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)

150 104 Acquisition 3962 1,65,14,270 105 officer 3959 66,84,980 106 85 HSIIDC 35,060 107 Total 4,90,93,460 That appellant also referred to amendments made in S. 56(2), 57 and 145A vide Finance (No.2) Act 2009 together with memorandum explaining Finance Bill 2009 as reported in ITR 183(St) page

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)

150 104 Acquisition 3962 1,65,14,270 105 officer 3959 66,84,980 106 85 HSIIDC 35,060 107 Total 4,90,93,460 That appellant also referred to amendments made in S. 56(2), 57 and 145A vide Finance (No.2) Act 2009 together with memorandum explaining Finance Bill 2009 as reported in ITR 183(St) page

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)

150 104 Acquisition 3962 1,65,14,270 105 officer 3959 66,84,980 106 85 HSIIDC 35,060 107 Total 4,90,93,460 That appellant also referred to amendments made in S. 56(2), 57 and 145A vide Finance (No.2) Act 2009 together with memorandum explaining Finance Bill 2009 as reported in ITR 183(St) page

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)

150 104 Acquisition 3962 1,65,14,270 105 officer 3959 66,84,980 106 85 HSIIDC 35,060 107 Total 4,90,93,460 That appellant also referred to amendments made in S. 56(2), 57 and 145A vide Finance (No.2) Act 2009 together with memorandum explaining Finance Bill 2009 as reported in ITR 183(St) page

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)

150 104 Acquisition 3962 1,65,14,270 105 officer 3959 66,84,980 106 85 HSIIDC 35,060 107 Total 4,90,93,460 That appellant also referred to amendments made in S. 56(2), 57 and 145A vide Finance (No.2) Act 2009 together with memorandum explaining Finance Bill 2009 as reported in ITR 183(St) page

SMT. URMILA GARG,SANGRUR vs. ITO, WARD, SANGRUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee’s are allowed

68,676/- 19.10.2015 Land 2. 245 Commercial 23.01.2015 1,54,53,202/- 15,45,320/- 1,39,07,882/- 10.07.2015 Land 5.2 The assessee appended note to the aforesaid details of the compensation received as under: Note: As per certificate from the O/o the Collector Land Acquisition-cum-S.D.M. Sangrur, the above said Agriculture and Commercial Land had been

SHRI SATISH KUMAR,SANGRUR vs. ITO, WARD, SANGRUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee’s are allowed

68,676/- 19.10.2015 Land 2. 245 Commercial 23.01.2015 1,54,53,202/- 15,45,320/- 1,39,07,882/- 10.07.2015 Land 5.2 The assessee appended note to the aforesaid details of the compensation received as under: Note: As per certificate from the O/o the Collector Land Acquisition-cum-S.D.M. Sangrur, the above said Agriculture and Commercial Land had been

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

M/S ASHA TECHNOLOGIES,SIRMOUR vs. ADDL. CIT, SOLAN

In the result, both the above appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed as aforesaid in respect of impugned orders dt

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

150 Pcs 5.00 Run Fix 325 Pcs 5.00 Supporting Iron 36. Ashima 036 L- 1330Pcs Powder 1.00 Industries dtd. 16.09.2006 Clamp(Small) 1515Pcs Coating 2.00 L-Clamp(Big) 37. A.V. 037 M.S. Ladders, 3958Kgs Galvanizing 3000 per qtl. Forging, dtd.22.09.2006 Clamps, along with 230, Phase Pendulum material IX. Industrial Area, Mohali 38. Ashima 038 Angle Support 1735Pcs Powder 5.00 Industries

M/S ASHA TECHNOLOGIES,KALA AMB vs. ITO, SIRMOUR

In the result, both the above appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed as aforesaid in respect of impugned orders dt

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

150 Pcs 5.00 Run Fix 325 Pcs 5.00 Supporting Iron 36. Ashima 036 L- 1330Pcs Powder 1.00 Industries dtd. 16.09.2006 Clamp(Small) 1515Pcs Coating 2.00 L-Clamp(Big) 37. A.V. 037 M.S. Ladders, 3958Kgs Galvanizing 3000 per qtl. Forging, dtd.22.09.2006 Clamps, along with 230, Phase Pendulum material IX. Industrial Area, Mohali 38. Ashima 038 Angle Support 1735Pcs Powder 5.00 Industries

AMRIK SINGH,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO, CHANDIGARH

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year : 2010-11

section 56(2)(viii)of the Act , Assessing officer assessed 50% of the interest received and made addition of Rs. 32,88,074/- (Rs. 34,56,224 - Rs. 1,68,250) as the assessee had shown interest of Rs. 1,68,150

DARBARA SINGH,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO, CHANDIGARH

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year : 2010-11

section 56(2)(viii)of the Act , Assessing officer assessed 50% of the interest received and made addition of Rs. 32,88,074/- (Rs. 34,56,224 - Rs. 1,68,250) as the assessee had shown interest of Rs. 1,68,150

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

In the result, the ground no

Bench: SHRI. SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

68 arbitrarily. These are actual long term capital gains earned by the assessee. h) All the documents in the shape of share certificates issued by Maple Goods Pvt. Ltd. which are part of annexure A containing 1 to 182 pages have been doubted under the words Character of Certificates, inspite of the fact that the AO has not doubted

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)

68 arbitrarily. These are actual long term capital gains earned by the assessee. h) All the documents in the shape of share certificates issued by Maple Goods Pvt. Ltd. which are part of annexure A containing 1 to 182 pages have been doubted under the words Character of Certificates, inspite of the fact that the AO has not doubted

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)

68 arbitrarily. These are actual long term capital gains earned by the assessee. h) All the documents in the shape of share certificates issued by Maple Goods Pvt. Ltd. which are part of annexure A containing 1 to 182 pages have been doubted under the words Character of Certificates, inspite of the fact that the AO has not doubted

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)

68 arbitrarily. These are actual long term capital gains earned by the assessee. h) All the documents in the shape of share certificates issued by Maple Goods Pvt. Ltd. which are part of annexure A containing 1 to 182 pages have been doubted under the words Character of Certificates, inspite of the fact that the AO has not doubted

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)

68 arbitrarily. These are actual long term capital gains earned by the assessee. h) All the documents in the shape of share certificates issued by Maple Goods Pvt. Ltd. which are part of annexure A containing 1 to 182 pages have been doubted under the words Character of Certificates, inspite of the fact that the AO has not doubted

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

Section 132 of the Act in Scott Edil Group of cases\non 15.11.2017. Since the facts involved in all these captioned appeals\nare identical and there are common issues, hence the same were heard\ntogether and the same are being disposed of by this common order.\n2. The grounds/issues raised in all the appeals are summarized as\nunder :\nITA