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

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

established norms, case laws and jurisprudence of penalty under the Income Tax Act and against various judicial pronouncements. 9. That the lower authorities have failed to appreciate that this is a simple case where the assessee declared the income under the head Income From House Property but the revenue has assessed the income under the head Income From Other Sources

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

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

established norms, case laws and jurisprudence of penalty under the Income Tax Act and against various judicial pronouncements. 9. That the lower authorities have failed to appreciate that this is a simple case where the assessee declared the income under the head Income From House Property but the revenue has assessed the income under the head Income From Other Sources

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

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

established norms, case laws and jurisprudence of penalty under the Income Tax Act and against various judicial pronouncements. 9. That the lower authorities have failed to appreciate that this is a simple case where the assessee declared the income under the head Income From House Property but the revenue has assessed the income under the head Income From Other Sources

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

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

established norms, case laws and jurisprudence of penalty under the Income Tax Act and against various judicial pronouncements. 9. That the lower authorities have failed to appreciate that this is a simple case where the assessee declared the income under the head Income From House Property but the revenue has assessed the income under the head Income From Other Sources

SH. LAIQ RAM S/O SH. TULSI RAM,SHIMLA vs. ITO, WARD, SHIMLA

In the result, the present appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

establish\nownership, possession, or agricultural activity. He accordingly confirmed the\nadditions.\n6. Feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is\nin appeal before us, on the ground mentioned hereinabove.\n7. Before us, the Ld. AR reiterated that the claim was made by mistake\nand should not have been treated adversely in the assessment. Reliance

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)

Penalty proceedings u/s 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

M/S ASHA TECHNOLOGIES,KALA AMB vs. ITO, SIRMOUR

In the result, both the above appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed as aforesaid in respect of impugned orders dt

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

Penalty u/s 271 (1) (c ) of the Income Tax Act is also initiated for filing inaccurate particular of income and for concealing income. 28. That the Ld. AO also has given finding on presuming that assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing activities : “Although it has been well established that the assessee was not engaged in the manufacturing

M/S ASHA TECHNOLOGIES,SIRMOUR vs. ADDL. CIT, SOLAN

In the result, both the above appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed as aforesaid in respect of impugned orders dt

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

Penalty u/s 271 (1) (c ) of the Income Tax Act is also initiated for filing inaccurate particular of income and for concealing income. 28. That the Ld. AO also has given finding on presuming that assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing activities : “Although it has been well established that the assessee was not engaged in the manufacturing

M/S LUXMI BUILDERS,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the respective appeals and stay applications are disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

u/s 153D, as part of the assessment record and draft assessment order, even though addition was made by the Ld. AO on 54 plots for which documents were found during the search. The Ld. AR highlighted the affidavit from Shri Kashmiri Lal which is also part of seized record in respect of those 4 plots which affidavit contained completely different

M/S GANESH BUILDERS,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the respective appeals and stay applications are disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

u/s 153D, as part of the assessment record and draft assessment order, even though addition was made by the Ld. AO on 54 plots for which documents were found during the search. The Ld. AR highlighted the affidavit from Shri Kashmiri Lal which is also part of seized record in respect of those 4 plots which affidavit contained completely different