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)

221 /Chd/ 2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 Sanjay Singal (HUF) बनाम The DCIT 53, Jor Bagh, New Delhi Central Circle-1 Chandigarh "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAMHS8301N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, C.A राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Kusum Bansal

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)

221 /Chd/ 2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 Sanjay Singal (HUF) बनाम The DCIT 53, Jor Bagh, New Delhi Central Circle-1 Chandigarh "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAMHS8301N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, C.A राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Kusum Bansal

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)

221 /Chd/ 2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 Sanjay Singal (HUF) बनाम The DCIT 53, Jor Bagh, New Delhi Central Circle-1 Chandigarh "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAMHS8301N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, C.A राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Kusum Bansal

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)

221 /Chd/ 2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 Sanjay Singal (HUF) बनाम The DCIT 53, Jor Bagh, New Delhi Central Circle-1 Chandigarh "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAMHS8301N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, C.A राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Kusum Bansal

JANTA LAND PROMOTERS PVT LTD,MOHALI vs. THE PRINICIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CHANDIGARH-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

68. For the sake of completeness, we present the background and basis for this deduction or appropriation from Reserves and Surplus: 5. The Ld. AR had submitted that the Assessing Officer in the original assessment had recorded the scrutiny heads as advances from customers, ICDS compliance & adjustments, verification of opening/closing stock and bonus/commission, and ultimately made only one addition

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

221 Taxman 436 (Guj) CIT vs. Pradeep Shantilal Patel (section 44AF) iv) ITA No. 116/Ahd/2011 dated 30.5.2014 Narpat Singh vs. 1TO v) 355 ITR 290 (Guj) CIT vs. Bholanath Poly Fab (P) Ltd. vi) 152 ITD 874 (Ahd) Dineshbhai Dhansukhlal Mithaiwala vs. ITO vii) ITA No. 2446 & 2447/Mum/2015 DCIT v. Allied Blende.s and Distillers (P) Ltd. viii

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

221 Taxman 436 (Guj) CIT vs. Pradeep Shantilal Patel (section 44AF) iv) ITA No. 116/Ahd/2011 dated 30.5.2014 Narpat Singh vs. 1TO v) 355 ITR 290 (Guj) CIT vs. Bholanath Poly Fab (P) Ltd. vi) 152 ITD 874 (Ahd) Dineshbhai Dhansukhlal Mithaiwala vs. ITO vii) ITA No. 2446 & 2447/Mum/2015 DCIT v. Allied Blende.s and Distillers (P) Ltd. viii

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

221 Taxman 436 (Guj) CIT vs. Pradeep Shantilal Patel (section 44AF) iv) ITA No. 116/Ahd/2011 dated 30.5.2014 Narpat Singh vs. 1TO v) 355 ITR 290 (Guj) CIT vs. Bholanath Poly Fab (P) Ltd. vi) 152 ITD 874 (Ahd) Dineshbhai Dhansukhlal Mithaiwala vs. ITO vii) ITA No. 2446 & 2447/Mum/2015 DCIT v. Allied Blende.s and Distillers (P) Ltd. viii

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH vs. JAMES HOTELS LTD, CHANDIGARH

Bench: The Said Resolution To Enhance Authorized Share Capital.

221 (iv) CIT vs Speedways Rubbers Pvt Ltd 326 ITR 31 (P&H) The contention of the assessee further substantiated from the facts that the assessee Co. during the relevant year increased its Authorized Capital by Rs. 38.00 crore to became authorized for issue the shores of Rs. 37.50 crore from the Share Application Money. Thus the presumption that

SHRI RAJIV GUPTA,SIRSA vs. ITO-WARD-2, SIRSA

Bench: The Bench That The Lead

section 68 of the Act. 2.1. That while making the above addition, the learned Income Tax Officer has failed to appreciate the factual substratum of the case, statutory provisions of law and as such, addition so made is highly misconceived, totally arbitrary, wholly unjustified and therefore, unsustainable. 2.2. That while confirming the above addition, the learned Commissioner of Income

RADHA MITTAL,LUDHIANA vs. ITO- WARD 7(3), LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in light

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavradha Mittal, Ito बनाम H. No. 85-A, Aggar Nagar, Ward- 7(3), Ludhiana- 141012 Ludhiana

68 of the Act. 3. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) wherein the assessment proceedings were challenged both on the legality as well as merits of the case. However, the appeal of the assessee was dismissed and against the said findings and order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee

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)

221/- on the assessed income of Rs. 19,05,26,62,664/- instead of Rs. 3,68,03,40,638/-. 3. Deduction u/s 80IA has not been considered while working out the Gross Total Income as per normal provisions of Income Tax. 4. Credit u/s 115JAA has been taken as Rs. 55,49,51,164/- instead

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANCHKULA CIRCLE, PANCHKULA, PANCHKULA vs. THE HARYANA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, PANCHKULA

Appeal is allowed

Bench: BEFORE: SHRI. RAJPALYADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

221-227 of assessees paper book which are already on record. For the sake of brevity and as the same is part of the record, it is not being reproduced herein. However, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate and understand and then confirmed the addition. 14.2 It was further submitted by the Ld Counsel for the Assessee that

THE HARYANA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, PANCHKULA, PANCHKULA

Appeal is allowed

Bench: BEFORE: SHRI. RAJPALYADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

221-227 of assessees paper book which are already on record. For the sake of brevity and as the same is part of the record, it is not being reproduced herein. However, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate and understand and then confirmed the addition. 14.2 It was further submitted by the Ld Counsel for the Assessee that

THE HARYANA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT,PANCHKULA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE,, PANCHKULA

Appeal is allowed

Bench: BEFORE: SHRI. RAJPALYADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

221-227 of assessees paper book which are already on record. For the sake of brevity and as the same is part of the record, it is not being reproduced herein. However, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate and understand and then confirmed the addition. 14.2 It was further submitted by the Ld Counsel for the Assessee that

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANCHKULA CIRCLE, PANCHKULA, PANCHKULA vs. THE HARYANA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, PANCHKULA

Appeal is allowed

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

221-227 of assessees paper book which are already on record. For the sake of brevity and as the same is part of the record, it is not being reproduced herein. However, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate and understand and then confirmed the addition. 14.2 It was further submitted by the Ld Counsel for the Assessee that

THE HARYANA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT,CIRCLE, PANCHKULA, PANCHKULA

Appeal is allowed

Bench: BEFORE: SHRI. RAJPALYADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

221-227 of assessees paper book which are already on record. For the sake of brevity and as the same is part of the record, it is not being reproduced herein. However, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate and understand and then confirmed the addition. 14.2 It was further submitted by the Ld Counsel for the Assessee that

THE HARYANA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT,PANCHKULA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, PANCHKULA

Appeal is allowed

Bench: BEFORE: SHRI. RAJPALYADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

221-227 of assessees paper book which are already on record. For the sake of brevity and as the same is part of the record, it is not being reproduced herein. However, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate and understand and then confirmed the addition. 14.2 It was further submitted by the Ld Counsel for the Assessee that