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

8,39,55,267/-\n41. The A.O. made various disallowance of interest under section 14A\nand Section 36(1) (iii). In para

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 expenditure or increase in income indicated in the audit report but not taken into account in computing the total income in the return’ 8. Sub-section

M/S APEX BUILDERS, LUDHIANA vs. ITO, W-2(1), LUDHIANA

The appeal is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member)

disallowance under section 36(1)(iii), stating there was no evidence that the advance was not from borrowed funds. Therefore, the appeal should be dismissed. 8

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.

disallowance of Rs. 66,53,09,400/- being interest accrued and due on Non-Performing Assets (NPAs), mainly on the ground that the special provisions of section 43D, as amended vide Finance Act 2017, are applicable to co-operative banks also from Assessment Year 2018-19 onwards. Thus, the bank has urged in this ground that interest due on NPAs

ACIT, CIRCLE, PANCHKULA vs. M/S HARYANA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LTD., PANCHKULA

In the result, we upheld the

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

disallowance under section 14A r.w. Rule 8 D is warranted. The Ld. CIT(A) also referred to the decision of Jurisdictional

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 of expenditure or increase in income indicated in the audit report but not taken into account in computing the total income in the return’ 8. Sub-section

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

disallowance of expenditure or increase in income indicated in the audit report but not taken into account in computing the total income in the return’ 8. Sub-section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. ESSIX BIOSCIENCES LIMITED, MANIMAJRA

In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

disallowance under Section 14A cannot exceed the amount of exempt income earned by the assessee. (iii) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the above action of the CIT(A), ITD is contrary to the settled position of law that Income Tax Authorities are duty bound to compute the correct income of the assessee. 8

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)

disallowance of Rs. 8,61,473/- under section 36(1)(iii) made by Ld. AO and sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) is illegal

DCIT, CIRCLE, PANCHKULA vs. M/S HARYANA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LTD., PANCHKULA

In the result, appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Krinwant Sahay & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

disallowance under section 14A r/w Rule 8D squarely covered by earlier Order of Hon'ble ITAT, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh in Appeal no ITA No.1272/Chd/2019 for assessment year 2013-14, in the case of the appellant itself. 193-Chd-2023 – Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Ltd., Panchkula 8

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANCHKULA CIRCLE, PANCHKULA, PANCHKULA vs. HARYANA STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LTD, PANCHKULA

In the result, the present appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

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

disallowance had already been made. 6. Against the order of the CIT(A) the Revenue preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. 7. During the hearing before us, the Ld. CIT-DR supported the order of the AO and submitted that as per the binding judgment of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the assessee’s own case reported

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANCHKULA CIRCLE, PANCHKULA, PANCHKULA vs. HARYANA STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LIMITED, PANCHKULA

In the result, the present appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

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

disallowance had already been made. 6. Against the order of the CIT(A) the Revenue preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. 7. During the hearing before us, the Ld. CIT-DR supported the order of the AO and submitted that as per the binding judgment of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the assessee’s own case reported

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANCHKULA CIRCLE, PANCHKULA, PANCHKULA vs. HARYANA STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LTD, PANCHKULA

In the result, the present appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

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

disallowance had already been made. 6. Against the order of the CIT(A) the Revenue preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. 7. During the hearing before us, the Ld. CIT-DR supported the order of the AO and submitted that as per the binding judgment of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the assessee’s own case reported

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)

8(c)(iv) of Section 35AD, the phrase “specified business” has been defined interalia to mean “building and operating anywhere in India a hotel of two star or above category as classified by the Central Government”. 32. In the instant case, the Assessing officer held that the Hotel being run by the assessee company is not registered / classified

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)

8(c)(iv) of Section 35AD, the phrase “specified business” has been defined interalia to mean “building and operating anywhere in India a hotel of two star or above category as classified by the Central Government”. 32. In the instant case, the Assessing officer held that the Hotel being run by the assessee company is not registered / classified

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)

8(c)(iv) of Section 35AD, the phrase “specified business” has been defined interalia to mean “building and operating anywhere in India a hotel of two star or above category as classified by the Central Government”. 32. In the instant case, the Assessing officer held that the Hotel being run by the assessee company is not registered / classified

DCIT-CC-III, LUDHIANA vs. M/S LAXMI ENERGY & FOODS LTD.,, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 33/Chd/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Dcit, Vs. M/S Laxmi Energy & Foods बनाम Ltd., Central Circle-Iii, Sco 18-19, Sector 9-D, Ludhiana Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaacl3147J अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Hybrid Mode ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Rohit Sharma, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06.06.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10.07.2024 आदेश/Order Per Dr. Krinwant Sahay, A.M.:

8 circumstance there is merit in invoking Rule 8D by the AO to make disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. However, it has been held by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case Caraf Builders and Construction Pvt. Ltd. (2019) 101 taxmann.com l67 (Delhi) that disallowance u/s 14A cannot exceed the quantum of exempt income. Departmental SLP against

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)

section 14A which deals with the expenditure incurred in relation to income not includible in total income. The Ld. AR in respect of Ground No. 2(supra) have submitted in writing by way written submission as under: 1. The calculation of disallowance made by the Ld. AO is as under: Particulars Amount Under Rule 8D(2)(ii) 1455246 Under Rule

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)

section 14A which deals with the expenditure incurred in relation to income not includible in total income. The Ld. AR in respect of Ground No. 2(supra) have submitted in writing by way written submission as under: 1. The calculation of disallowance made by the Ld. AO is as under: Particulars Amount Under Rule 8D(2)(ii) 1455246 Under Rule