CHANDIGARH HOUSING BOARD,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the Appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ANDSHRI PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

Loss Account and correspondingly debiting the same as amount payable to Chandigarh Administration as expense. Thus, it cannot be interpreted that the assessee has concealed income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income in the return filed for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15 on 26.09.2013 and 27.11.2014 i.e. before the date of statement made by the counsel of the department

DCIT, C-1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. CHANDIGARH HOUSING BOARD, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the Appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ANDSHRI PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

Loss Account and correspondingly debiting the same as amount payable to Chandigarh Administration as expense. Thus, it cannot be interpreted that the assessee has concealed income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income in the return filed for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15 on 26.09.2013 and 27.11.2014 i.e. before the date of statement made by the counsel of the department

THE KANGRA CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,DHARAMSHALA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PALAMPUR

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

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

loss from sale of or dealing with non-banking business even though it was not an expense but an appropriation of profit disallowed said amounts and included same in income of assessee and also imposed penalty upon it under section 271(1)(c), penalty was rightly imposed. SLP filed against the High Court order has been dismissed

HEALTH BIOTECH LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: the disposal of the same.

u/s 271(1)(c) and then confirmed by Worthy CIT(A) deserves to be quashed since the same have been passed without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 6. That the appellant craves for any addition, deletion or amendment in the grounds of appeal on or before the disposal of the same. 3. Briefly, the facts

THE KANGRA CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,DHARAMSHALA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PALAMPUR

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

loss from sale of or dealing with non-banking business even though it was not\nan expense but an appropriation of profit disallowed said amounts and included\nsame in income of assessee and also imposed penalty upon it under section\n271(1)(c), penalty was rightly imposed. SLP filed against the High Court order has\nbeen dismissed

ACIT, C-6, LUDHIANA vs. M/S ARADHANA FABRICS PVT. LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

set off of business loss against income surrendered at the time of survey u/s 133A of the Income Tax Act and addition of Rs.3,50,000/- on account of unexplained share premium. By virtue of order dated 28.09.2015, passed u/s 271(1)(c)of the Income Tax Act, the AO imposed a penalty

SH. AMAN SETH,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, W-1(1), LUDHIANA

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

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

loss account were subjected to verification. Relevant vouchers were called for and test checked. During the course of verification the assessee could not produced some vouchers out of petty expenses like diwali expenses, staff labour welfare etc. on the plea that for such petty expenses vouchers can not be obtained and the same have been booked on the basis

M/S YAMUNA POWER & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,JAGADHRI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

271 AA o f the Act the appellant was asked to provide any details/copies o f account of such transactions. No such notice/questionnaire/order sheet entry in this regard is available on record/file o f the appellant with the department. The Ld. Assessing Officer while levying the impugned penalty has time and again referred to the failure on part

PAVITAR SINGH,JAGADHRI, YAMUNANAGAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 653/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Pavitar Singh, Ito, बना 188, Vuillage Satgoli, Nwr-W-(65)(95) Bhagu Majra, Chandigarh म Jadadhri, Yamunanagar Vs. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Bteps4094J अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(b) of the IT act are initiated for non-compliance to notices u/s 142(1).” 4. Feeling aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the Assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeal for the reasons recorded in para 5.2.2. of his order which

M/S SATWANT AGRO ENGINEERS,BHAWANIGARH vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PATIALA

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

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

Penalty proceedings are initiated u/s 271AAC of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The AR has also submitted that the addition in the partner's capita! account of Rs. 50 lacs should be considered as explained under the unaccounted sales transactions of Rs. 42.80 lacs in the impounded documents and other discrepancies of Rs. 7.2 lacs found during the course

BALDEV SINGH,FATEHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARDS 1, FATEHBAD

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yaday & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 813/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Baldev Singh, Vs. The Ito, बनाम M/S Baldev Singh Jarnail Ward-1, Singh, Anaj Mandi, Fatehabad Dharsul Kalan, Tehsil Tohana, Fatehabad

loss”. 6. We do not deem it necessary to re-cite or recapitulate the proposition laid down in other decisions. It is suffice to say that the Honble Courts are unanimous in their approach to propound that whenever the reasons assigned by an applicant for explaining the condonation of delay, then such reasons are to be construed with a justice

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)

Set Balance carried forward unabsorbed off against the forward to the next depreciation current year income year 2012-13 25199906 7429889 17770017 2013-14 7027382 0 7027382 Total 32227288 7429889 24797399 Losses to be carried forward Rs. 2,47,97,399/-. Assessed. Issue requisite documents. Charge Interest u/s 234A/B/C, if any. Penalty proceedings u/s 271

THE SAHA PRIMARY AGRICULTURE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,AMBALA vs. ITO, WARD-4, AMBALA

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

penalty u/s 271(l)(c) for the same years against the ex-parte orders of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)NFAC. The Ld.CIT(Appeals) NFAC dismissed all the six appeals ex-parte holding that "since the assessee has not filed return of income as well as not paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable

THE SAHA PRIMARY AGRICULTURE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,AMBALA vs. ITO, WARD-4, AMBALA

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

penalty u/s 271(l)(c) for the same years against the ex-parte orders of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)NFAC. The Ld.CIT(Appeals) NFAC dismissed all the six appeals ex-parte holding that "since the assessee has not filed return of income as well as not paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable

THE SAHA PRIMARY AGRICULTURE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,AMBALA vs. ITO, WARD-4, AMBALA

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

penalty u/s 271(l)(c) for the same years against the ex-parte orders of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)NFAC. The Ld.CIT(Appeals) NFAC dismissed all the six appeals ex-parte holding that "since the assessee has not filed return of income as well as not paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable

THE SAHA PRIMARY AGRICULTURE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,AMBALA vs. ITO, WARD-4, AMBALA

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

penalty u/s 271(l)(c) for the same years against the ex-parte orders of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)NFAC. The Ld.CIT(Appeals) NFAC dismissed all the six appeals ex-parte holding that "since the assessee has not filed return of income as well as not paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable

THE SAHA PRIMARY AGRICULTURE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,AMBALA vs. ITO, WARD-4, AMBALA

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

penalty u/s 271(l)(c) for the same years against the ex-parte orders of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)NFAC. The Ld.CIT(Appeals) NFAC dismissed all the six appeals ex-parte holding that "since the assessee has not filed return of income as well as not paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable

THE SAHA PRIMARY AGRICULTURE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,AMBALA vs. ITO, WARD-4, AMBALA

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

penalty u/s 271(l)(c) for the same years against the ex-parte orders of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)NFAC. The Ld.CIT(Appeals) NFAC dismissed all the six appeals ex-parte holding that "since the assessee has not filed return of income as well as not paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable