JAMNA DASS NIKKAMAL JAIN SARAF PRIVATE LIMITED, LUDHIANA,LUDHIANA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

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

section 69A, hence, penalty proceedings u/s 271AAC are to be initiated, which are being initiated separately. (Addition: Rs. 36,75,23,049-/) 22. Feeling aggrieved with the finding of the Assessing Officer the Assessee preferred the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) has granted 22 the relief to the assessee. The finding

SHRI SATISH SOIN,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, CC-II, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 303/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Satish Soin, बनाम The Acit, House No.31, Garden Enclave, Central Circle-2, Vs South City-Ii, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan /Tan No: Advps6254N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Kumar & Ms. Muskan Garg, Cas राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 26.05.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.07.2025 Hybrid Hearing आदेश/Order Per Rajpal Yadav, Vp

70,120/-. A notice under Section 143(2) was issued and served upon the assessee. Thereafter ld. AO has passed an assessment order under Section 153A read with Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act on 31.03.2015. Since no incriminating material was found during the course of search, therefore, no addition was made by the AO except Rs.25

ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SML ISUZU LTD., CHANDIGARH

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

3) of the Act, whereby the total income of the assessee company was assessed at Rs. 57,03,70,400/- after making addition on account of alleged under valuation of closing work in progress. 6. That the aforesaid addition made by the AO was deleted by the CIT(A) and the order of Ld. CIT(A) was thereafter affirmed

AMAN THUKRAL,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA

Accordingly, Additional Ground No. 1 is allowed for statistical

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

70. In the interest of justice and to meet the ends of fairness, we deem it appropriate to restrict the disallowance to 5% of the cash component of salary and wages, instead of 25% of the total expenditure as made by the Assessing Officer. 71. Accordingly, the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer at Rs. 11,48,800/- is reduced

SHRI ABHISHEK SOIN,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-II, LUDHIANA

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 321 & 322/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11, 2011-12 Shri Abhishek Soin, The Dcit, C/O Sigma Cartons Pvt. Ltd., Vs Central Circle-Ii, Unit-Ii, Industrial Area-C, Ludhiana. Sua Road, Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Anbps9446A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Aditya Kumar, Ca Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.07.2025 Hybrid Hearing O R D E R

70,120/-. A notice under Section 143(2) was issued and served upon the assessee. Thereafter ld. AO has passed an assessment order under Section 153A read with Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act on 31.03.2015. Since no incriminating material was found during the course of search, therefore, no addition was made by the AO except Rs.25

SHRI ABHISHEK SOIN,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-II, LUDHIANA

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 321 & 322/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11, 2011-12 Shri Abhishek Soin, The Dcit, C/O Sigma Cartons Pvt. Ltd., Vs Central Circle-Ii, Unit-Ii, Industrial Area-C, Ludhiana. Sua Road, Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Anbps9446A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Aditya Kumar, Ca Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.07.2025 Hybrid Hearing O R D E R

70,120/-. A notice under Section 143(2) was issued and served upon the assessee. Thereafter ld. AO has passed an assessment order under Section 153A read with Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act on 31.03.2015. Since no incriminating material was found during the course of search, therefore, no addition was made by the AO except Rs.25

S.P. SINGLA CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

disallowed the total expenses claimed by assessee on account of these bogus Sub Contractor firms at Rs.36,10,58,438/-. Accordingly, assessee's income was assessed. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A). 5. Before CIT(A), assessee raised the issue of re-opening vide Ground No. 2 and 3 as under : “2. That the assessment order dated 17.12.2019 passed

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

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

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

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

3,05,70,155/-. 26.4 It is also brought to our notice that on identical facts the Hon'ble ITAT vide para 31 to 34 of the order dated 15.6.2021 in ITA No. 1493/2017 & CO 4/2018 for AY 2011-12 restored the issue of suo-moto disallowance made under section

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)

3. Briefly the facts of the case are that while processing the return of income under section 143(1), the income of the assessee was assessed at a figure of Rs. 5,63,69,10,130/- by CPC, Bangalore after making disallowance of Rs. 5,63,70

SMT. RITU SOIN,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, CC-II, LUDHIANA

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

70,120/-. A\nnotice under Section 143(2) was issued and served upon\nthe assessee. Thereafter ld. AO has passed an assessment\norder under Section 153A read with Section 143(3) of the\nIncome Tax Act on 31.03.2015. Since no incriminating\nmaterial was found during the course of search, therefore,\nno addition was made by the AO except Rs.25

EXOTIC REALTORS AND DEVELOPERS,CHANDIGARH vs. PR.CIT-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

70 taxmann.com 227 has also held that in a case where learned Pr. CIT has not brought any material on record by making enquiries or verifications to substantiate his inference, the learned PCIT is not justified in holding that the impugned assessment order was erroneous. The relevant portion of the decision is as under:- "21. In the instant case

SHRI SUBHASH SHARMA,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO, W-2(3), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: This Tribunal, As Pointed Out By The Registry. The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Alongwith Affidavit Of The Assessee. On Perusing The Application For Condonation Of Delay & Affidavit Of The Assessee, The Delay Of 15 Days In Filing The Appeal Before This Tribunal Is Condoned.

Section 40A(3) of the Act and therefore, he made a disallowance of Rs. 11,70,750/- invoking provisions of Section

SH. GURMAL SINGH H NO R-18 NEW GRAIN MARKET NEAR JAIN HOSPITAL, JALANDHAR BYEPASS ROAD, LUDHIANA,PUNJAB vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-3 LUDHIANA, PUNJAB

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: This Tribunal. The Assessee Is Aggrieved

70 of his order. f). Our books of accounts have not been rejected u/s 145(3) and same have been accepted by the Assessing Officer and, thus, when as per our books of accounts, there is no payment exceeding Rs. 10,000/- and, thus, no disallowance u/s 40A(3) can be made because 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

70,155/-.\n26.4 It is also brought to our notice that on identical facts the Hon'ble\nITAT vide para 31 to 34 of the order dated 15.6.2021 in ITA No.\n1493/2017 & CO 4/2018 for AY 2011-12 restored the issue of suo-moto\ndisallowance made under section 14A r.w.r 8D of the Income Tax Rules,\n1962 to the file

DCIT, C-1 (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SHRI AUROBINDO SOCIO ECONOMIC & MANAGEMENT RESEARCH INSTITUTE, LUDHINA

In the result, whereas the assessee's appeal in ITA

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

70,000.00 Total 1,96,07,874.52 2,01,15,556.82 16. The calculation of surplus of 53.17% is as under : Particulars AY. 2013-14 A.Y. 2014-15 Total Receipts 6,67, 40,319/- 7,17,85, 575/- Revenue 2,30, 29,1 41/- 3.02.01.080/- Expenditure Capital Expenditure 5,91,92,922/- 34.15.376/- Total Expenditure 8,22,22,063/- 3

SIR AUROBINDO SOCIO ECONOMIC & MANAGEMENT RESEARCH INSTITUTE,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, C-1 (E), CHANDIGARH

In the result, whereas the assessee's appeal in ITA

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

70,000.00 Total 1,96,07,874.52 2,01,15,556.82 16. The calculation of surplus of 53.17% is as under : Particulars AY. 2013-14 A.Y. 2014-15 Total Receipts 6,67, 40,319/- 7,17,85, 575/- Revenue 2,30, 29,1 41/- 3.02.01.080/- Expenditure Capital Expenditure 5,91,92,922/- 34.15.376/- Total Expenditure 8,22,22,063/- 3