M/S JAIN AMAR CLOTHING PVT. LTD.,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)

68 of the Act. As against the returned income of Rs. 8,85,15,010/-, the assessed income was determined at Rs. 37,11,61,260/- by bringing to tax the whole of the share premium amounting to Rs. 28,26,46,250/-. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before

SMT. AARTI SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

D 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 22.07.10 P RAN ETA NEW 100000 46.25 46.25,000.00 -50,000.00 45,75,000.00 22.07.10 COMM 1,94,607.50 47,69.607.50 COMM ON 40.97 @ 4.75 % 22.07.10 CASH RCD 50,00.000.00 -2,30.3 92.50 22.07.10 ANGAD1A CHRG 12,500.00 -2,17,892.50 26.07.10 CASH

SMT. AARTI SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

D 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 22.07.10 P RAN ETA NEW 100000 46.25 46.25,000.00 -50,000.00 45,75,000.00 22.07.10 COMM 1,94,607.50 47,69.607.50 COMM ON 40.97 @ 4.75 % 22.07.10 CASH RCD 50,00.000.00 -2,30.3 92.50 22.07.10 ANGAD1A CHRG 12,500.00 -2,17,892.50 26.07.10 CASH

SMT. AARTI SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

D 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 22.07.10 P RAN ETA NEW 100000 46.25 46.25,000.00 -50,000.00 45,75,000.00 22.07.10 COMM 1,94,607.50 47,69.607.50 COMM ON 40.97 @ 4.75 % 22.07.10 CASH RCD 50,00.000.00 -2,30.3 92.50 22.07.10 ANGAD1A CHRG 12,500.00 -2,17,892.50 26.07.10 CASH

SH. SANJAY SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

D 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 22.07.10 P RAN ETA NEW 100000 46.25 46.25,000.00 -50,000.00 45,75,000.00 22.07.10 COMM 1,94,607.50 47,69.607.50 COMM ON 40.97 @ 4.75 % 22.07.10 CASH RCD 50,00.000.00 -2,30.3 92.50 22.07.10 ANGAD1A CHRG 12,500.00 -2,17,892.50 26.07.10 CASH

SH. SANJAY SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

D 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 22.07.10 P RAN ETA NEW 100000 46.25 46.25,000.00 -50,000.00 45,75,000.00 22.07.10 COMM 1,94,607.50 47,69.607.50 COMM ON 40.97 @ 4.75 % 22.07.10 CASH RCD 50,00.000.00 -2,30.3 92.50 22.07.10 ANGAD1A CHRG 12,500.00 -2,17,892.50 26.07.10 CASH

SH. SANJAY SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

D 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 22.07.10 P RAN ETA NEW 100000 46.25 46.25,000.00 -50,000.00 45,75,000.00 22.07.10 COMM 1,94,607.50 47,69.607.50 COMM ON 40.97 @ 4.75 % 22.07.10 CASH RCD 50,00.000.00 -2,30.3 92.50 22.07.10 ANGAD1A CHRG 12,500.00 -2,17,892.50 26.07.10 CASH

RAJIV KUMAR GOYAL,DHURI vs. DCIT, CC-2, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: This Hon’Ble Tribunal Under Section 253 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 As Amended From Time To Time. 2. The Assessee Is Aggrieved By Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dated 03/02/2023 In Appeal No. 10850/2018-19/It/Cit(A)-5/Ldh/2021-22 For A.Y. 2019-20 Under Section 250(6) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Which Was Dismissed. Therefore The Present Second Appeal Under Section 253 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Before Us Against The Aforesaid Order Dt. 03/02/2023 Which Is Hereiafter Referred To As The Impugned Order. Factual Matrix 3. The Assessee Had For The Relevant Year I.E; A.Y. 2019-20 Was Also Engaged In The Same Business I.E; Manufacturing Of Pvc Pipes & Had Filed

D) Pr. CIT vs. Khushi Ram and Sons Foods Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.126 of 2015, of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court where it was held that the onus to establish the source of surrendered income lay entirely on the assessee. 5.9 In view of the above, the amount surrendered by the assessee

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, LUDHIANA vs. AB ALCOBEV PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, Cross\nObjections of the assessee for

D\" Bench in the\ncase of Dr. Mansukh Kanjibhai Shahi Vs ACIT, in which, it has been held as under:-\n(Refer page no. 19-31 of case law index book)\nv) \"Section 153 A, read with section 132, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search\nand seizure - Assessment in case of - Assessment years

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA vs. AB ALCOBEV PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, Cross\nObjections of the assessee for

D" Bench in the\ncase of Dr. Mansukh Kanjibhai Shahi Vs ACIT, in which, it has been held as under:-\n(Refer page no. 19-31 of case law index book)\nvi)\n\"Section 153 A, read with section 132, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search\nand seizure - Assessment in case of - Assessment years

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, LUDHIANA vs. AB ALCOBEV PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, Cross\nObjections of the assessee for

D" Bench in the\ncase of Dr. Mansukh Kanjibhai Shahi Vs ACIT, in which, it has been held as under:-\n(Refer page no. 19-31 of case law index book)\nv)\n\"Section 153 A, read with section 132, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search\nand seizure - Assessment in case of - Assessment years

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA vs. AB ALCOBEV PRIVATE LIMITED , DELHI

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, Cross\nObjections of the assessee for

131 of the\nIncome-tax Act, 1961, or a notice under sub-section (4) of Section\n22 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 or under sub-section (1) of\nSection 142 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is issued to Ajay Kumar\nBindal, Smt. Geeta Bindal AB Alcobev Pvt. Ltd., Homeland\nBuildwell Pvt. Ltd. (name

DCIT, C-V, LUDHIANA vs. M/S HERO CYCLES LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 588/Chd/2018 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2012-13 The DCIT C-V, Ludhiana बनाम M/s Hero Cycles Ltd. Hero Nagar, G.T. Road Ludhiana स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAACH4073P अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 473/Chd/2018 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2012-13 M/s Hero Cycles Ltd. Hero Nagar, G.T. Road Ludhiana बनाम The ACIT C-V, Ludhiana स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAACH4073P

68,771/-) is disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee as being the expenditure not wholly and exclusively for the purposes of business and is added back to the total income of the assessee." 13. Being aggrieved the assessee carried the matter to the Ld. CIT(A) and furnished the written submissions dt. 14.12.2017 which

M/S HERO CYCLES LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, C-V, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed and the\nappeal of the assessee is allowed

68,771/-) is disallowed and added back to the\ntotal income of the assessee as being the expenditure not wholly and\nexclusively for the purposes of business and is added back to the total\nincome of the assessee.\"\n13. Being aggrieved the assessee carried the matter to the Ld. CIT(A)\nand furnished the written submissions dt. 14.12.2017 which

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1,, LUDHIANA vs. M/S OSWAL APPARELS PVT. LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Krinwant Sahay

section 131 at the instance of the assessee, did not pursue the matter further. The revenue did not examine the source of income of the said alleged creditors to find out whether they were credit-worthy or were such who could advance the alleged loans. There was no effort made to pursue the so-called alleged creditors. In those

ACIT -CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, LUDHIANA vs. M/S OSWAL TRENDS PVT. LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Krinwant Sahay

section 131 at the instance of the assessee, did not pursue the matter further. The revenue did not examine the source of income of the said alleged creditors to find out whether they were credit-worthy or were such who could advance the alleged loans. There was no effort made to pursue the so-called alleged creditors. In those

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1,, LUDHIANA vs. M/S OSWAL APPARELS PVT. LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Krinwant Sahay

section 131 at the instance of the assessee, did not pursue the matter further. The revenue did not examine the source of income of the said alleged creditors to find out whether they were credit-worthy or were such who could advance the alleged loans. There was no effort made to pursue the so-called alleged creditors. In those

ACIT -CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, LUDHIANA vs. M/S OSWAL TRENDS PVT. LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Krinwant Sahay

section 131 at the instance of the assessee, did not pursue the matter further. The revenue did not examine the source of income of the said alleged creditors to find out whether they were credit-worthy or were such who could advance the alleged loans. There was no effort made to pursue the so-called alleged creditors. In those

M/S OSWAL TREND (P) LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, C. C.-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Krinwant Sahay

section 131 at the instance of the assessee, did not pursue the matter further. The revenue did not examine the source of income of the said alleged creditors to find out whether they were credit-worthy or were such who could advance the alleged loans. There was no effort made to pursue the so-called alleged creditors. In those