, LUDHIANA,LUDHIANA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

In the result, the ground of appeal is allowed

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

section 115BBE of the income Tax Act on account of alleged unexplained investment in the Hotel Building. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in making the reference to the Departmental Valuer, for estimate cost of construction of the hotel building, without any incriminating evidence during the course of search from

KHANNA INFRABUILD PRIVATE LIMITED ,LUDHIANA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE)-2 LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

In the result, the ground of appeal is allowed

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

section 115BBE of the income Tax Act on account of alleged unexplained investment in the Hotel Building. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in making the reference to the Departmental Valuer, for estimate cost of construction of the hotel building, without any incriminating evidence during the course of search from

KHANNA INFRABUILD PRIVATE LIMITED ,LUDHIANA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE)-2, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

In the result, the ground of appeal is allowed

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

section 115BBE of the income Tax Act on account of alleged unexplained investment in the Hotel Building. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in making the reference to the Departmental Valuer, for estimate cost of construction of the hotel building, without any incriminating evidence during the course of search from

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

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

70 were pertaining to earlier years and they were brought forward as pending balances. Now, it is well settled that sums pertaining to earlier years, brought forward as pending balance cannot be taxed under the provisions of Section 68 of the Act. It has been so held, inter-alia in the following decisions