DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. KULWANT SINGH, MOHALI

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

68, section 69, section 69A, section 69B, section 69C or section 69D to the extent such income has been included by the assessee in the return of income furnished under section 139 and the tax in accordance with the provisions of clause (i) of sub-section (1) of section 115BBE has been

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. PARAMJIT SINGH, MOHALI

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

68, section 69, section 69A, section 69B, section 69C or section 69D to the extent such income has been included by the assessee in the return of income furnished under section 139 and the tax in accordance with the provisions of clause (i) of sub-section (1) of section 115BBE has been

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. PARAMJIT SINGH, MOHALI

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

68, section 69, section 69A, section 69B, section 69C or section 69D to the extent such income has been included by the assessee in the return of income furnished under section 139 and the tax in accordance with the provisions of clause (i) of sub-section (1) of section 115BBE has been

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SMT. JASWANT KAUR, MOHALI

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

68, section 69, section 69A, section 69B, section 69C or section 69D to the extent such income has been included by the assessee in the return of income furnished under section 139 and the tax in accordance with the provisions of clause (i) of sub-section (1) of section 115BBE has been

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SMT. JASWANT KAUR, MOHALI

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

68, section 69, section 69A, section 69B, section 69C or section 69D to the extent such income has been included by the assessee in the return of income furnished under section 139 and the tax in accordance with the provisions of clause (i) of sub-section (1) of section 115BBE has been

SMT. JYOTI BHALLA,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO, WARD-3(2), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

68 of the Act and tax is charged @ 60% plus applicable surcharge as per Section 115BBE. Further, penalty u/s 271AAB of the Act for under reporting of the income is initiated.” 9. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who has since sustained the said addition. Against the findings and the directions

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

Bench: The Said Resolution To Enhance Authorized Share Capital.

section 68 of the Income Tax Act which means that identity of the person, creditworthiness of the persons contributing the money and genuineness of the transactions has been duly accepted in the regular assessment proceedings. 8.2 It was submitted that the nature of transaction which was admittedly the share application money between the transacting parties cannot be reclassified

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

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

68 ITD 65 CHD, and viii) Rupesh Chiman Lal V ITO, order dated 30.01.2017 in ITA Nos. 6179-6182/Mum/2016 13.5 Then, it is well settled that the assessee cannot be expected to be after the person with whom he has entered in the business transactions and the assessee's onus is to establish the identity of the party

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

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

68 ITD 65 CHD, and viii) Rupesh Chiman Lal V ITO, order dated 30.01.2017 in ITA Nos. 6179-6182/Mum/2016 13.5 Then, it is well settled that the assessee cannot be expected to be after the person with whom he has entered in the business transactions and the assessee's onus is to establish the identity of the party

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

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

68 ITD 65 CHD, and viii) Rupesh Chiman Lal V ITO, order dated 30.01.2017 in ITA Nos. 6179-6182/Mum/2016 13.5 Then, it is well settled that the assessee cannot be expected to be after the person with whom he has entered in the business transactions and the assessee's onus is to establish the identity of the party

AMAN THUKRAL,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA

Accordingly, Additional Ground No. 1 is allowed for statistical

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

section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 82. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition, observing that during the appellate proceedings, the assessee also did not furnish confirmation letters, signed ledger accounts, copies of ITRs and bank statements of the concerned creditors. 83. Before us, the Ld. AR submitted that the addition has been made without properly appreciating

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS, SHIMLA

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

68,805/- as unexplained expenditure. Grounds of appeal in ITA No.322/Chd/2014 for A.Y. 2008-09: 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred by upholding the Ld. DCIT/’s order which is contrary to law and the facts of the case; 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred by upholding the Ld. DCIT/’s order dt. 28/03/2013 which seems

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

68,805/- as unexplained expenditure. Grounds of appeal in ITA No.322/Chd/2014 for A.Y. 2008-09: 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred by upholding the Ld. DCIT/’s order which is contrary to law and the facts of the case; 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred by upholding the Ld. DCIT/’s order dt. 28/03/2013 which seems

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

68,805/- as unexplained expenditure. Grounds of appeal in ITA No.322/Chd/2014 for A.Y. 2008-09: 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred by upholding the Ld. DCIT/’s order which is contrary to law and the facts of the case; 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred by upholding the Ld. DCIT/’s order dt. 28/03/2013 which seems

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

68,805/- as unexplained expenditure. Grounds of appeal in ITA No.322/Chd/2014 for A.Y. 2008-09: 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred by upholding the Ld. DCIT/’s order which is contrary to law and the facts of the case; 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred by upholding the Ld. DCIT/’s order dt. 28/03/2013 which seems

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

68,805/- as unexplained expenditure. Grounds of appeal in ITA No.322/Chd/2014 for A.Y. 2008-09: 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred by upholding the Ld. DCIT/’s order which is contrary to law and the facts of the case; 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred by upholding the Ld. DCIT/’s order dt. 28/03/2013 which seems

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

68,805/- as unexplained expenditure. Grounds of appeal in ITA No.322/Chd/2014 for A.Y. 2008-09: 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred by upholding the Ld. DCIT/’s order which is contrary to law and the facts of the case; 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred by upholding the Ld. DCIT/’s order dt. 28/03/2013 which seems

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

68,805/- as unexplained expenditure. Grounds of appeal in ITA No.322/Chd/2014 for A.Y. 2008-09: 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred by upholding the Ld. DCIT/’s order which is contrary to law and the facts of the case; 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred by upholding the Ld. DCIT/’s order dt. 28/03/2013 which seems