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

DCIT, C-3, LUDHIANA vs. SH. SHAMBHU KUMAR, JUGIANA

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

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 957/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2000-01 Shri Shambhu Kumar, Vs. The Acit, Circle-V, Prop.M/S Jindal Alloys, Ludhiana बनाम Kanganwal Road, Vpo Juugiana, Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aihpk8666P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

section 148 of the Act, a notice is required to be served for reopening of the assessment. So far as the arguments of the Ld. DR that assessment was going to be time barred, hence, the service was done through affixture, in our view, the said reasoning has not merits. The Coordinate Beach of the Tribunal in the case

DCIT, C-5, LUDHIANA vs. SHRI SHAMBHU KUMAR, LUDHIANA

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

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 957/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2000-01 Shri Shambhu Kumar, Vs. The Acit, Circle-V, Prop.M/S Jindal Alloys, Ludhiana बनाम Kanganwal Road, Vpo Juugiana, Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aihpk8666P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

section 148 of the Act, a notice is required to be served for reopening of the assessment. So far as the arguments of the Ld. DR that assessment was going to be time barred, hence, the service was done through affixture, in our view, the said reasoning has not merits. The Coordinate Beach of the Tribunal in the case

SH. SHAMBHU KUMAR,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, LUDHIANA

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

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 957/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2000-01 Shri Shambhu Kumar, Vs. The Acit, Circle-V, Prop.M/S Jindal Alloys, Ludhiana बनाम Kanganwal Road, Vpo Juugiana, Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aihpk8666P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

section 148 of the Act, a notice is required to be served for reopening of the assessment. So far as the arguments of the Ld. DR that assessment was going to be time barred, hence, the service was done through affixture, in our view, the said reasoning has not merits. The Coordinate Beach of the Tribunal in the case

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

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 of the Act. This position stands settled vide inter-alia, the following decisions : i) ITA No. 325/2008 (Del) CIT vs. Ritu Anurag Agarwal "As there was no case for disallowance for corresponding purchases, no addition could be made under Section 68 in as much as it is not in dispute that the creditors outstanding related to purchases

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 of the Act. This position stands settled vide inter-alia, the following decisions : i) ITA No. 325/2008 (Del) CIT vs. Ritu Anurag Agarwal "As there was no case for disallowance for corresponding purchases, no addition could be made under Section 68 in as much as it is not in dispute that the creditors outstanding related to purchases

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 of the Act. This position stands settled vide inter-alia, the following decisions : i) ITA No. 325/2008 (Del) CIT vs. Ritu Anurag Agarwal "As there was no case for disallowance for corresponding purchases, no addition could be made under Section 68 in as much as it is not in dispute that the creditors outstanding related to purchases

M/S A.P. KNIT FAB,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT CC-3, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Have Not Been Appreciated. 4. That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Failed To Appreciate That During The Course Of Survey, No Other Income Was Noticed By The Department And, As Such, Taxing The Amount Offered As Deemed Income, Is Against The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. 5. That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Also Failed To Appreciate That At The Time Of Survey, It Was Agreed That The Applicant Shall Pay The Taxes On The Amount Offered

282 has been found and to purchase piece of mind and to avoid litigation, the additional income of Rs 1,00,00,000/- is voluntarily surrendered on account of excess stock found out of their normal business income for the current financial year 2018-19 over and above normal business income. We therefore find that the nature and source

M/S AMARJIT & SONS,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-2, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Have Not Been Appreciated.

282 has been found and to purchase piece of mind and to avoid litigation, the additional income of Rs 1,00,00,000/- is voluntarily surrendered on account of excess stock found out of their normal business income for the current financial year 2018-19 over and above normal business income. We therefore find that the nature and source

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATIALA vs. SATGURU FOUNDATION(REGD.), MUKTSAR

In the result, all the four appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 491, 493 & 494/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / A.Y. : 2010-11, 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Acit, M/S Satguru Foundation (Regd.), Central Circle, Vs Desh Bhagat College & Hospital, Patiala. Kotkapura Road, Muktsar. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabas1418A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 492/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / A.Y. : 2011-12 The Acit, M/S Satguru Foundation (Regd.), Patiala. Vs Desh Bhagat College & Hospital, Kotkapura Road, Muktsar. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabas1418A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

282 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The proceedings u/s 147/148 are void ab-initio because the reasons to believe recorded by the AO are infact reasons to suspect. That no satisfaction was recorded by the Principle CIT which was mandatory under the provisions of Section 151(1) & reliance for the contention has been placed on the following judgments

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PATIALA vs. SATGURU FOUNDATION(REGD), MUKTSAR

In the result, all the four appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 491, 493 & 494/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / A.Y. : 2010-11, 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Acit, M/S Satguru Foundation (Regd.), Central Circle, Vs Desh Bhagat College & Hospital, Patiala. Kotkapura Road, Muktsar. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabas1418A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 492/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / A.Y. : 2011-12 The Acit, M/S Satguru Foundation (Regd.), Patiala. Vs Desh Bhagat College & Hospital, Kotkapura Road, Muktsar. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabas1418A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

282 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The proceedings u/s 147/148 are void ab-initio because the reasons to believe recorded by the AO are infact reasons to suspect. That no satisfaction was recorded by the Principle CIT which was mandatory under the provisions of Section 151(1) & reliance for the contention has been placed on the following judgments

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATIALA vs. SATGURU FOUNDATION(REGD)., MUKTSAR

In the result, all the four appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 491, 493 & 494/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / A.Y. : 2010-11, 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Acit, M/S Satguru Foundation (Regd.), Central Circle, Vs Desh Bhagat College & Hospital, Patiala. Kotkapura Road, Muktsar. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabas1418A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 492/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / A.Y. : 2011-12 The Acit, M/S Satguru Foundation (Regd.), Patiala. Vs Desh Bhagat College & Hospital, Kotkapura Road, Muktsar. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabas1418A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

282 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The proceedings u/s 147/148 are void ab-initio because the reasons to believe recorded by the AO are infact reasons to suspect. That no satisfaction was recorded by the Principle CIT which was mandatory under the provisions of Section 151(1) & reliance for the contention has been placed on the following judgments

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATIALA vs. SATGURU FOUNDATION(REGD), MUKTSAR

In the result, all the four appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 491, 493 & 494/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / A.Y. : 2010-11, 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Acit, M/S Satguru Foundation (Regd.), Central Circle, Vs Desh Bhagat College & Hospital, Patiala. Kotkapura Road, Muktsar. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabas1418A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 492/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / A.Y. : 2011-12 The Acit, M/S Satguru Foundation (Regd.), Patiala. Vs Desh Bhagat College & Hospital, Kotkapura Road, Muktsar. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabas1418A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

282 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The proceedings u/s 147/148 are void ab-initio because the reasons to believe recorded by the AO are infact reasons to suspect. That no satisfaction was recorded by the Principle CIT which was mandatory under the provisions of Section 151(1) & reliance for the contention has been placed on the following judgments

M/S PARDEEP ISPAT(P) LTD.,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.149/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sh. Rajeev Goyal Pr. Commissioner Of Income बनाम M/S R.K. Associates, Tax, Rohtak B.G. Complex Near Ganesh Dharam Kanta, Sirsa -125055, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aibpg7289A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

68 of the Act. It was also submitted that the bank account does not constitute “books of account” of the assessee, as has been held in following cases: i) 113 TTJ 178 (Del) Mayawati vs. DCIT Affirmed by Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT vs. Mayawati reported

SHRI. TARSEM GOYAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.149/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sh. Rajeev Goyal Pr. Commissioner Of Income बनाम M/S R.K. Associates, Tax, Rohtak B.G. Complex Near Ganesh Dharam Kanta, Sirsa -125055, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aibpg7289A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

68 of the Act. It was also submitted that the bank account does not constitute “books of account” of the assessee, as has been held in following cases: i) 113 TTJ 178 (Del) Mayawati vs. DCIT Affirmed by Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT vs. Mayawati reported

SH. PARSHOTAM GOYAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.149/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sh. Rajeev Goyal Pr. Commissioner Of Income बनाम M/S R.K. Associates, Tax, Rohtak B.G. Complex Near Ganesh Dharam Kanta, Sirsa -125055, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aibpg7289A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

68 of the Act. It was also submitted that the bank account does not constitute “books of account” of the assessee, as has been held in following cases: i) 113 TTJ 178 (Del) Mayawati vs. DCIT Affirmed by Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT vs. Mayawati reported

SHRI RAJEEV GOYAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.149/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sh. Rajeev Goyal Pr. Commissioner Of Income बनाम M/S R.K. Associates, Tax, Rohtak B.G. Complex Near Ganesh Dharam Kanta, Sirsa -125055, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aibpg7289A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

68 of the Act. It was also submitted that the bank account does not constitute “books of account” of the assessee, as has been held in following cases: i) 113 TTJ 178 (Del) Mayawati vs. DCIT Affirmed by Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT vs. Mayawati reported

PRIYA GOYAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.149/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sh. Rajeev Goyal Pr. Commissioner Of Income बनाम M/S R.K. Associates, Tax, Rohtak B.G. Complex Near Ganesh Dharam Kanta, Sirsa -125055, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aibpg7289A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

68 of the Act. It was also submitted that the bank account does not constitute “books of account” of the assessee, as has been held in following cases: i) 113 TTJ 178 (Del) Mayawati vs. DCIT Affirmed by Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT vs. Mayawati reported