M/S FORTUNE METALIKS LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. PR.CIT(CENTRAL), LUDHIANA

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

House, Ferozepur Road, Ludhiana. VS Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN /TAN No: AABCF3202D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR Khanna, Addl. CIT तारीख/Date of Hearing : 11.01.2022 उदघोषणा क" तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 09.03.2022 VIRTUAL HEARING आदेश आदेश/ORDER

TARUN JAIN,BATHINDA vs. PR.CIT(CENTRAL), LUDHIANA

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

property and deduction u/s 57 of the Act were duly called for by the AO and the assessees ITA Nos. 140 to 143-Chd-2021 Sh. Sanjay Jain and Others, Ludhiana 26 made due compliance in this regard too. It is also not the case of the Department that the assessees did not discharge their onus before

SHRI SANJAY JAIN,BATHINDA vs. PR.CIT(CENTRAL), LUDHIANA

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

property and deduction u/s 57 of the Act were duly called for by the AO and the assessees ITA Nos. 140 to 143-Chd-2021 Sh. Sanjay Jain and Others, Ludhiana 26 made due compliance in this regard too. It is also not the case of the Department that the assessees did not discharge their onus before

RAJNI JAIN,BATHINDA vs. PR.CIT(CENTRAL), LUDHIANA

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

property and deduction u/s 57 of the Act were duly called for by the AO and the assessees ITA Nos. 140 to 143-Chd-2021 Sh. Sanjay Jain and Others, Ludhiana 26 made due compliance in this regard too. It is also not the case of the Department that the assessees did not discharge their onus before

SHRI HARISH GOYAL,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, C-4(1), CHANDIGARH

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes only

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 1378/Chd/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shri Harish Goyal, Vs. The Acit, H.No. 3126, Circle 4(1), बनाम Sector 28-D Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aavpg3228R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

property by estimating the rental income from House No. 659/16 B, Panchkula at Rs. 1,80,000/- as against correctly declared actual realized rent of Rs. 84,000/- of the portion let out. 8. That the appellant craves leave for any addition, deletion or amendment in the grounds of appeal on or before the disposal of the same. 3. Ground

CT EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JALANDHAR vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is Partly Allowed for\nStatistical Purposes as per the directions above

property which is necessary for the attainment of object of society.\nIn this regard it is submitted that Hon'ble CIT(A) allowed this ground of appeal for\nstatistical purpose for the reason that assessee submitted documents which were\nnot filed with Ld. AO.\nSir, it is incorrect that assessee did not file documents with Ld. AO. In order

BABITA JAIN,AMBALA CITY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ,WARD -1 AMBALA, AMBALA CANTT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed as and by way of remand back to the file of Ld

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

property as a result of which assessed the income at Rs. 53,55,786/-. 12. The following were grounds of appeal before Ld. CIT(A): 1. That the learned AO has erred in law and facts in treating the cash deposit of Rs. 48,70,000/- as business income of the assessee. 2. That the learned AO has erred

KULWANT KAUR,MOHALI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for

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

natural justice. 3. The sold property is not a capital asset and obtained amount is not a taxable under the Income Tax Act 196 Lit may kindly be considered and the addition may kindly be deleted. 3. The facts of the case, as available from the record are that the Assessing Officer added a sum of Rs.45

KULWANT KAUR,MOHALI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MOHALI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for

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

natural justice. 3. The sold property is not a capital asset and obtained amount is not a taxable under the Income Tax Act 196 Lit may kindly be considered and the addition may kindly be deleted. 3. The facts of the case, as available from the record are that the Assessing Officer added a sum of Rs.45

ADITI AGGARWAL,AMBALA CANTT vs. PR.CIT, PANCHKULA

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing Of Case.

natural justice while passing the order u/s 263 dated 19-03-2021. 3. That Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or to substitute the above grounds of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of case. 3. The only grievance of the assessee relates to the revisionary power of the Ld. Pr. CIT exercised under section

SH. RAJINDER SINGH BEDI,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT (INTL. TAXATION), CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 538/Chd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Rajinder Singh Bedi, The Dcit, (Int.Taxation ), 1368, Sector 40-B, Vs Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Afwpb3355A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.06.2025 Hybrid Hearing O R D E R

house bearing No. 845 Sector 38-A, Chandigarh was originally allotted to Smt. Joginder Kaur on 03.04.1987. The assessee got 100% share of this property from his mother on 24.06.2010. He has sold the property for a total consideration of Rs.3,88,00,000/- during the accounting year relevant to assessment year 2018-19. Thus, the dispute relates to correct

M/S Y.D.SOLUTIONS,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO WARD-4(5), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

House No. 2133, Ward-4 (5), Sector 38-C, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AABFY0386N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Ashok Khanna, Addl.CIT सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 01.12.2021 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement

SH. JASWINDER SINGH LOTA,MOHALI vs. DY. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Diva Singh & Shri B.R.R.Kumarassessment Year: 2008-09

house property purchased in India qualifies for exemption. iv) That furthermore, the Ld. CIT (A) is erroneous in upholding the additions made by the Ld. AO on the account of alleged income under the head of Capital gain whereas the income under the head of capital gain is NIL. v) That the impugned order dated 22.09.2015 passed

ITO, W-4(2), LUDHIANA vs. M/S SWARAN FASTNERS, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

house, Bury Street. London as per photocopy of the document attached. Your honor will find that all the transaction had been done from London by Sh. Puneet Gupta who is Son of Smt. SwaranKanta Jain and brother of Sh. Ankush Gupta. The above amounts have been transferred by Sh. Puneet Gupta in his savings account being maintained with CITI Bank

SH. INDERJIT SINGH BRAR,BATHINDA vs. DCIT, LUDHIANA

house property, capital gain & other sources". It is stated that the assessee is maintaining personal books of accounts which has been produced. 2.1 During the course of search of the residence premises of the assessee at Mohali, certain documents in the form of annexure ISB-8, 11 & 21 were found during the course of search. The notings on these documents

DCIT, LUDHIANA vs. SH. INDERJIT SINGH BRAR, MOHALI

house property, capital gain & other sources". It is stated that the assessee is maintaining personal books of accounts which has been produced. 2.1 During the course of search of the residence premises of the assessee at Mohali, certain documents in the form of annexure ISB-8, 11 & 21 were found during the course of search. The notings on these documents

DCIT, LUDHIANA vs. SH. INDERJIT SINGH BRAR, MOHALI

house property, capital gain & other sources". It is stated that the assessee is maintaining personal books of accounts which has been produced. 2.1 During the course of search of the residence premises of the assessee at Mohali, certain documents in the form of annexure ISB-8, 11 & 21 were found during the course of search. The notings on these documents

M/S SINGLA BUILDERS AND PROMOTERS LIMITED,RUPNAGAR, PUNJAB vs. DCIT/ACIT(CEN)-1 CHD, CHANDIGARH

The appeals stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.487/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S Singla Builders & Promoters Ltd. Dcit / Acit Central-1 बनाम/ Plot No 1265, Sector 82, Industrial Area C.R. Building, Sector 17 Vs. Rupnagar (Punjab) 140308 Chandigarh-160017 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaocs-6503-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.482/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.484/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) M/S Credo Assets Private Ltd. Dcit / Acit Central-1 बनाम/ Plot No 1265-C, Sector 82, Industrial Area C.R. Building, Sector 17 Vs. Rupnagar (Punjab) 140308 Chandigarh-160017 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafcc-6400-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca) & Smt. Shruti Khandelwal (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Kusum Bansal (Cit) & Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel (Cit) – Ld. Drs (Virtual) Date Of Final Hearing : 27-01-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 03-02-2026

natural justice and the report was duly confronted to the assessee and opportunity was granted to the assessee to offer his explanation with supporting documentary evidences. The legal objection of the assessee was thus rejected by Ld. AO. Further, DVO had taken into account all the information and records as provided by the assessee. The method adopted