AARTI SINGAL,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the above appeals are allowed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 939/Chd/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Shri Aniket Singal बनाम The DCIT Central Circle-1 Chandigarh 4, Amritashergil Marg, New Delhi- 110003 स्थायी लेखा सं./ PAN NO: CZCPS6126E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 1145/Chd/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Smt. Aarti Singal बनाम The DCIT Central Circle-1 Chandigarh 53, Jor Bagh, New Delhi-110003 स

68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and subsequently denying claim of exemption u/s 10(38). 2. That the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) further gravely erred in upholding the action of the Learned Assessing Officer in making an addition of Rs. 1,76,33,254/- on account of alleged commission expenses allegedly paid by the appellant for arranging

RAJIV GOYAL, PATIALA,PATIALA, PUNJAB vs. JAO ITO WARD-3, PATIALA, PATIALA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: the CIT(A) have not been considered properly.

section 68 were not attracted - Whether on facts, Tribunal was justified in deleting addition made by Assessing Officer - Held, yes [In favour of assessee]" c. Judgment in the case of PCIT vs. Merrygold Gems (P.) Ltd. as reported in T20241 164

ANIKET SINGAL,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and\nsubsequently denying claim of exemption u/s 10(38).\n2. That the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) further gravely\nerred in upholding the action of the Learned Assessing Officer in making an\naddition of Rs.1,76,33,254/- on account of alleged commission expenses\nallegedly paid by the appellant for arranging alleged

M/S HERITAGE EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH

164 (2) of I. T. Act. ITA Nos 1069 to 1071-chd-2019- M/s Heritage Educational Society, Chandigarh 6. The Assessing Officer also mentioned that during assessment proceedings information from DDIT-1(Investigation) had been received vide letter dated 3.10.2016 having the following details:- “4.3 It is mentioned here that during the assessment proceedings information from DDIT-1 (Investigation), Chandigarh

M/S HERITAGE EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH

164 (2) of I. T. Act. ITA Nos 1069 to 1071-chd-2019- M/s Heritage Educational Society, Chandigarh 6. The Assessing Officer also mentioned that during assessment proceedings information from DDIT-1(Investigation) had been received vide letter dated 3.10.2016 having the following details:- “4.3 It is mentioned here that during the assessment proceedings information from DDIT-1 (Investigation), Chandigarh

M/S HERITAGE EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH

164 (2) of I. T. Act. ITA Nos 1069 to 1071-chd-2019- M/s Heritage Educational Society, Chandigarh 6. The Assessing Officer also mentioned that during assessment proceedings information from DDIT-1(Investigation) had been received vide letter dated 3.10.2016 having the following details:- “4.3 It is mentioned here that during the assessment proceedings information from DDIT-1 (Investigation), Chandigarh

SHRI GURU RAM DASS EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,MOHALI vs. PR.CIT(CENTRAL) GURGAON, AT CHANDIGARH

164(2) of the Act. 5.17 As regards to the submissions of the assessee that the issue of cancellation of registration under section 12AA of the Act shall be dealt upon by the CIT(E) only and not by Pr. CIT(Central). The Ld. Pr. CIT mentioned that there were three notifications issued by the CBDT under section

CHANDIGARH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,MOHALI vs. PR.CIT(CENTRAL)-GURGAON, AT CHANDIGARH

164(2) of the Act. 5.17 As regards to the submissions of the assessee that the issue of cancellation of registration under section 12AA of the Act shall be dealt upon by the CIT(E) only and not by Pr. CIT(Central). The Ld. Pr. CIT mentioned that there were three notifications issued by the CBDT under section

CHANDIGARH EDUCATIONAL TRUST,MOHALI vs. PR.CIT-CENTRAL,GURGAON, AT CHANDIGARH

164(2) of the Act. 5.17 As regards to the submissions of the assessee that the issue of cancellation of registration under section 12AA of the Act shall be dealt upon by the CIT(E) only and not by Pr. CIT(Central). The Ld. Pr. CIT mentioned that there were three notifications issued by the CBDT under section

SH. BALJIT SINGH,LUDHIANA vs. PR. CIT, LUDHIANA -1, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

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

68 with regard to unsecured loans and payment of interest thereon as a consequence thereof expenditure of Rs. 1,32,97,887/- has remained unexplained. The other issue dealt by him in para 4 & 5(supra) of the impugned order stands dealt with in fresh assessment order dt. 27/03/2023-i.e; the consequential order passed in pursuance to order under section

SATYAPAL SINGH CHAUHAN HUF,AMBALA CANTT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4 AMBALA, INCOME TAX OFFICE, AMBALA

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

68, read with section 263, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 -\nCash Credit (Share capital) Assessment year 2018-19\nAssessee-company received share capital of certain amount\nAssessing Officer passed assessment order accepting share\ncapital received by assessee - Principal Commissioner invoked\nrevisionary jurisdiction under section 263 on ground that\nAssessing Officer had not made any enquiry in respect

ACIT, C-7, LUDHIANA vs. M/S CEIGALL INDIA LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: The Appeal Is Finally Heard Or Disposed Off.

68,20,164/- for certain overdrafts limits and for depreciation, the complete particulars have been given in the audited balance sheet and for which, the Ld. Assessing Officer had not raised any doubt. The total depreciation claimed has been to the tune of Rs. 1,48,84,802/- and the fact that the depreciation is to be allowed, even

SJVN LIMITED,SHIMLA HIMACHAL PRADESH vs. ACIT , SHIMLA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

164/- was allowed by the AO/CPC. 4. Thereafter, the case of the assessee was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS by issuance of notice under section 143(2) dt. 29/06/2021. Thereafter notice under section 142(1) was issued and after calling for the information, explanation from the assessee, the assessment proceedings were completed by the AO passing

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)

section 2 of section 56, clause(iv) in section 57 and clause (b) in Section 145A w.e.f. 01.04.2010. From the assessment year 2010-11 onwards, the amount of compensation or enhanced compensation is taxable as "income from other sources" after allowing deduction of a sum equal to 50% of such income in the year of receipt

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)

section 2 of section 56, clause(iv) in section 57 and clause (b) in Section 145A w.e.f. 01.04.2010. From the assessment year 2010-11 onwards, the amount of compensation or enhanced compensation is taxable as "income from other sources" after allowing deduction of a sum equal to 50% of such income in the year of receipt

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)

section 2 of section 56, clause(iv) in section 57 and clause (b) in Section 145A w.e.f. 01.04.2010. From the assessment year 2010-11 onwards, the amount of compensation or enhanced compensation is taxable as "income from other sources" after allowing deduction of a sum equal to 50% of such income in the year of receipt

DHUNI CHAND 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)

section 2 of section 56, clause(iv) in section 57 and clause (b) in Section 145A w.e.f. 01.04.2010. From the assessment year 2010-11 onwards, the amount of compensation or enhanced compensation is taxable as "income from other sources" after allowing deduction of a sum equal to 50% of such income in the year of receipt

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)

section 2 of section 56, clause(iv) in section 57 and clause (b) in Section 145A w.e.f. 01.04.2010. From the assessment year 2010-11 onwards, the amount of compensation or enhanced compensation is taxable as "income from other sources" after allowing deduction of a sum equal to 50% of such income in the year of receipt

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)

section 2 of section 56, clause(iv) in section 57 and clause (b) in Section 145A w.e.f. 01.04.2010. From the assessment year 2010-11 onwards, the amount of compensation or enhanced compensation is taxable as "income from other sources" after allowing deduction of a sum equal to 50% of such income in the year of receipt