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/- as originally declared and thereafter notice under section 143(2) and 142(1) alongwith detailed questionnaire were issued and after taking into consideration the submissions so filed by the assessee and after carrying out necessary examination/verification, the assessment proceedings were completed under section 147 r.w.s 144B vide order dt. 30/03/2022 without drawing any adverse inference

DSM SINOCHEM PHARMACEUTICALS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NAWANSHAHR vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 253/ चंडीगढ़/2016(िन.व. 2011-12)

68 2.56% 1.74 million Crores LC/Guarantee EUR 30 204 3.50% 7.14 million Crores Total 8.88 Your honour would appreciate from the above that the services availed by DSM India resulted in benefit to the assessee and indeed added economic and commercial value to the business of the assessee. In case these services were not provided by the AEs the assessee

M/S DSM SINOCHEM PHARMACEUTICALS INDIA PVT. LTD. ,TOANSA vs. DCIT, C-1(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 253/ चंडीगढ़/2016(िन.व. 2011-12)

68 2.56% 1.74 million Crores LC/Guarantee EUR 30 204 3.50% 7.14 million Crores Total 8.88 Your honour would appreciate from the above that the services availed by DSM India resulted in benefit to the assessee and indeed added economic and commercial value to the business of the assessee. In case these services were not provided by the AEs the assessee

M/S NAMDHARI INDUSTRIAL TRADERS PVT. LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, LUDHIANA

section 68 of the Act AO has jurisdiction to make addition where any sum is found credited in the bank account of the assessee A.Y. 2012-13 Page 11 of 14 and the assessee offers no explanation about nature and source thereof or explanation offered by him is not in the opinion of the A.O. satisfactory

SRI RAM HEALTH CARE PRIVATE LIMITED,BADDI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - PARWANOO, PARWANOO

In the result, all the appeal of the Assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 850/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Sri Ram Health Care Private The Dcit, Limited, बनाम Circle. 81C/2 Epip Phase I, Parwanoo Vs. Jharmajari, Baddi, Himachal Pradesh 173205 "थायी लेखा सं./ Pan No: Aamcs5840H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Dr.Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr

195, wherein it was clearly held that if the share application money is received by the assessee company from the shareholders, then the department is free to proceed to reopen their individual assessment. Since the said judgment was applicable to the assessee for the relevant assessment year 2010-11, so 850-Chd-2025 4 question of addition under section

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

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

section 68 if any sum is found credited in the books of assessee maintained for any previous year and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof or the explanation offered by him is not in the opinion of the AO satisfactory, the sum so credited may be 12 charged to income tax as income

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

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

section 68 if any sum is found credited in the books of assessee maintained for any previous year and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof or the explanation offered by him is not in the opinion of the AO satisfactory, the sum so credited may be 12 charged to income tax as income

SANJAY SINGAL (HUF),NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH , CHANDIGARH

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

section 68 if any sum is found credited in the books of assessee maintained for any previous year and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof or the explanation offered by him is not in the opinion of the AO satisfactory, the sum so credited may be 12 charged to income tax as income

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

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

section 68 if any sum is found credited in the books of assessee maintained for any previous year and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof or the explanation offered by him is not in the opinion of the AO satisfactory, the sum so credited may be 12 charged to income tax as income

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

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

section 68 if any sum is found credited in the books of assessee maintained for any previous year and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof or the explanation offered by him is not in the opinion of the AO satisfactory, the sum so credited may be 12 charged to income tax as income

JANKEY POLYMERS,BAROTIWALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BADDI

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 239/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Jankey Polymers, The Ito, Khatoni No.210/213, बना Baddi Khasra No. 482, म Village Tirpa Vs. Hadbest No. 195 Barotiwala, Himachal Pradesh 174103 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Ptlji1625F अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh Ravinder Sharma, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 11-11-2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17-11-2025 आदेश/Order This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Dated 17.03.2022, For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: -

195 Barotiwala, Himachal Pradesh 174103 "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: PTLJI1625F अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Sh Ravinder Sharma, CA राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 11-11-2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement

SANJEEV AGGARWAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

68 on account of amount received from Jai Ambe\nPharmaceutical (JAAPL) holding the company as a shell company.\n7. Ground No. 7 – Purchase transactions carried out allegedly outside books.\n18\n8. Ground No. 8 and 9 -Carry forward of MAT credit against the demand raised\nconsequent to impugned addition made in assessment.\n9. Ground No. 10 – Transfer order

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-I, CHANDIGARH , CHANDIGARH vs. MS SCOTT EDIL ADVANCE RESEARCH LABORATOTRIES AND EDUCATION LTD., , CHANDIGARH

68 on account of amount received from Jai Ambe\nPharmaceutical (JAAPL) holding the company as a shell company.\n7. Ground No. 7 – Purchase transactions carried out allegedly outside books.\n8. Ground No. 8 and 9 -Carry forward of MAT credit against the demand raised\nconsequent to impugned addition made in assessment.\n9. Ground No. 10 – Transfer order

SCOTT EDIL PHARMACIA LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

68 on account of amount received from Jai Ambe\nPharmaceutical (JAAPL) holding the company as a shell company.\n7. Ground No. 7 – Purchase transactions carried out allegedly outside books.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n17\n8. Ground No. 8 and 9 -Carry forward of MAT credit against the demand raised

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

68 on account of amount received from Jai Ambe\nPharmaceutical (JAAPL) holding the company as a shell company.\n7. Ground No. 7 – Purchase transactions carried out allegedly outside books.\n16\n8. Ground No. 8 and 9 -Carry forward of MAT credit against the demand raised\nconsequent to impugned addition made in assessment.\n9. Ground No. 10 – Transfer order

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

68 on account of amount received from Jai Ambe\nPharmaceutical (JAAPL) holding the company as a shell company.\n7. Ground No. 7 – Purchase transactions carried out allegedly outside books.\n8. Ground No. 8 and 9 -Carry forward of MAT credit against the demand raised\nconsequent to impugned addition made in assessment.\n9. Ground No. 10 – Transfer order

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

68 on account of amount received from Jai Ambe\nPharmaceutical (JAAPL) holding the company as a shell company.\n7. Ground No. 7 – Purchase transactions carried out allegedly outside books.\n16\n8. Ground No. 8 and 9 -Carry forward of MAT credit against the demand raised\nconsequent to impugned addition made in assessment.\n9. Ground No. 10 – Transfer order

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SANJEEV AGGARWAL , CHANDIGARH

68 on account of amount received from Jai Ambe\nPharmaceutical (JAAPL) holding the company as a shell company.\n7. Ground No. 7 – Purchase transactions carried out allegedly outside books.\n16\n8. Ground No. 8 and 9 -Carry forward of MAT credit against the demand raised\nconsequent to impugned addition made in assessment.\n9. Ground No. 10 – Transfer order