SCOTT EDIL PHARMACIA LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

201 3-14 to 2018-19\nScott Edil Pharmacia Ltd.\n54,55 Phase-III, Industrial Area,\nChandigarh बनाम The DCIT,\nCentral Circle-1,\nChandigarh\nथायीलेखासं./PAN NO: AAHCS1643K\n&\nआयकर अपी लसं./ITA Nos. 726 to 732/CH D /2023\nिनधारणवष / Assessment Years : 2 012- 13 t o 2 018-19\nShri Balram Krishan\nPlot No. 47-48, Phase-2,\nIndustrial

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)

property being land or building or both, shares and securities, loans and advances and deposits in the bank accounts. From the facts of the case, it is observed that the AO has recorded her satisfaction that income of Rs. 36,10,58,438/- has escaped assessment on account of bogus expenses claimed in the names of fictitious sub contractors

SH. RANDHIR SINGH,SIRSA vs. PCIT ROHTAK, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

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

section 2 of section 56, clause(iv) in section 57 and clause (b) in Section 145A w.e.f. 01.04.2010. From the assessment year 2010-11 onwards, the amount of compensation or enhanced compensation is taxable as "income from other sources" after allowing deduction of a sum equal to 50% of such income in the year of receipt The Hon'ble Apex

SH. ARVAIL SINGH,SIRSA vs. PCIT, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

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

section 2 of section 56, clause(iv) in section 57 and clause (b) in Section 145A w.e.f. 01.04.2010. From the assessment year 2010-11 onwards, the amount of compensation or enhanced compensation is taxable as "income from other sources" after allowing deduction of a sum equal to 50% of such income in the year of receipt The Hon'ble Apex

M/S GANESH DASS HUF,SIRSA vs. PCIT, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

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

section 2 of section 56, clause(iv) in section 57 and clause (b) in Section 145A w.e.f. 01.04.2010. From the assessment year 2010-11 onwards, the amount of compensation or enhanced compensation is taxable as "income from other sources" after allowing deduction of a sum equal to 50% of such income in the year of receipt The Hon'ble Apex

SH. KASHMIR SINGH SANDHA,SIRSA vs. PCIT, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

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

section 2 of section 56, clause(iv) in section 57 and clause (b) in Section 145A w.e.f. 01.04.2010. From the assessment year 2010-11 onwards, the amount of compensation or enhanced compensation is taxable as "income from other sources" after allowing deduction of a sum equal to 50% of such income in the year of receipt The Hon'ble Apex

DHUNI CHAND HUF,SIRSA vs. PCIT, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

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

section 2 of section 56, clause(iv) in section 57 and clause (b) in Section 145A w.e.f. 01.04.2010. From the assessment year 2010-11 onwards, the amount of compensation or enhanced compensation is taxable as "income from other sources" after allowing deduction of a sum equal to 50% of such income in the year of receipt The Hon'ble Apex

SH. PARAMJEET SINGH,SIRSA vs. PCIT, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

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

section 2 of section 56, clause(iv) in section 57 and clause (b) in Section 145A w.e.f. 01.04.2010. From the assessment year 2010-11 onwards, the amount of compensation or enhanced compensation is taxable as "income from other sources" after allowing deduction of a sum equal to 50% of such income in the year of receipt The Hon'ble Apex

SURJEET SINGH,SIRSA vs. PCIT, ROHTAK, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

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

section 2 of section 56, clause(iv) in section 57 and clause (b) in Section 145A w.e.f. 01.04.2010. From the assessment year 2010-11 onwards, the amount of compensation or enhanced compensation is taxable as "income from other sources" after allowing deduction of a sum equal to 50% of such income in the year of receipt The Hon'ble Apex

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)

201] 50 taxmann.com 206 (P&H). 8. Notwithstanding the above grounds of appeal, that the confirmation of addition on substantive basis on the basis of the judgment of CIT vs. Sh. Baba Rupa Dass is against the facts 6t circumstances of the case, since it is not a case of any amount introduced in the books of accounts

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)

201] 50 taxmann.com 206 (P&H). 8. Notwithstanding the above grounds of appeal, that the confirmation of addition on substantive basis on the basis of the judgment of CIT vs. Sh. Baba Rupa Dass is against the facts 6t circumstances of the case, since it is not a case of any amount introduced in the books of accounts

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)

201] 50 taxmann.com 206 (P&H). 8. Notwithstanding the above grounds of appeal, that the confirmation of addition on substantive basis on the basis of the judgment of CIT vs. Sh. Baba Rupa Dass is against the facts 6t circumstances of the case, since it is not a case of any amount introduced in the books of accounts

INDER KALTA,SHIMLA vs. DCIT/ACIT(CENTRAL) , SHIMLA

Appeals stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1056/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1057/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1060/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1058/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2023-24) Smt. Ranjana Kumari / Kalta Dcit/Acit (Central) Kalta Niwas (Near Sharma Niwas) Shimla बनाम/ Vs. North Oak,Sanjauli, Shimla Himachal Pradesh - 171006 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Bbndp-5738-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1046/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) & 6. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1047/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 7. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1048/Chandi/2025

Section 271AAC. 10. The Appellant craves leave to add to, amend, alter, delete, modify or substitute any of the above grounds. 2. During the course of hearing before us, Ld. AR argued only on the merits of quantum additions and stated that the assessee is not pressing its respective legal grounds in all the appeals. Therefore, the respective legal grounds

INDER KALTA,SHIMLA vs. DCIT/ACIT(CENTRAL) , SHIMLA

Appeals stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1056/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1057/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1060/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1058/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2023-24) Smt. Ranjana Kumari / Kalta Dcit/Acit (Central) Kalta Niwas (Near Sharma Niwas) Shimla बनाम/ Vs. North Oak,Sanjauli, Shimla Himachal Pradesh - 171006 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Bbndp-5738-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1046/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) & 6. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1047/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 7. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1048/Chandi/2025

Section 271AAC. 10. The Appellant craves leave to add to, amend, alter, delete, modify or substitute any of the above grounds. 2. During the course of hearing before us, Ld. AR argued only on the merits of quantum additions and stated that the assessee is not pressing its respective legal grounds in all the appeals. Therefore, the respective legal grounds

RANJANA KUMARI,SHIMLA vs. DCIT/ACIT(CENTRAL) , SHIMLA

Appeals stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1056/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1057/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1060/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1058/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2023-24) Smt. Ranjana Kumari / Kalta Dcit/Acit (Central) Kalta Niwas (Near Sharma Niwas) Shimla बनाम/ Vs. North Oak,Sanjauli, Shimla Himachal Pradesh - 171006 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Bbndp-5738-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1046/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) & 6. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1047/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 7. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1048/Chandi/2025

Section 271AAC. 10. The Appellant craves leave to add to, amend, alter, delete, modify or substitute any of the above grounds. 2. During the course of hearing before us, Ld. AR argued only on the merits of quantum additions and stated that the assessee is not pressing its respective legal grounds in all the appeals. Therefore, the respective legal grounds

KALTA LIQUORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT/ACIT(CENTRAL) , SHIMLA

Appeals stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1056/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1057/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1060/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1058/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2023-24) Smt. Ranjana Kumari / Kalta Dcit/Acit (Central) Kalta Niwas (Near Sharma Niwas) Shimla बनाम/ Vs. North Oak,Sanjauli, Shimla Himachal Pradesh - 171006 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Bbndp-5738-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1046/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) & 6. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1047/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 7. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1048/Chandi/2025

Section 271AAC. 10. The Appellant craves leave to add to, amend, alter, delete, modify or substitute any of the above grounds. 2. During the course of hearing before us, Ld. AR argued only on the merits of quantum additions and stated that the assessee is not pressing its respective legal grounds in all the appeals. Therefore, the respective legal grounds

KALTA LIQUORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT/ACIT(CENTRAL) , SHIMLA

Appeals stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1056/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1057/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1060/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1058/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2023-24) Smt. Ranjana Kumari / Kalta Dcit/Acit (Central) Kalta Niwas (Near Sharma Niwas) Shimla बनाम/ Vs. North Oak,Sanjauli, Shimla Himachal Pradesh - 171006 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Bbndp-5738-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1046/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) & 6. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1047/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 7. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1048/Chandi/2025

Section 271AAC. 10. The Appellant craves leave to add to, amend, alter, delete, modify or substitute any of the above grounds. 2. During the course of hearing before us, Ld. AR argued only on the merits of quantum additions and stated that the assessee is not pressing its respective legal grounds in all the appeals. Therefore, the respective legal grounds

RANJANA KUMARI,SHIMLA vs. DCIT/ACIT(CENTRAL) , SHIMLA

Appeals stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1056/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1057/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1060/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1058/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2023-24) Smt. Ranjana Kumari / Kalta Dcit/Acit (Central) Kalta Niwas (Near Sharma Niwas) Shimla बनाम/ Vs. North Oak,Sanjauli, Shimla Himachal Pradesh - 171006 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Bbndp-5738-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1046/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) & 6. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1047/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 7. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1048/Chandi/2025

Section 271AAC. 10. The Appellant craves leave to add to, amend, alter, delete, modify or substitute any of the above grounds. 2. During the course of hearing before us, Ld. AR argued only on the merits of quantum additions and stated that the assessee is not pressing its respective legal grounds in all the appeals. Therefore, the respective legal grounds