M/S AGYA RAM MANOHAR LAL,KHANNA vs. PR.CIT(CENTRAL), LUDHIANA

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

42,04,640/-) 9. We therefore find that the AO has given a clear cut finding and recorded his satisfaction that there is clear failure on the part of the assessee to furnish any explanation regarding the unexplained salary expenditure and in view of the same, the provisions of section 69C are clearly attracted and which have accordingly been

SH. KRISHAN KUMAR,KHANNA vs. DCIT, CC-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

68 or 69A, excess stock is covered u/s 69 or 69B, construction of Shed/Godown is covered u/s 69B or 69C and advances made to Sundry Parties is covered u/s 69, 69B or 69D is like an open ended hypothesis which is not supported by any specific finding that the matter shall fall under which of the specific sections

RAJIV KUMAR GOYAL,DHURI vs. DCIT, CC-2, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: This Hon’Ble Tribunal Under Section 253 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 As Amended From Time To Time. 2. The Assessee Is Aggrieved By Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dated 03/02/2023 In Appeal No. 10850/2018-19/It/Cit(A)-5/Ldh/2021-22 For A.Y. 2019-20 Under Section 250(6) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Which Was Dismissed. Therefore The Present Second Appeal Under Section 253 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Before Us Against The Aforesaid Order Dt. 03/02/2023 Which Is Hereiafter Referred To As The Impugned Order. Factual Matrix 3. The Assessee Had For The Relevant Year I.E; A.Y. 2019-20 Was Also Engaged In The Same Business I.E; Manufacturing Of Pvc Pipes & Had Filed

68, section 69, section 69A, section 69B, section 69C or section 69D, if such income is not covered under clause (a), the income-tax payable shall be the aggregate of- (i) the amount of income-tax calculated on the income referred to in clause (a) and clause (b), at the rate of sixty per cent

RAJIV GOYAL, PATIALA,PATIALA, PUNJAB vs. JAO ITO WARD-3, PATIALA, PATIALA

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

Bench: the CIT(A) have not been considered properly.

section 68 i.e. genuineness, creditworthiness and identity as per details as follows: 7. IDENTITY, CREDITWORTHINESS AND GENUINENESS OF THE LENDER: It is submitted before your goodself that M/s Suraj Bhan and Bros HUF vide PAN: AACHV0222P. The said concerned was engaged in the activities relating to Agriculture Income i.e. sale purchases of Grains and regular filer of Income

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-1, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA vs. SHREE GANESH EDIBLES PVT. LTD., KHANNA

The appeal stand dismissed

Bench: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

section 68 of the Act, deeming provisions postulate that it is possible that the assessee may circulate its own unaccounted money in the shape of bogus persons and therefore legal onus has been created. What is relevant is the identity, creditworthiness of the depositors and genuineness of the transaction. All these three conditions have been established and onus

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-1, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA vs. SHREE GANESH EDIBLES PVT. LTD., KHANNA

The appeal stand dismissed

Bench: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

section 68 of the Act, deeming provisions postulate that it is possible that the assessee may circulate its own unaccounted money in the shape of bogus persons and therefore legal onus has been created. What is relevant is the identity, creditworthiness of the depositors and genuineness of the transaction. All these three conditions have been established and onus

INCOME TAX OFFICER, CHANDIGARH vs. SANBIR SINGH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 68 of the Act were proved and the loans taken had been repaid : i) ITAT, Indore Bench, in ‘M/s Life Care International V/s JCIT 3(1), Indore’, vide order dated 01.09.2021 ii) The Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in ‘PCIT v. Ambe Tradecorp (P.) Ltd’, 145 taxmann.com 27 (Gujarat) vide order dated 05-07-2022 iii) ITAT

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1,, LUDHIANA vs. M/S OSWAL APPARELS PVT. LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Krinwant Sahay

42 to 55 of the Paper Book). He has further submitted that the genuineness of the transaction is proved from the confirmed copies of accounts of M/s Navratan Distributors Pvt. Ltd. in the books of the assessee company and vice-a-versa. He has further submitted that the credit worthiness of M/s Navratan Distributors Pvt. Ltd. is proved from

M/S OSWAL TREND (P) LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, C. C.-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Krinwant Sahay

42 to 55 of the Paper Book). He has further submitted that the genuineness of the transaction is proved from the confirmed copies of accounts of M/s Navratan Distributors Pvt. Ltd. in the books of the assessee company and vice-a-versa. He has further submitted that the credit worthiness of M/s Navratan Distributors Pvt. Ltd. is proved from

ACIT -CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, LUDHIANA vs. M/S OSWAL TRENDS PVT. LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Krinwant Sahay

42 to 55 of the Paper Book). He has further submitted that the genuineness of the transaction is proved from the confirmed copies of accounts of M/s Navratan Distributors Pvt. Ltd. in the books of the assessee company and vice-a-versa. He has further submitted that the credit worthiness of M/s Navratan Distributors Pvt. Ltd. is proved from

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1,, LUDHIANA vs. M/S OSWAL APPARELS PVT. LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Krinwant Sahay

42 to 55 of the Paper Book). He has further submitted that the genuineness of the transaction is proved from the confirmed copies of accounts of M/s Navratan Distributors Pvt. Ltd. in the books of the assessee company and vice-a-versa. He has further submitted that the credit worthiness of M/s Navratan Distributors Pvt. Ltd. is proved from

ACIT -CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, LUDHIANA vs. M/S OSWAL TRENDS PVT. LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Krinwant Sahay

42 to 55 of the Paper Book). He has further submitted that the genuineness of the transaction is proved from the confirmed copies of accounts of M/s Navratan Distributors Pvt. Ltd. in the books of the assessee company and vice-a-versa. He has further submitted that the credit worthiness of M/s Navratan Distributors Pvt. Ltd. is proved from

M/S OSWAL APPARELS PVT. LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, C.C.- 1, LUDHIANA

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Krinwant Sahay

42 to 55 of the Paper Book). He has further submitted that the genuineness of the transaction is proved from the confirmed copies of accounts of M/s Navratan Distributors Pvt. Ltd. in the books of the assessee company and vice-a-versa. He has further submitted that the credit worthiness of M/s Navratan Distributors Pvt. Ltd. is proved from

M/S JASHAN FINLEASE LTD.,KHANNA vs. DCIT, CC-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

68 or 69A, excess stock is covered u/s 69 or 69B, construction of Shed/Godown is covered u/s 69B or 69C and advances made to Sundry Parties is covered u/s 69, 69B or 69D is like an open ended hypothesis which is not supported by any specific finding that the matter shall fall under which of the specific sections

ITO, W-1(3), CHANDIGARH vs. SMT. RENU ANAND, CHANDIGARH

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

68,00,252.81 5,84,50,000.00 October 2012 26,22,00,112.36 24,62,00,000.00 November 2012 27,66,50,028.09 27,42,00,000.00 December 2012 37,65,42,968.54 38,52,00,028.09 January 2013 41,89,00,000.00 40,99,40,000.00 February 2013 162,40,50,224.72 166,83,15000.00 March

RAV SHARAN SINGH,PATIALA vs. ACIT, C.C., PATIALA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

68 or 69A, excess stock is covered u/s 69 or 69B, construction of Shed/Godown is covered u/s 69B or 69C and advances made to Sundry Parties is covered u/s 69, 69B or 69D is like an open ended hypothesis which is not supported by any specific finding that the matter shall fall under which of the specific sections

SH. SANJAY SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

section 68 of the Act, alongwith unaccounted commission expenditure @ 6.5% of the total LTCG of the year for arranging those entries. The A.O. made the addition of Rs. 42

SMT. AARTI SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

section 68 of the Act, alongwith unaccounted commission expenditure @ 6.5% of the total LTCG of the year for arranging those entries. The A.O. made the addition of Rs. 42

SH. SANJAY SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

section 68 of the Act, alongwith unaccounted commission expenditure @ 6.5% of the total LTCG of the year for arranging those entries. The A.O. made the addition of Rs. 42