INDO PACIFIC FINLEASE LTD,CHANDIGARH vs. PCIT- CHANDIGARH 1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the appeals are filed by the\nassessee are allowed

reassessment order passed was illegal and invalid due to following:-\n\n1. Notice u/s 148 issued on 01.04.2021 is time barred for the above Assessment Year.\nRegarding the date of issue of notice, there is no date mentioned on ITBA portal when the notice was uploaded and column is left blank. The snapshot is as under:\n\nIncome Tax Portal

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH vs. WINSOME TEXTILE INDUSTRIES LTD, CHANDIGARH

set off\nagainst the brought forward losses and thereby NIL income was reported under\nthe normal provisions. However, the tax liability was discharged by paying taxes\nunder section 115JB of the Act. The return of income was processed under\nsection 143(1), thereafter the case of the assessee was reopened under section\n147 after recording reasons relating to taxability

ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SML ISUZU LTD., CHANDIGARH

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

reassessment order. Re:- Ground of Appeal No. 3- On merits 39. No finding of CIT(A) in the impugned order on merits of disallowance made, the disallowance made by the AO is not sustainable for following reasons:- Re(i) Jalandhar City Transport Services Ltd. (‘JCTS’)- Bank Guarantee Invoked 40. Due to delay in delivering vehicles by the assessee to JCTS

INCOME TAX OFFICER, PARWANOO, H.P vs. DEYEM INDUSTRY, NALAGARH SOLAN

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 708/Chd/2023 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2012-13 The ITO Parwanoo, Himachal Pradesh बनाम DEYEM INDUSTRY Nalagarh, Ropar Road Near Hazat Khana, Nalagarh, H.P.- 174101 स्थायी लेखा सं./ PAN NO: AAGFD0437L अपीलार्थी/ Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Ankit Awal, Ms. Khushbu Sood, Advocates राजस्व की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR (Virtual) सुनवाई की ता

setting off current 2 year losses. The case was initially selected for scrutiny, and the assessment was completed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, accepting the returned income. 3.1 Subsequently, it was discovered that the assessee had entered into a slump sale agreement dated 06.04.2011 with M/s. Preethi Kitchen Appliances Pvt. Ltd. for a total consideration

INCOME TAX OFFICER, MOHALI PUNJAB vs. TAJ LAND DEVELOPEFRS AND PROMOTERS PRIVATE LIMITED , SECTOR MOHALI PUNJAB

In the result, appeal is dismissed

set aside the order of the Id. CIT(A) and hold re-\nassessment proceedings bad in law and also directing quashing of the re-\nassessment order.\n\nFortune Metaliks Limited vs DCIT, ITA No. 1090/Chd/2019 dated 12.01.2021 -\nCHD Trib.\nReliance is also placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Jurisdictional ITAT \"A\"\nBench, in which, the similar facts were there

RAJESH KHANNA,NEELKANTH PLYWOOD, YAMUNANAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, INCOME TAX OFFICER, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, the assessee's appeal in ITA

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

reassess such income or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any other, allowance or deduction for the Assessment Year 2018-19 and I, hereby, require you to furnish, within 30 days from service of this notice, a return in the prescribed form of the Assessment Year 2018-19. 3. This notice is being issued after obtaining the prior

INCOME TAX OFFICER, YAMUNA NAGAR vs. RAJESH KHANNA, YAMUNA NAGAR

In the result, the assessee's appeal in ITA

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

reassess such income or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any other, allowance or deduction for the Assessment Year 2018-19 and I, hereby, require you to furnish, within 30 days from service of this notice, a return in the prescribed form of the Assessment Year 2018-19. 3. This notice is being issued after obtaining the prior

G.J. HOLDING PVT. LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, C-2, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1171/Chandi/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 G.J. Holding Pvt. Ltd. बनाम Acit, Central Circle-Ii, Ludhiana C/O G.S. Auto International Limited, G.S. Estate, G.T. Road, Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaacg6664K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri P.K. Goel & Sunil Arora, C.As राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.12.2023 उदघोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30.01.2024 आदेश/Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 04.07.2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ludhiana[Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following 2. Grounds Of Appeal:

loss account. It was also contended that the observation of the Assessing Officer that income had escaped assessment because there was no trading transactions i.e. purchase and sale as mentioned in reasons recorded was wrong and factually incorrect. It was also pointed out the assessee thatthe assessee company had allotted shares of face value of Rs. 3076200/- (307620 Shares

INTERNATIONAL CUSTOMER RELATED MANAGEMENT SERVICES PVT LTD,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(1), MOHALI

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

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

loss of Rs. 37,545/-. 4. During the reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, as per the order dated 05.11.2019. The assessment primarily resulted in the following additions: an amount of Rs. 27,56,748/- was added by treating rental receipts as undisclosed income; a disallowance

MANDEEP KAUR,FATEHABAD vs. ITO, WARD - 1, FATEHABAD

The appeal stand allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.630/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Ms. Mandeep Kaur Ito Ward -1 बनाम/ Vs. Vpo Museh Ali Hizrawan, Khurd, To Fatehabad Rohtak - 124001 Fatehabad, Haryana – 125050 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Datpk-9813-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Mukesh Kumar Jain (Ca) – Ld. Ar (Virtual) ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10.02.2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 16.02.2026 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2016- 17 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac [Cit(A)] Dated 17-02-2025 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S 147 R.W.S. 144Of The Act On30-04-2023. 2. The Ld. Ar, At The Outset, Urged Legal Ground No.4 To Assail The Jurisdiction Of Ld. Ao. In This Ground Of Appeal, It Has Been Pleaded That The Order Passed U/S 148A(D) As Well As Issue Of Notice U/S 148

reassessment proceedings. 4. Pursuant to the said judgment, CBDT issued instruction no. 01/2022 on 11-05-2022 detailing the procedure to be followed in compliance with the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court. Considering the same, the underlying information / material as relied upon by Ld. AO on the basis of which proceedings u/s 148 were initiated

DCIT, CIRCLE-I, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA vs. FINDOC INVESTMENT PRIVATE LIMITED, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 863/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 The Dcit, Vs M/S Findoc Investment Pvt.Ltd., Circle-1, 4Th Floor, Kartar Bhawan, Ludhiana. Ferozepur Road, Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabcf8332L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Kumar & Shri Aditya Kumar, Cas Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.06.2025 Physical Hearing O R D E R

set of facts and without application of mind, and deserves to be quashed. 7.1 In support of his grounds of appeal, the appellant has submitted the following pointers before me vide written submission dated 28.09.2023: (i) Ld. AO is unclear on what has escaped assessment i.e., "Losses" or "Profits" ? (ii) Ld. AO failed to test the Wing's information

MASTER TRUST LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA

In the result, ground no. 1 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

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

loss so claimed by the assessee and the assessed income was determined at Rs. 4,33,75,115/-. 5. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who has since sustained the said disallowance and against the said findings and direction of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, FOCAL POINT

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

loss account. That the Ld. AO has wrongly ignored the decision of Hon’ble ITAT relevant for A.Y. 2012-13. Therefore now the impugned order of CIT(A)should be set aside as the said ground No. 4 of assessee was wrong and bad in law save and except this nothing else was contended by the Ld. DR on merits

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4,, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

loss account. That the Ld. AO has wrongly ignored the decision of Hon’ble ITAT relevant for A.Y. 2012-13. Therefore now the impugned order of CIT(A)should be set aside as the said ground No. 4 of assessee was wrong and bad in law save and except this nothing else was contended by the Ld. DR on merits

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

loss account. That the Ld. AO has wrongly ignored the decision of Hon’ble ITAT relevant for A.Y. 2012-13. Therefore now the impugned order of CIT(A)should be set aside as the said ground No. 4 of assessee was wrong and bad in law save and except this nothing else was contended by the Ld. DR on merits

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA, - vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LTD, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

loss account. That the Ld. AO has wrongly ignored the decision of Hon’ble ITAT relevant for A.Y. 2012-13. Therefore now the impugned order of CIT(A)should be set aside as the said ground No. 4 of assessee was wrong and bad in law save and except this nothing else was contended by the Ld. DR on merits

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

loss account. That the Ld. AO has wrongly ignored the decision of Hon’ble ITAT relevant for A.Y. 2012-13. Therefore now the impugned order of CIT(A)should be set aside as the said ground No. 4 of assessee was wrong and bad in law save and except this nothing else was contended by the Ld. DR on merits

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, , AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ROCKMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED, -

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

loss account. That the Ld. AO has wrongly ignored the decision of Hon’ble ITAT relevant for A.Y. 2012-13. Therefore now the impugned order of CIT(A)should be set aside as the said ground No. 4 of assessee was wrong and bad in law save and except this nothing else was contended by the Ld. DR on merits