M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

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

68) was filed by the Market Committee, Dabwali, before the AO, stating that as per their ITA 146,147 & 148/CHD/2021 A.Y. 2011-12, 2015-16 & 2016-17 13 office record available, there was no firm registered as M/s Gaja Nand Pardeep Kumar, Shop No.209, New Grain Market, Dabwali during the year 2010-11. On 11.12.2018, a reply

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

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

68) was filed by the Market Committee, Dabwali, before the AO, stating that as per their ITA 146,147 & 148/CHD/2021 A.Y. 2011-12, 2015-16 & 2016-17 13 office record available, there was no firm registered as M/s Gaja Nand Pardeep Kumar, Shop No.209, New Grain Market, Dabwali during the year 2010-11. On 11.12.2018, a reply

ACIT, LUDHIANA vs. VARDHMAN TEXTILES LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result appeals of the Assessee and the Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2002-03

68,698/- Duty b) Export 1,01,28,889/- 6,87,98,501/- 24,02,439/- Turnover of Trading goods 6. (i) That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on the facts while not increasing profits of business eligible for deduction u/s 80HHC by 10% of interest received. (ii) That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred

ACIT, LUDHIANA vs. M/S VARDHMAN TEXTILES LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result appeals of the Assessee and the Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2002-03

68,698/- Duty b) Export 1,01,28,889/- 6,87,98,501/- 24,02,439/- Turnover of Trading goods 6. (i) That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on the facts while not increasing profits of business eligible for deduction u/s 80HHC by 10% of interest received. (ii) That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred

ACIT,, LUDHIANA vs. M/S VARDHMAN TEXTILES LTD.,, LUDHIANA

In the result appeals of the Assessee and the Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2002-03

68,698/- Duty b) Export 1,01,28,889/- 6,87,98,501/- 24,02,439/- Turnover of Trading goods 6. (i) That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on the facts while not increasing profits of business eligible for deduction u/s 80HHC by 10% of interest received. (ii) That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred

ACIT,, LUDHIANA vs. M/S VARDHMAN TEXTILES LTD.,, LUDHIANA

In the result appeals of the Assessee and the Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2002-03

68,698/- Duty b) Export 1,01,28,889/- 6,87,98,501/- 24,02,439/- Turnover of Trading goods 6. (i) That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on the facts while not increasing profits of business eligible for deduction u/s 80HHC by 10% of interest received. (ii) That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred

VARDHMAN TEXTILE LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, LUDHIANA

In the result appeals of the Assessee and the Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2002-03

68,698/- Duty b) Export 1,01,28,889/- 6,87,98,501/- 24,02,439/- Turnover of Trading goods 6. (i) That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on the facts while not increasing profits of business eligible for deduction u/s 80HHC by 10% of interest received. (ii) That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred

M/S VARDHMAN TEXTILES LTD.,,LUDHIANA vs. ADDL. CIT,, LUDHIANA

In the result appeals of the Assessee and the Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2002-03

68,698/- Duty b) Export 1,01,28,889/- 6,87,98,501/- 24,02,439/- Turnover of Trading goods 6. (i) That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on the facts while not increasing profits of business eligible for deduction u/s 80HHC by 10% of interest received. (ii) That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred

VARDHMAN TEXTILES LTD.,,LUDHIANA vs. JCIT,, LUDHIANA

In the result appeals of the Assessee and the Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2002-03

68,698/- Duty b) Export 1,01,28,889/- 6,87,98,501/- 24,02,439/- Turnover of Trading goods 6. (i) That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on the facts while not increasing profits of business eligible for deduction u/s 80HHC by 10% of interest received. (ii) That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred

M/S VARDHMAN TEXTILES LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, LUDHIANA

In the result appeals of the Assessee and the Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2002-03

68,698/- Duty b) Export 1,01,28,889/- 6,87,98,501/- 24,02,439/- Turnover of Trading goods 6. (i) That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on the facts while not increasing profits of business eligible for deduction u/s 80HHC by 10% of interest received. (ii) That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred

ITO, W-1(3), CHANDIGARH vs. SMT. RENU ANAND, CHANDIGARH

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

section 143(2) was issued on 02/09/2014 by the Dy. CIT Circle1(1) Chandigarh 2 and served upon the assessee on 08/09/2014. Thereafter the case record was transferred to ITO Ward1(3) which was received on 26/05/2015. That further proceedings were taken up by issuing notice u/s 142(1) alongwith questionnaire on 11/06/2015 followed by on 30/07/2015. That

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS, SHIMLA

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

3 for the A.Y. 2005-06 relates to addition of Rs. 7,43,502/- as unexplained expenditure. A.Y. 2006-07 relates to addition of Rs. 10,56,406/- as unexplained expenditure. A.Y. 2007-08 relates to addition of Rs. 19,68,805/- as unexplained expenditure. A.Y. 2008-09 relates to addition of Rs. 5,28,126/- as unexplained expenditure

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

3 for the A.Y. 2005-06 relates to addition of Rs. 7,43,502/- as unexplained expenditure. A.Y. 2006-07 relates to addition of Rs. 10,56,406/- as unexplained expenditure. A.Y. 2007-08 relates to addition of Rs. 19,68,805/- as unexplained expenditure. A.Y. 2008-09 relates to addition of Rs. 5,28,126/- as unexplained expenditure

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

3 for the A.Y. 2005-06 relates to addition of Rs. 7,43,502/- as unexplained expenditure. A.Y. 2006-07 relates to addition of Rs. 10,56,406/- as unexplained expenditure. A.Y. 2007-08 relates to addition of Rs. 19,68,805/- as unexplained expenditure. A.Y. 2008-09 relates to addition of Rs. 5,28,126/- as unexplained expenditure

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

3 for the A.Y. 2005-06 relates to addition of Rs. 7,43,502/- as unexplained expenditure. A.Y. 2006-07 relates to addition of Rs. 10,56,406/- as unexplained expenditure. A.Y. 2007-08 relates to addition of Rs. 19,68,805/- as unexplained expenditure. A.Y. 2008-09 relates to addition of Rs. 5,28,126/- as unexplained expenditure

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

3 for the A.Y. 2005-06 relates to addition of Rs. 7,43,502/- as unexplained expenditure. A.Y. 2006-07 relates to addition of Rs. 10,56,406/- as unexplained expenditure. A.Y. 2007-08 relates to addition of Rs. 19,68,805/- as unexplained expenditure. A.Y. 2008-09 relates to addition of Rs. 5,28,126/- as unexplained expenditure

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

3 for the A.Y. 2005-06 relates to addition of Rs. 7,43,502/- as unexplained expenditure. A.Y. 2006-07 relates to addition of Rs. 10,56,406/- as unexplained expenditure. A.Y. 2007-08 relates to addition of Rs. 19,68,805/- as unexplained expenditure. A.Y. 2008-09 relates to addition of Rs. 5,28,126/- as unexplained expenditure

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

3 for the A.Y. 2005-06 relates to addition of Rs. 7,43,502/- as unexplained expenditure. A.Y. 2006-07 relates to addition of Rs. 10,56,406/- as unexplained expenditure. A.Y. 2007-08 relates to addition of Rs. 19,68,805/- as unexplained expenditure. A.Y. 2008-09 relates to addition of Rs. 5,28,126/- as unexplained expenditure