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

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

161 taxmann.com 301 (Delhi has held as under; 17. We have heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the record. 18. The solitary question which arises for our consideration in the present appeal is whether the interest on enhanced compensation received by the respondent-assessee partakes the character of income from other sources under Section

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

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

161 taxmann.com 301 (Delhi has held as under; 17. We have heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the record. 18. The solitary question which arises for our consideration in the present appeal is whether the interest on enhanced compensation received by the respondent-assessee partakes the character of income from other sources under Section

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

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

161 taxmann.com 301 (Delhi has held as under; 17. We have heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the record. 18. The solitary question which arises for our consideration in the present appeal is whether the interest on enhanced compensation received by the respondent-assessee partakes the character of income from other sources under Section

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

161 taxmann.com 301 (Delhi has held as under; 17. We have heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the record. 18. The solitary question which arises for our consideration in the present appeal is whether the interest on enhanced compensation received by the respondent-assessee partakes the character of income from other sources under Section

BALBIR KUMAR HUF,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO , CHANDIGARH

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

161 taxmann.com 301 (Delhi has held as under; 17. We have heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the record. 18. The solitary question which arises for our consideration in the present appeal is whether the interest on enhanced compensation received by the respondent-assessee partakes the character of income from other sources under Section

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

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

161 taxmann.com 301 (Delhi has held as under; 17. We have heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the record. 18. The solitary question which arises for our consideration in the present appeal is whether the interest on enhanced compensation received by the respondent-assessee partakes the character of income from other sources under Section

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

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

161 taxmann.com 301 (Delhi has held as under; 17. We have heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the record. 18. The solitary question which arises for our consideration in the present appeal is whether the interest on enhanced compensation received by the respondent-assessee partakes the character of income from other sources under Section

INCOME TAX OFFICER, FATEHABAD vs. MAHESH NAGPAL, FATEHABAD

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

161 taxmann.com 301 (Delhi has held as under; 17. We have heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the record. 18. The solitary question which arises for our consideration in the present appeal is whether the interest on enhanced compensation received by the respondent-assessee partakes the character of income from other sources under Section

RANJIT SINGH,PANCHKULA vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR, CPC DEPARTMENT

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

161 taxmann.com 301 (Delhi has held as under; 17. We have heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the record. 18. The solitary question which arises for our consideration in the present appeal is whether the interest on enhanced compensation received by the respondent-assessee partakes the character of income from other sources under Section

LABH SINGH,PANCHKULA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO 2,, PANCHKULA

68, Shiv Shakti Colony, Pinjore-134102\nबनाम\nThe ITO\nWard-2, Panchkula\nस्थायी लेखा सं./ PAN NO: EAAPS5523L\nअपीलार्थी/Appellant\nप्रत्यर्थी/Respondent\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :\nSmt. Neelam Dhiman, C.A (Virtual)\nराजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by :\nShri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR\nआयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 668/Chd/2022\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19\nShri Suresh Pal,\nVill

DCIT, C-4, LUDHIANA vs. AARTI INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, LUDHIANA

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1619/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09 The Dcit, Circle-4, बनाम M/S Aarti Steels Ltd., Ludhiana G.T. Raod, Miller Ganj, Ludhiana. "थायीलेखासं./Pan No:Aabca4455D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

68,12,403/-. After claiming pre-paid taxes @ Rs.9,92,59,948/- which included TDS and advance taxes, refund of Rs.24,47,550/- was claimed by the assessee. The assessment in this case was completed by the Assessing officer making various additions to the income of the assessee which was deleted in appeals upto the ITAT, thus, restoring the assessed

DCIT, C-4, LUDHIANA vs. AARTI INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, LUDHIANA

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1619/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09 The Dcit, Circle-4, बनाम M/S Aarti Steels Ltd., Ludhiana G.T. Raod, Miller Ganj, Ludhiana. "थायीलेखासं./Pan No:Aabca4455D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

68,12,403/-. After claiming pre-paid taxes @ Rs.9,92,59,948/- which included TDS and advance taxes, refund of Rs.24,47,550/- was claimed by the assessee. The assessment in this case was completed by the Assessing officer making various additions to the income of the assessee which was deleted in appeals upto the ITAT, thus, restoring the assessed

DCIT, C-4, LUDHIANA vs. M/S AARTI STEELS LIMITED, LUDHIANA

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1619/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09 The Dcit, Circle-4, बनाम M/S Aarti Steels Ltd., Ludhiana G.T. Raod, Miller Ganj, Ludhiana. "थायीलेखासं./Pan No:Aabca4455D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

68,12,403/-. After claiming pre-paid taxes @ Rs.9,92,59,948/- which included TDS and advance taxes, refund of Rs.24,47,550/- was claimed by the assessee. The assessment in this case was completed by the Assessing officer making various additions to the income of the assessee which was deleted in appeals upto the ITAT, thus, restoring the assessed

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

section 153C in the case of the assessee after duly\nrecording satisfaction that the seized documents belonged to the assessee and represented its\nundisclosed 11 income. In the absence of such compliance, the assessment so framed is without\njurisdiction and liable to be quashed.\n6. The Assessing Officer has relied upon various documents and digital data seized during\nthe

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

section 153C in the case of the assessee after duly\nrecording satisfaction that the seized documents belonged to the assessee and represented its\nundisclosed 11 income. In the absence of such compliance, the assessment so framed is without\njurisdiction and liable to be quashed.\n6. The Assessing Officer has relied upon various documents and digital data seized during\nthe

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

section 153C in the case of the assessee after duly\nrecording satisfaction that the seized documents belonged to the assessee and represented its\nundisclosed 11 income. In the absence of such compliance, the assessment so framed is without\njurisdiction and liable to be quashed.\n6. The Assessing Officer has relied upon various documents and digital data seized during\nthe

GURMEET SINGH,PANCHKULA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PANCHKULA

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Tribunal.

68. The assessee has argued that the decisions of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court and the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court, which have upheld the post-amendment taxability of interest on enhanced compensation under Section 56(2)(viii), are per incuriam as they did not expressly consider the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s rulings in Hari Singh

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

section 153C in the case of the assessee after duly\nrecording satisfaction that the seized documents belonged to the assessee and represented its\nundisclosed 11 income. In the absence of such compliance, the assessment so framed is without\njurisdiction and liable to be quashed.\n6. The Assessing Officer has relied upon various documents and digital data seized during\nthe

ACIT, LUDHIANA vs. M/S AVON CYCLES LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is

Bench: Ms.Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptathe A.C.I.T., Vs. M/S Avon Cycles Ltd., Circle-5, G.T. Road, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. Pan: Aabca4140R & C.O.No.6/Chd/2016 In M/S Avon Cycles Ltd., Vs. The A.C.I.T., G.T. Road, Circle-5, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. Pan: Aabca4140R (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 36(1)(iii) of the Act amounting to Rs.14,42,161/- was made. The same was deleted by the Ld.CIT (Appeals) following the order of the I.T.A.T. in the case of the assessee in preceding years i.e. assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12 which the Ld.CIT (Appeals) observed were decided on identical facts. 5. Before