ITO, W-6(5), MOHALI vs. SMT. GURDEV KAUR, KHARAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Disposal Of Appeal.”

House No. 85, Village Rai Pur Kalan Kharar, SAS Nagar, Mohali "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: CWJPS6206H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 06/02/2024 उदघोषणा क" तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 03/05/2024 आदेश

AJMER SINGH,MOHALI vs. ITO, W-6(5), MOHAL

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Disposal Of Appeal.”

House No. 85, Village Rai Pur Kalan Kharar, SAS Nagar, Mohali "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: CWJPS6206H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 06/02/2024 उदघोषणा क" तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 03/05/2024 आदेश

DEVI DAYAL,KAITHAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 , KAITHAL

In the result, appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 899/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 Shri Devi Dayal, Vs The Ito, Pundri Anaj Mandi, Ward – 1, Kaithal-Haryana 136026. Kaithal. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aajpd5851H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca & Ms. Shruti Khandelwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 30.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.09.2025

property, as envisaged by a the parties. We are, therefore, of the view that this clause will also not rope in the present transaction. 24. The matter can also be viewed from a slightly different angle. Shri Vohra is right when he ha referred to Sections 45 and 48 of the Income Tax Act and has then argued that some

SH. JAI RAM,JAGADHARI vs. ITO, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, both the appeal of different assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

Housing & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Hon'ble High Court gave a direction to the Superintendent of Police, Yamuna Nagar to enquire into the complaints of petitioners vide order dated 31.05.2007, copy is placed on record. 11(2) The ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that only after intervention of the High Court and District authorities, the assessee is able

SH. AMAR SINGH,JAGADHARI vs. ITO, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, both the appeal of different assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

Housing & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Hon'ble High Court gave a direction to the Superintendent of Police, Yamuna Nagar to enquire into the complaints of petitioners vide order dated 31.05.2007, copy is placed on record. 11(2) The ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that only after intervention of the High Court and District authorities, the assessee is able

ITO, W-4, CHANDIGARH vs. SANT RAM SHARMA, PANCHKULA

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Ms.Diva Singh & Ms.Annapurna Guptathe Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sh.Sant Ram Sharma, Ward 4, H.No.883, Sector 8, Panchkula. Panchkula. Pan: Ampps1995K (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 144, the comparable case given by the appellant has been found to be acceptable and reasonable having regard to nature of business and turnover declared. Therefore N.P. Rate of 16.49 %, as agreed by the appellant, is applied to gross receipts of Rs.28,55,000/- declared by appellant from business of marriage palace and net profit thereby comes to Rs.4

SIKANDER SINGH MALUKA,MOHALI vs. ITO, MOHALI

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptathe I.T.O., Vs. Sh.Sikandar Singh Maluka, Ward 5(1), # 1370, Sector 40-B, Chandigarh. Chandigarh Pan: Abzpm7206N & Sh.Sikandar Singh Maluka, Vs. The I.T.O., # 1370, Sector 40-B, Ward 5(2), Chandigarh. Chandigarh Pan: Abzpm7206N

property Act and Registration Act were not conclusive for interpretation of provisions of Income Tax Act. 9. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the provisions of section 2(47)(ii) are not applicable whereas all the members of society surrendered their individual rights

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

Section 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act by Circle-I, International Taxation, Chandigarh. 2. The assessee has taken eight grounds of appeal, however, his grievance revolves around a single issue, namely, A.Y.2018-19 2 as to how true Long Term Capital Gain required to be determined on sale of immovable house property bearing House No. 845 Sector 38-A, Chandigarh

ACIT, INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. MANJIT SINGH BAIDWAN, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri R.L Negiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1245/Chd/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Acit, Sh. Manjit Singh Baidwan, बनाम (International Taxation), # 3151, Sector 27-D, Chandigarh Chandigarh

section 54 of the Act. The ld. DR supporting the assessment order submitted that the assessee purchased a residential house for a sum of Rs. 636.64 lacs by raising a loan and utilizing the sale proceeds amounting to Rs. 575 lacs received from sale of House No. 144, Sector 27A, Chandigarh. The entire gain on sale of the house property

RISHU GARG S/O SH. SURENDER KUMAR GARG,YAMUNANAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, YAMUNANAGAR

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

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A). However, it is evident from the impugned appellate order that, despite several opportunities granted during the appellate proceedings, the assessee failed to comply and did not file any substantive submissions. Consequently, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal and confirmed the addition primarily on account of non-prosecution and absence of supporting evidence.

House No. 1491, Sector – 4 Panchkula Haryana - 134112 "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AGPPG1912N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Ms. Vineet Thakral, Adv. राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 18/03/2026 उदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 19/03/2026 आदेश/Order

MAHAKALI DEVELOPERS AND RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,SCF vs. PCIT PATIALA, AAYKAR BHAWAN

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

144 on 23.03.2022 for both the years. The ld. CIT harboured a belief that assessment orders in both the assessment years are erroneous and have caused a prejudice to the interests of Revenue. Therefore, action under Section 263 is required to be taken. Accordingly, he has issued a Show Cause Notice under Section 263 dated 14.12.2023 in both the years

MAHAKALI DEVELOPERS AND RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITES,SCF , IST FLOOR vs. PCIT PATIALA, AAYKAR BHAWAN PATIALA

The appeals are allowed

144 on 23.03.2022 for both the years.\nThe ld. CIT harboured a belief that assessment orders in\nboth the assessment years are erroneous and have caused a\nprejudice to the interests of Revenue. Therefore, action\nunder Section 263 is required to be taken. Accordingly, he\nhas issued a Show Cause Notice under Section 263 dated\n14.12.2023 in both the years

LEELA DUTT SHARMA,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(3), CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

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

Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to the assessee’s non- compliance. The assessee had declared income under the heads "Income from House Property

RAMESH KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, PANCHKULA

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

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

section 144 was also issued to the assessee, however in absence of any explanation/submission filed by the assessee, the AO proceeded and completed the assessment proceedings stating that since the assessee has not furnished any explanation in respect of the sale of the property amounting to Rs. 3,15,00,000/- and has not provided the detail of capital gains

YASH PAL JINDAL, 1233, SECTOR 10, AMBALA CITY, HARYANA,HARYANA vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, NFAC DELHI, JAO, INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, AMBALA, HARYANA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

house property, other sources and a\nsmall business. The assessment was reopened under section 147 and\nconcluded under section 144

UMESH KUMAR,MANDI vs. ITO, BILASPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Diva Singhassessment Year: 2008-09

section 144. The resultant additions were challenged in appeal before the ITA 657/CHD/2017 A.Y. 2008-09 Page 2 of 5 CIT(A) against the part relief granted by the CIT(A) assessee is in appeal before the ITAT. The Ld. AR inviting attention to the facts of the present case submitted that the assessee at the relevant point of time

DCIT, C-3, LUDHIANA vs. SH. SHAMBHU KUMAR, JUGIANA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, whereas,

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 957/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2000-01 Shri Shambhu Kumar, Vs. The Acit, Circle-V, Prop.M/S Jindal Alloys, Ludhiana बनाम Kanganwal Road, Vpo Juugiana, Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aihpk8666P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

house number / property number etc., nor any independent witness was jointed. 8. The Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order, while rejecting the contention of the assessee regarding valid service of notice has observed that since as per the report of the DRI, the assessee firm was fictitious and the assessee was not operating at the given address, hence

SH. SHAMBHU KUMAR,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, whereas,

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 957/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2000-01 Shri Shambhu Kumar, Vs. The Acit, Circle-V, Prop.M/S Jindal Alloys, Ludhiana बनाम Kanganwal Road, Vpo Juugiana, Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aihpk8666P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

house number / property number etc., nor any independent witness was jointed. 8. The Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order, while rejecting the contention of the assessee regarding valid service of notice has observed that since as per the report of the DRI, the assessee firm was fictitious and the assessee was not operating at the given address, hence