BANUR BROTHER ,PATIALA vs. ITO-WARD-1, AMBALA

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed as and by way of remand to Ld

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

68,63,786/- u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 with respect to cash withdrawals without any finding doubting the source of funds withdrawn. 3. That under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (Appeals) had erred in upholding the order of the Ld. AO making an addition u/s 69A based on surmises and conjectures

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

section 68.” 11. Respectfully following the above decisions, which, in our view, are squarely applicable on the facts of the instant case, we find that the assessee has successfully discharged the burden of proof primarily casted upon it to explain the identity and creditworthiness of share applicant and genuineness of the share transactions and correctness of such details

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

section 68.” 11. Respectfully following the above decisions, which, in our view, are squarely applicable on the facts of the instant case, we find that the assessee has successfully discharged the burden of proof primarily casted upon it to explain the identity and creditworthiness of share applicant and genuineness of the share transactions and correctness of such details

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

section 68.” 11. Respectfully following the above decisions, which, in our view, are squarely applicable on the facts of the instant case, we find that the assessee has successfully discharged the burden of proof primarily casted upon it to explain the identity and creditworthiness of share applicant and genuineness of the share transactions and correctness of such details

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

section 68.” 11. Respectfully following the above decisions, which, in our view, are squarely applicable on the facts of the instant case, we find that the assessee has successfully discharged the burden of proof primarily casted upon it to explain the identity and creditworthiness of share applicant and genuineness of the share transactions and correctness of such details

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

section 68.” 11. Respectfully following the above decisions, which, in our view, are squarely applicable on the facts of the instant case, we find that the assessee has successfully discharged the burden of proof primarily casted upon it to explain the identity and creditworthiness of share applicant and genuineness of the share transactions and correctness of such details

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

section 68.” 11. Respectfully following the above decisions, which, in our view, are squarely applicable on the facts of the instant case, we find that the assessee has successfully discharged the burden of proof primarily casted upon it to explain the identity and creditworthiness of share applicant and genuineness of the share transactions and correctness of such details

M/S ARYANS EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,MOHALI vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 821/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 M/S Aryans Educational & Vs. The Dcit, Circle-1 Charitable Trust, बनाम (Exemptions), # 2129, Phase-10, Chandigarh Mohali "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabta7550L

68 of the Act treating corpus donations received from students to be anonymous donations. 8. We find that the not considering the evidence filed by the Assessee during the appellate proceedings before the ld. CIT(A) is not justified on the part of the ld. CIT(A). In fact, the case laws relied upon

SAHIL SINGLA,CHANDIGARH vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-2, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

section 68 could 4 not be satisfied by the appellant to establish the creditworthiness and genuineness of loan transaction; and that similarly, the genuineness of loan from Shri Sanbir Singh could not be established. 6. On behalf of the assessee / appellant, it had been submitted that the CIT(A) has wrongly upheld addition made the learned assessing officer

SH. NARESH CHAUHAN,SHIMLA vs. ACIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the addition so made is hereby directed to be deleted and the ground of appeal is allowed

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

section 68 of the Act which on appeal, was restored by the Coordinate Bench to the file of the AO along with other matters for fresh consideration. 24. In the set-aside proceedings, the AO held that the assessee has failed to produce any additional evidence and addition of Rs 56,674/- was reiterated as per the original assessment

SH. NARESH CHAUHAN,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the addition so made is hereby directed to be deleted and the ground of appeal is allowed

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

section 68 of the Act which on appeal, was restored by the Coordinate Bench to the file of the AO along with other matters for fresh consideration. 24. In the set-aside proceedings, the AO held that the assessee has failed to produce any additional evidence and addition of Rs 56,674/- was reiterated as per the original assessment

WINSOME TEXTILE INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

68, can be initiated in the year of such credit. Moreover, it is also being mentioned here that in the A.Y. 2013-14, the then AO specifically given office note about the reference to Foreign Authorities and about remedial action to be taken on the basis of information received till that date from Singapore Authority. The assessee also claimed that

SBS BIOTECH UNIT II,SIRMOUR 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)

68,78,900/- after claiming deduction under section 80IC @ 100% amounting to Rs. 15,12,63,064/-. The return

JT. CIT (OSD), (E), C-2, CHANDIGARH vs. CH. LEKH RAJ EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST, YAMUNANAGAR

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

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 717/Chd/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13

78 persons and made addition under section 68 of the Act, which got confirmed by the learned CIT (Appeals

BHANU PRATAP JAIN,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, LUDHIANA

In the result the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 155/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Bhanu Pratap Jain, Proprietor, Vs. The Ito, बनाम Ward Vii(1), M/S Pehal International, Ludhiana B-31, Phase V, Focal Point, Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Agzpjj0090L अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Kumar, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Jcit, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 08.08.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.10.2024

Section 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The Assessee is an individual and is engaged in the business of dealing in yarn. The Assessee was a sole proprietor of M/s Pehal International and was a Partner in M/s Srishti Wool Combers. Return of income for A.Y. 2017-18 was filed on 31.10.2017 declaring income

M/S CREATIVE CAPITAL SERVICES P. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 223/Chd/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10 Creative Capital Services Pvt.Ltd. The Dcit, S-16, 2Nd Floor, Pandav Nagar Extn, Vs Central Circle-1, New Delhi. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaacc5540L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.06.2025 Physical Hearing O R D E R

78,500/- which were added by the AO with the aid of Section 68 and 69C of the Income

DCIT, LUDHIANA vs. M/S INCITE HOMECARE PVT. LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R.Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12

78,32,498/-. The assessee was asked to furnish why interest on capital work in progress should not be capitalized. The assessee's representative attended and submitted as below: "Regarding interest on building under construction not capitalized, it is submitted that assessee raised term loan for the building under construction and had outstanding balance ofRs.1

M/S TJR PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, CC-2, CHANDIGARH

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

68 of the Act in one Assessment proceedings and be genuine and credible in the other Assessment proceedings for the same year. This clearly shows that the Learned Assessing officer was not using his wits, common sense and there was no application of mind by ITA 3 &144/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2014-15 25 him whatsoever. Further, the following documents, as also

ACIT, CC-2, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S TJR PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., CHANDIGARH

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

68 of the Act in one Assessment proceedings and be genuine and credible in the other Assessment proceedings for the same year. This clearly shows that the Learned Assessing officer was not using his wits, common sense and there was no application of mind by ITA 3 &144/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2014-15 25 him whatsoever. Further, the following documents, as also