TARLOCHAN SINGH ,BHAWANIGARH vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PATIALA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

68 of Income Tax Act 1961 but if such income from undisclosed sources, though, invested had not been recorded in the assessee's books, than such income is liable to be assessed in terms of section 69 of Income Tax Act 1961. vii. In Roshan Lal Madan VS CIT 245

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

DCIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S CHANDIGARH DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is

Bench: Ms.Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptathe D.C.I.T., Vs. M/S Chandigarh Developers Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-Ii, Sco 49-50, Sector 26, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. Pan: Aadcc6359G (Appellant) (Respondent)

68 of the Act. The CIT (A) has dealt with this issue at Paras 5 Pages 24 to 31 of his order. The case law M/s Mala Builders Pvt Ltd vs ACIT ITA No.433 to 437/Chad/2017 relied upon by the CIT (A) is on different footings i.e. related to section 24(b) of the Act. Moreover

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA vs. LALIT KUMAR PROP. LALIT CO., MIS BABU RAM HEM RAJ, FARIDKOT

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.685/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.686/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Dcit Central Circle-1 Shri Lalit Kumar बनाम/ Sco 1-6, 2Nd Floor, Opp. Bvm School (Prop. Lalit & Co.& M/S Babu Ram Hem Raj) Vs. New Grain Market, Faridkot - 151203 Kitchlu Nagar, Ludhiana-141001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Adapk-3617-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 3. Co No.28/Chandi/2024 (In Ita No. 685/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 4. Co No.29/Chandi/2024 (In Ita No. 686/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Lalit Kumar Dcit Central Circle-1 बनाम/ Sco 1-6, 2Nd Floor, Opp. Bvm School (Prop. Lalit & Co. & M/S Babu Ram Hem Raj) Vs. New Grain Market, Faridkot - 151203 Kitchlu Nagar, Ludhiana-141001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Adapk-3617-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate) – Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Rohit Sharma (Cit) & Shri Vivek Vardhan (Addl. Cit) - Ld. Drs

Section 115BBE on the addition as sustained to the tune of Rs.86,04,687/- and which addition has been made against the facts and circumstances of the case. 1.4 As is evident, the impugned addition stem from survey proceedings on the assessee. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of case records, our adjudication would be as under. Proceedings

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA vs. LALIT KUMAR PROP. MIS BABU RAM HEM RAJ, FARIDKOT

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.685/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.686/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Dcit Central Circle-1 Shri Lalit Kumar बनाम/ Sco 1-6, 2Nd Floor, Opp. Bvm School (Prop. Lalit & Co.& M/S Babu Ram Hem Raj) Vs. New Grain Market, Faridkot - 151203 Kitchlu Nagar, Ludhiana-141001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Adapk-3617-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 3. Co No.28/Chandi/2024 (In Ita No. 685/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 4. Co No.29/Chandi/2024 (In Ita No. 686/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Lalit Kumar Dcit Central Circle-1 बनाम/ Sco 1-6, 2Nd Floor, Opp. Bvm School (Prop. Lalit & Co. & M/S Babu Ram Hem Raj) Vs. New Grain Market, Faridkot - 151203 Kitchlu Nagar, Ludhiana-141001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Adapk-3617-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate) – Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Rohit Sharma (Cit) & Shri Vivek Vardhan (Addl. Cit) - Ld. Drs

Section 115BBE on the addition as sustained to the tune of Rs.86,04,687/- and which addition has been made against the facts and circumstances of the case. 1.4 As is evident, the impugned addition stem from survey proceedings on the assessee. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of case records, our adjudication would be as under. Proceedings

GAURAV GOEL,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO, WARD 4(3), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Paresh M. Joshiआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 132/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Gaurav Goel, Vs. The Ito, बनाम H. No. 1676, Sector 33-D, Ward 4(3), Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Ahgpg3162Q अपीलाथ"/ Assessee ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Jaspal Sharma, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Jcit, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 17.12.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025 आदेश/Order Per Paresh M. Joshi, Jm :

245 of paper book. We notice that these are sales of gold and silver 132-chd-2024 Gaurav Goel, Chandigarh 13 jewellery items and names of customers are spelt out therein with address. There are sales on credit cards too. These documents were before lower authorities but for reasons best known to them its contents were not verified

SH.RANDHIR SINGH,MOHALI vs. PR.CIT-1, CHANDIGARH

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

68)] there is net tax payable of Rs.31,61,510/- including interest components and as on 06.12.2017 [note:- interest under Section 234B is of Rs.9,96,370/- and interest under Section 234C is of Rs.43,369/-]. The original assessment order dated 06.12.2017 is under challenge by the assessee before CIT(A) and its fate is not known

DCIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S DHG MARKETING PVT. LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is

Bench: Ms Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptathe D.C.I.T., Vs. M/S Dhg Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-Ii, Sco 49-50, Sector 26, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. Pan: Aadcd1364Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

68 of the Act. The case law M/s Mala Builders Pvt Ltd vs ACIT ITA No.433 to 437/Chad/2017 relied upon by the CIT(A) is on different footings i.e. related to section 24(b) of the Act. Moreover, the CIT(A) has failed to verify the contention of the Assessee that no incriminating documents have been found and seized

A.B. SUGARS LIMITED,PUNJAB vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

68,07,307 Total 11,53,61,815 Expenditure (B) Profit from COGEN Division (A-B) 25,88,20,248 (37,41,82,063-11,53,61,815) For clarification of Doubt, we are enclosing Segment-wise copies of statement of Profit & Loss Account for FY 2017-18 one of which is before elimination of Inter-unit transactions and other

A.B. SUGARS LIMITED,PUNJAB 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)

68,07,307 Total 11,53,61,815 Expenditure (B) Profit from COGEN Division (A-B) 25,88,20,248 (37,41,82,063-11,53,61,815) For clarification of Doubt, we are enclosing Segment-wise copies of statement of Profit & Loss Account for FY 2017-18 one of which is before elimination of Inter-unit transactions and other

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

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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA vs. ROSHA ALLOYS PVT. LTD., MANDI GOBINDGARH

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,\nwhereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed

68 of the order.\n4\n3.1\nThe grounds of appeal as taken by the Department are\nreproduced as under bearing ITA No. 921/Chd/2024:\n1.\nWhether upon facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT\n(A) was justified to restricted the addition made by the A.O on account of\nsuppression of sales of Rs.11

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA vs. ROSHA ALLOYS PVT. LTD., MANDI GOBINDGARH

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,\nwhereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed

68 of the order.\n\n4\n3.1\nThe grounds of appeal as taken by the Department are\nreproduced as under bearing ITA No. 921/Chd/2024:\n1.\nWhether upon facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT\n(A) was justified to restricted the addition made by the A.O on account of\nsuppression of sales of Rs.11

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA vs. ROSHA ALLOYS PVT. LTD., MANDI GOBINDGARH

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,\nwhereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed

68 of the order.\n4\n3.1 The grounds of appeal as taken by the Department are\nreproduced as under bearing ITA No. 921/Chd/2024:\n1. Whether upon facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT\n(A) was justified to restricted the addition made by the A.O on account of\nsuppression of sales of Rs.11

ROSHA ALLOYS P LIMITED, AMLOH ROAD, VILLAGE TURAN, MANDI GOBINDGARH,PUNJAB vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, LUDHIANA, PUNJAB

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,\nwhereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed

68 of the order.\n3.1 The grounds of appeal as taken by the Department are\nreproduced as under bearing ITA No. 921/Chd/2024:\n1.\nWhether upon facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT\n(A) was justified to restricted the addition made by the A.O on account of\nsuppression of sales of Rs.11

DCIT, C-,1 (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S PUNJAB MEDICAL FOUNDATION CHARITABLE TRUST, JALANDHAR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-"नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt.Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Cir.1(Exemption) M/S.Punjab Medical Foundation Chandigarh. Vs. Charitable Trust 63-64, Waryam Nagar Cool Road, Jalandhar Pan : Aaatp 5171 B (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Sudhir Sehal, Advocate Assessee By Revenue By : Shri Ashok K. Khana, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 18/11/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/12/2020 आदेश/O R D E R

245 ITR 492, 264 ITR 276. It is stated that exemption had been granted to the assessee u/s 11 from the A.Y. 1991-92 consistently for twenty six years. There is absolutely no change of circumstances and there was no occasion for a different approach to be taken for the assessment year in question when the activities have continued uninterruptedly