DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SMT. JASWANT KAUR, MOHALI

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

unexplained income detected or added by the income tax authorities. 25. It is pertinent to mention here that even though, the Government noticed that the aforesaid provisions of sections 68, 69A, 69B, 69C and 69D can be misused by the assessees to circumvent the ‘Voluntary ITA Nos.41 to 44, 387, 45 to 54/Chd/17 & CO 16-to 30-Chd-2018- Shri

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. PARAMJIT SINGH, MOHALI

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

unexplained income detected or added by the income tax authorities. 25. It is pertinent to mention here that even though, the Government noticed that the aforesaid provisions of sections 68, 69A, 69B, 69C and 69D can be misused by the assessees to circumvent the ‘Voluntary ITA Nos.41 to 44, 387, 45 to 54/Chd/17 & CO 16-to 30-Chd-2018- Shri

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. PARAMJIT SINGH, MOHALI

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

unexplained income detected or added by the income tax authorities. 25. It is pertinent to mention here that even though, the Government noticed that the aforesaid provisions of sections 68, 69A, 69B, 69C and 69D can be misused by the assessees to circumvent the ‘Voluntary ITA Nos.41 to 44, 387, 45 to 54/Chd/17 & CO 16-to 30-Chd-2018- Shri

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. KULWANT SINGH, MOHALI

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

unexplained income detected or added by the income tax authorities. 25. It is pertinent to mention here that even though, the Government noticed that the aforesaid provisions of sections 68, 69A, 69B, 69C and 69D can be misused by the assessees to circumvent the ‘Voluntary ITA Nos.41 to 44, 387, 45 to 54/Chd/17 & CO 16-to 30-Chd-2018- Shri

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SMT. MANJIT KAUR, CHANDIGARH

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

unexplained income detected or added by the income tax authorities. 25. It is pertinent to mention here that even though, the Government noticed that the aforesaid provisions of sections 68, 69A, 69B, 69C and 69D can be misused by the assessees to circumvent the ‘Voluntary ITA Nos.41 to 44, 387, 45 to 54/Chd/17 & CO 16-to 30-Chd-2018- Shri

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

M/S SEL TEXTILES LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-III, LUDHIANA

In the result, theappeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.695/Chd/2018 धििागरणवर्ग / Assessment Year :2014-15 बिाम M/S Sel Textiles Limited, The Dcit, 273-74,G.T. Road, Central Circle-Iii, Dhandari Kalan, Ludhiana Ludhiana स्थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aancs0401M अपीलाथी/Appellant प्रत्यथी/Respondent धििागररतीकीओरसे/Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Kumar, Ca राजस्वकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Sh. Ram Mohan, Cit Dr सुिवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28.01.2019 उदघोर्णाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.04.2019 आदेश/Order Per Sanjay Garg:

271(1)(c), Section 271AAA & Section 271AAB, the Legislature has restricted the scope of penal provision only to “undisclosed income” and not assessed total income. Moreover the “undisclosed income” term/expression has been defined by the Legislature in all such penal provisions in a specific and restricted manner and not in an inclusive manner. For that reason the definition of undisclosed

M/S MAHARAJA LIGHT & TENT SERVICES,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, all the above appeals of different assessees are partly allowed for statistical purposes

271(1)(c), Section 271AAA & Section 271AAB, the Legislature has restricted the scope of penal provision only to “undisclosed income” and not assessed total income. Moreover the term/expression “undisclosed income” has been defined by the Legislature in all such penal provisions in a specific and restricted manner and not in an inclusive manner. For that reason the definition of undisclosed

SMT. VANI JAIN,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, all the above appeals of different assessees are partly allowed for statistical purposes

271(1)(c), Section 271AAA & Section 271AAB, the Legislature has restricted the scope of penal provision only to “undisclosed income” and not assessed total income. Moreover the term/expression “undisclosed income” has been defined by the Legislature in all such penal provisions in a specific and restricted manner and not in an inclusive manner. For that reason the definition of undisclosed

SMT. SHWETA JAIN,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, all the above appeals of different assessees are partly allowed for statistical purposes

271(1)(c), Section 271AAA & Section 271AAB, the Legislature has restricted the scope of penal provision only to “undisclosed income” and not assessed total income. Moreover the term/expression “undisclosed income” has been defined by the Legislature in all such penal provisions in a specific and restricted manner and not in an inclusive manner. For that reason the definition of undisclosed

SH. ROSHAN LAL JINDAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1555/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10

unexplained as no from which it is derived. Thus, with regard to the same, it is held that the appellant has not specified and substantiated the manner of earning income during the course of search and hence Penalty u/s 271AAA of the Act is leviable on this amount. Similarly, the appellant has also not specified and substantiated the manner

RAJESH POPLI,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg& Ms. Annapurna Gupta

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). 2. The brief facts relating to the issue involved are that in a search action carried out in the group concern of the assessee, the assessee admitted that he was indulged in unaccounted purchases and sales. ITA Nos 1387 to 1392/Chd/2016- Shri Rajesh Popli, Shimla

RAJESH POPLI,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg& Ms. Annapurna Gupta

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). 2. The brief facts relating to the issue involved are that in a search action carried out in the group concern of the assessee, the assessee admitted that he was indulged in unaccounted purchases and sales. ITA Nos 1387 to 1392/Chd/2016- Shri Rajesh Popli, Shimla

RAJESH POPLI,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg& Ms. Annapurna Gupta

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). 2. The brief facts relating to the issue involved are that in a search action carried out in the group concern of the assessee, the assessee admitted that he was indulged in unaccounted purchases and sales. ITA Nos 1387 to 1392/Chd/2016- Shri Rajesh Popli, Shimla

RAJESH POPLI,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg& Ms. Annapurna Gupta

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). 2. The brief facts relating to the issue involved are that in a search action carried out in the group concern of the assessee, the assessee admitted that he was indulged in unaccounted purchases and sales. ITA Nos 1387 to 1392/Chd/2016- Shri Rajesh Popli, Shimla

RAJESH POPLI,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg& Ms. Annapurna Gupta

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). 2. The brief facts relating to the issue involved are that in a search action carried out in the group concern of the assessee, the assessee admitted that he was indulged in unaccounted purchases and sales. ITA Nos 1387 to 1392/Chd/2016- Shri Rajesh Popli, Shimla

RAJESH POPLI,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg& Ms. Annapurna Gupta

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). 2. The brief facts relating to the issue involved are that in a search action carried out in the group concern of the assessee, the assessee admitted that he was indulged in unaccounted purchases and sales. ITA Nos 1387 to 1392/Chd/2016- Shri Rajesh Popli, Shimla

DCIT, PATIALA vs. M/S SANGRUR AGRO LTD., SANGRUR

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Yeas : 2008-09

penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). ITA Nos. 429 & 430-Chd-2016- Sangrur Industrial Corpn Ltd & Sangrur Agro Ltd, Sangrur 2 2. The brief facts relating to the issue under consideration are that the Assessing officer during assessment proceedings noted that there was increase in the share capital