SMT. SHANKRI DEVI,PANCHKULA vs. ACIT, PANCKULA CIRCLE, PANCHKULA

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

68, Shiv Shakti Colony, Pinjore-134102 "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: EAAPS5523L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Smt. Neelam Dhiman, C.A (Virtual) राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 668/Chd/ 2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shri Suresh Pal, बनाम The ITO, Vill

BALBIR KUMAR HUF,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO , CHANDIGARH

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

68, Shiv Shakti Colony, Pinjore-134102 "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: EAAPS5523L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Smt. Neelam Dhiman, C.A (Virtual) राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 668/Chd/ 2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shri Suresh Pal, बनाम The ITO, Vill

INCOME TAX OFFICER, FATEHABAD vs. MAHESH NAGPAL, FATEHABAD

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

68, Shiv Shakti Colony, Pinjore-134102 "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: EAAPS5523L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Smt. Neelam Dhiman, C.A (Virtual) राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 668/Chd/ 2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shri Suresh Pal, बनाम The ITO, Vill

PAWAN KUMAR,FATEHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, FATEHABAD

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

68, Shiv Shakti Colony, Pinjore-134102 "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: EAAPS5523L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Smt. Neelam Dhiman, C.A (Virtual) राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 668/Chd/ 2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shri Suresh Pal, बनाम The ITO, Vill

SAROJ CHAUDHARY BALA,PANCHKULA vs. ITO, WARD-4, PANCHKULA

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

68, Shiv Shakti Colony, Pinjore-134102 "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: EAAPS5523L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Smt. Neelam Dhiman, C.A (Virtual) राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 668/Chd/ 2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shri Suresh Pal, बनाम The ITO, Vill

SH. AMARDEEP SINGH ATHWAL,YAMUNANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-1, YAMUNANAGAR

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

68, Shiv Shakti Colony, Pinjore-134102 "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: EAAPS5523L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Smt. Neelam Dhiman, C.A (Virtual) राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 668/Chd/ 2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shri Suresh Pal, बनाम The ITO, Vill

ARJESH KUMAR,PATIALA vs. ITO NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE , DELHI

68, Shiv Shakti Colony, Pinjore-134102 "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: EAAPS5523L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Smt. Neelam Dhiman, C.A (Virtual) राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 668/Chd/ 2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shri Suresh Pal, बनाम The ITO, Vill

SBS BIOTECH UNIT II,SIRMOUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

68,78,900/-, Notice u/s 143(2) of the I.T. Act dated 30/06/2021. 2. The assessee has shown Profit from Manufacturing 3. The assessee submitted reply on e-filing portal in response to notices under section 142

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)

142(1) alongwith show cause were issued during the course of assessment proceedings and thereafter considering the submissions of the assessee but not finding the same acceptable, the assessment proceedings were completed under section 143(3) dt. 27/09/2021 wherein the AO brought to tax the excess stock surrendered during the course of survey under section 69, unexplained capital

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SMT. MANJIT KAUR, CHANDIGARH

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

142 or section 148 and the Assessing Officer or the Commissioner (Appeals) is satisfied that in respect of such assessment year such person has taxable income, then, such person shall, for the purposes of clause (c) of this sub-section, be deemed to have concealed the particulars of his income in respect of such assessment year, notwithstanding that

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. PARAMJIT SINGH, MOHALI

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

142 or section 148 and the Assessing Officer or the Commissioner (Appeals) is satisfied that in respect of such assessment year such person has taxable income, then, such person shall, for the purposes of clause (c) of this sub-section, be deemed to have concealed the particulars of his income in respect of such assessment year, notwithstanding that

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SMT. JASWANT KAUR, MOHALI

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

142 or section 148 and the Assessing Officer or the Commissioner (Appeals) is satisfied that in respect of such assessment year such person has taxable income, then, such person shall, for the purposes of clause (c) of this sub-section, be deemed to have concealed the particulars of his income in respect of such assessment year, notwithstanding that

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. KULWANT SINGH, MOHALI

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

142 or section 148 and the Assessing Officer or the Commissioner (Appeals) is satisfied that in respect of such assessment year such person has taxable income, then, such person shall, for the purposes of clause (c) of this sub-section, be deemed to have concealed the particulars of his income in respect of such assessment year, notwithstanding that

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. PARAMJIT SINGH, MOHALI

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

142 or section 148 and the Assessing Officer or the Commissioner (Appeals) is satisfied that in respect of such assessment year such person has taxable income, then, such person shall, for the purposes of clause (c) of this sub-section, be deemed to have concealed the particulars of his income in respect of such assessment year, notwithstanding that

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SMT. JASWANT KAUR, MOHALI

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

142 or section 148 and the Assessing Officer or the Commissioner (Appeals) is satisfied that in respect of such assessment year such person has taxable income, then, such person shall, for the purposes of clause (c) of this sub-section, be deemed to have concealed the particulars of his income in respect of such assessment year, notwithstanding that

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. KULWANT SINGH, MOHALI

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

142 or section 148 and the Assessing Officer or the Commissioner (Appeals) is satisfied that in respect of such assessment year such person has taxable income, then, such person shall, for the purposes of clause (c) of this sub-section, be deemed to have concealed the particulars of his income in respect of such assessment year, notwithstanding that

JAMNA DASS NIKKAMAL JAIN SARAF PRIVATE LIMITED, LUDHIANA,LUDHIANA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

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

142(1) and again in show cause notice. But it has completely failed to provide any justification regarding the same. Assessee has stated that it is unable to reconcile opening balances. Moreover, in each table, two opening balances are written which are again not reconciling with each other. Further, assessee has stated that these pages are not in continuation

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA vs. M/S JAMNA DASS NIKKAMAL JAIN SARAF PVT. LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

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

142(1) and again in show cause notice. But it has completely failed to provide any justification regarding the same. Assessee has stated that it is unable to reconcile opening balances. Moreover, in each table, two opening balances are written which are again not reconciling with each other. Further, assessee has stated that these pages are not in continuation