SH. ASHISH JAIN,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-III, LUDHIANA

In the result, the ground no

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

127 DTR 241 and other similar judgments. 6. That the Ld.CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the number of judgements as having been cited before him for the above preposition and particularly the said long term capital gain having been disclosed in the original return filed much before the date of search and hence no addition could be made

SH. BIPAN JAIN,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-III, LUDHIANA

In the result, the ground no

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

127 DTR 241 and other similar judgments. 6. That the Ld.CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the number of judgements as having been cited before him for the above preposition and particularly the said long term capital gain having been disclosed in the original return filed much before the date of search and hence no addition could be made

SH. AKHIL JAIN,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-III, LUDHIANA

In the result, the ground no

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

127 DTR 241 and other similar judgments. 6. That the Ld.CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the number of judgements as having been cited before him for the above preposition and particularly the said long term capital gain having been disclosed in the original return filed much before the date of search and hence no addition could be made

SH. ASHISH JAIN,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-III, LUDHIANA

In the result, the ground no

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

127 DTR 241 and other similar judgments. 6. That the Ld.CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the number of judgements as having been cited before him for the above preposition and particularly the said long term capital gain having been disclosed in the original return filed much before the date of search and hence no addition could be made

HARYANA BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION, CHANDIGARH

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed

127 (All.).In GNIDA\n(supra), the High Court drew a distinction between bodies set up by\nthe government with commercial purpose and objects - which are\nmotivated by profit, and other government bodies. The court held,\ncorrectly so that other government bodies are not entitled to\nexemption as they are motivated by profit. Then, dealing with the\nterm \"commercial activity

HARYANA BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION, SECTOR 17

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed

127 (All.).In GNIDA\n(supra), the High Court drew a distinction between bodies set up by\nthe government with commercial purpose and objects - which are\nmotivated by profit, and other government bodies. The court held,\ncorrectly so that other government bodies are not entitled to\nexemption as they are motivated by profit. Then, dealing with the\nterm \"commercial activity

HARYANA BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed

127 (All.).In GNIDA\n(supra), the High Court drew a distinction between bodies set up by\nthe government with commercial purpose and objects - which are\nmotivated by profit, and other government bodies. The court held,\ncorrectly so that other government bodies are not entitled to\nexemption as they are motivated by profit. Then, dealing with the\nterm \"commercial activity

HARYANA BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION, CHANDIGARH

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed

127 (All.).In GNIDA\n(supra), the High Court drew a distinction between bodies set up by\nthe government with commercial purpose and objects - which are\nmotivated by profit, and other government bodies. The court held,\ncorrectly so that other government bodies are not entitled to\nexemption as they are motivated by profit. Then, dealing with the\nterm \"commercial activity

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-I, CHANDIGARH , CHANDIGARH vs. MS SCOTT EDIL ADVANCE RESEARCH LABORATOTRIES AND EDUCATION LTD., , CHANDIGARH

127 dtd. 30.03.2018 was without sanction of law, hence bad in law. Issue 16: Carry forward of MAT credit against the demand raised consequent to impugned addition made in assessment. Issue 17: Disallowance of 80IC on subsidy claimed in ITR. Issue 18 : Jewellery found at House no 2273, Sector 21C, Chandigarh & Locker no 64, Bank of India, Sector 35, Chandigarh

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SANJEEV AGGARWAL , CHANDIGARH

127 dtd. 30.03.2018 was without sanction of law, hence bad in law. Issue 16: Carry forward of MAT credit against the demand raised consequent to impugned addition made in assessment. Issue 17: Disallowance of 80IC on subsidy claimed in ITR. Issue 18 : Jewellery found at House no 2273, Sector 21C, Chandigarh & Locker no 64, Bank of India, Sector 35, Chandigarh

SHRI BALRAM KRISHAN,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

127 dtd. 30.03.2018 was without sanction of law, hence bad in law. Issue 16: Carry forward of MAT credit against the demand raised consequent to impugned addition made in assessment. Issue 17: Disallowance of 80IC on subsidy claimed in ITR. Issue 18 : Jewellery found at House no 2273, Sector 21C, Chandigarh & Locker no 64, Bank of India, Sector 35, Chandigarh

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

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. 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

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

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

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. 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