KARNAIL SINGH,UK vs. JCIT (OSD) INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

1. That the notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(l)(c) of the Act initiating penalty proceedings against the appellant is vague, illegal and bad in law. 2. That, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, no valid satisfaction has been recorded by the Assessing Officer while completing the assessment proceedings

KARNAIL SINGH,UK vs. JCIT (OSD) INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

1. That the notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(l)(c) of the Act initiating penalty proceedings against the appellant is vague, illegal and bad in law. 2. That, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, no valid satisfaction has been recorded by the Assessing Officer while completing the assessment proceedings

KARNAIL SINGH,UK vs. JCIT (OSD) INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

1. That the notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(l)(c) of the Act initiating penalty proceedings against the appellant is vague, illegal and bad in law. 2. That, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, no valid satisfaction has been recorded by the Assessing Officer while completing the assessment proceedings

KARNAIL SINGH,UK vs. JCIT (OSD) INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

1. That the notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(l)(c) of the Act initiating penalty proceedings against the appellant is vague, illegal and bad in law. 2. That, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, no valid satisfaction has been recorded by the Assessing Officer while completing the assessment proceedings

DCIT, C-1 (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH vs. THE INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ENGINEERS SOCIETY, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

property\" of the trust or institution is,\nor continues to be, made available for the use of any person referred to in\nsub-section (3), for any period during the previous year without charging\nadequate rent or other compensation;\n(c) if any amount is paid by way of salary, allowance or otherwise during\nthe previous year to any person

SMT. SUREKHA THUKRAL ,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

House Property and ‘Income from Other sources’. Assessment in this case was completed on 31.01.2013 at Rs. 8,32,234/-. An addition of Rs. 3,13,000/- was made on account of unexplained cash found during the course of search. The Penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c

SH. PARMINDER SINGH MAVI,MORINDA vs. ITO, ROPAR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Housing Development Company Ltd. for which consideration had been settled in the form of cash as well as kind. He, therefore, held that the provisions of section 2(47)(v) of the Act r.w.s. A.Y.2008-09 53A of the transfer of Property Act were attracted on entering into the Development Agreement and the assessee had come within the purview of section

SH. ANIL TALWAR,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R.Kumar

House No. 346, Sector 9, Chandigarh certain additions were made by the assessing officer. The additions were partly sustained in appeal by the CIT(A). On further appeal before the ITAT, the additions estimated by the AO and the CIT(A) to an extent were restricted to the additions proposed by the DVO in his valuation report. In the penalty

SH. JAGMOHAN SINGH,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

property and to substantiate his claim of deduction under Section 54 of the Act. Thereafter, the assessee filed the necessary information/documentation which were considered by the AO but not found fully acceptable. 3. The AO reworked the LTCG at Rs. 38,65,580/-, as against capital gain of Rs. 37,22,387/- declared by the assessee, by disallowing certain cost

SHRI PARDEEP KUMAR JAIN,ZIRAKPUR vs. ITO, W-2(3), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 190/Chd/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Pradeep Kumar Jain, The Ito, Ward 2(3), बनाम Chandigarh Flat No.222, Orbit Apartments, 6Th Floor, Zirakpur "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Advpj6719P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

271 (1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, that the assessee came to know about the passing of the appellate order. Thereafter, the assessee applied for certifiedof the order of the CIT(A) which was provided to him on 20.2.2019 and the appeal was filed immediately within the period of limitation. The above averments made by the assessee

M/S MRS. BECTOR FOOD SPECIALITIES LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2006-07

271(1)(c) were for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income or concealment of income and as such the confirmation of penalty was against the law and facts of the case. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessment in the case of Assessee Company is completed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) of the Income

SHRI BALBIR SINGH VERMA,SHIMLA vs. PR.CIT, SHIMLA

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

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

house property and salary as a sitting MLA from HP Vidhan Sabha. Key issues examined included deductions claimed under Section 24(b) for interest on borrowed capital, motor car expenses, loans and advances, unsecured loans, and additional income of Rs. 1,25,00,000/- declared post a survey under Section 133A conducted on 04.03.2015. 3.2 Regarding Interest Claimed under Section

DAMANDEEP KAUR,MOHALI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE-2), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

House No. 2368., Phase X, Mohali\n| Central Circle-2, Chandigarh\n| Punjab-160055\n| बंनाम\n| प्रत्यक्षती / Respondent\n| स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: ALCPK6320J\n| अपीलार्थी/Appellant\n| निर्धिरिती की ओर से/Assessee by :\n| Shri Rohit Kapoor, Advocate &\n| Shri Virsain Aggarwal, ITP\n| राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by :\n| Shri Manav Bansal

DAMANDEEP KAUR,MOHALI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE-2), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

House No. 2368., Phase X, Mohali | | Central Circle-2, Chandigarh\n| Punjab-160055 | | \n| स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: ALCPK6320J | | \n| अपीलार्थी/Appellant | | प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent\n\n| निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by : | | Shri Rohit Kapoor, Advocate &\n| | | Shri Virsain Aggarwal, ITP\n| राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : | | Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR\n\n| सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date

DAMANDEEP KAUR,MOHALI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE-2), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

House No. 2368., Phase X, Mohali | | Central Circle-2, Chandigarh |\n| Punjab-160055 | | |\n| स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: ALCPK6320J | | |\n| अपीलार्थी/ Appellant | प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent |\n\n| निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by : | Shri Rohit Kapoor, Advocate &\n| | Shri Virsain Aggarwal, ITP |\n| राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : | Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR |\n\n| सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date

M/S PAGRO FROZEN FOODS PVT. LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO, W-2(3), CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

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

271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act is being initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 25. The Assessee feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the AO’s order dt. 26/12/2016 had filed first appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who vide impugned order has dismissed the same. The core finding of CIT(A) is as follows: “4.3 I have carefully

ITO, LUDHIANA vs. SH. CHARANJIT SINGH ATWAL, LUDHIANA

In the result, the penalty of the assessee is hereby allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year : 2007-08 Sh. Charanjit Singh Atwal, Vs. The Ito, Ward 6(1), 484-A, Model Town Extension, Ludhiana Ludhiana

271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') whereas Revenue is aggrieved by the action of the CIT(A) in deleting the remaining part of penalty. 3. The society consisted of 95 members and was the owner of 21.2 acres, of which 500 square yards plots were held by 65 members, 1000 square yards plots

SH. CHARANJIT SINGH ATWAL,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, LUDHIANA

In the result, the penalty of the assessee is hereby allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year : 2007-08 Sh. Charanjit Singh Atwal, Vs. The Ito, Ward 6(1), 484-A, Model Town Extension, Ludhiana Ludhiana

271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') whereas Revenue is aggrieved by the action of the CIT(A) in deleting the remaining part of penalty. 3. The society consisted of 95 members and was the owner of 21.2 acres, of which 500 square yards plots were held by 65 members, 1000 square yards plots