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)

92,385.46 13,59,619.27 Total 3,19,30,200.33 15,96,510.02 2.2.7 Therefore, the total sales made to DFSC and Kacha Arhatia Association comes to Rs. 3,19,30,200.33/- as per certificate provided by them. Further, this figure can be tallied with the proceeds received in the bank of the Appellant which is Rs. 3

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

ANIKET SINGAL,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the above appeals are allowed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 939/Chd/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Shri Aniket Singal बनाम The DCIT 4, Amritashergil Marg, New Delhi- 110003 Central Circle-1 Chandigarh स्थायी लेखा सं./ PAN NO: CZCPS6126E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 1145/Chd/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Smt. Aarti Singal बनाम The DCIT 53, Jor Bagh, New Delhi-110003 Central Circle-1 Chandigarh स

3 percent and 7 percent have been judicially upheld in similar contexts. Given the scale, layering and assured one-way returns evident here, the AO’s adoption of 6.5 percent is a fair and conservative estimate. The argument that section 69C must fall because section 68 is deleted cannot help the appellant; since I uphold section 68

AARTI SINGAL,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the above appeals are allowed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 939/Chd/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Shri Aniket Singal बनाम The DCIT Central Circle-1 Chandigarh 4, Amritashergil Marg, New Delhi- 110003 स्थायी लेखा सं./ PAN NO: CZCPS6126E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 1145/Chd/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Smt. Aarti Singal बनाम The DCIT Central Circle-1 Chandigarh 53, Jor Bagh, New Delhi-110003 स

3 percent and 7 percent have been judicially upheld in similar contexts. Given the scale, layering and assured one-way returns evident here, the AO’s adoption of 6.5 percent is a fair and conservative estimate. The argument that section 69C must fall because section 68 is deleted cannot help the appellant; since I uphold section 68

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

68 8 4,94,000 3,51,451 D/o Shri R.K. Chhabra, # 3085 Sector 21 D, Chandigarh Sanjay Sardana Salary Rent Interest Salary Rent Interest Salary Rent Interest 6. S/o Shri Gian

M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

68 8 4,94,000 3,51,451 D/o Shri R.K. Chhabra, # 3085 Sector 21 D, Chandigarh Sanjay Sardana Salary Rent Interest Salary Rent Interest Salary Rent Interest 6. S/o Shri Gian

M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

68 8 4,94,000 3,51,451 D/o Shri R.K. Chhabra, # 3085 Sector 21 D, Chandigarh Sanjay Sardana Salary Rent Interest Salary Rent Interest Salary Rent Interest 6. S/o Shri Gian

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

68 8 4,94,000 3,51,451 D/o Shri R.K. Chhabra, # 3085 Sector 21 D, Chandigarh Sanjay Sardana Salary Rent Interest Salary Rent Interest Salary Rent Interest 6. S/o Shri Gian

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

68 8 4,94,000 3,51,451 D/o Shri R.K. Chhabra, # 3085 Sector 21 D, Chandigarh Sanjay Sardana Salary Rent Interest Salary Rent Interest Salary Rent Interest 6. S/o Shri Gian

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

68 8 4,94,000 3,51,451 D/o Shri R.K. Chhabra, # 3085 Sector 21 D, Chandigarh Sanjay Sardana Salary Rent Interest Salary Rent Interest Salary Rent Interest 6. S/o Shri Gian

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

68 8 4,94,000 3,51,451 D/o Shri R.K. Chhabra, # 3085 Sector 21 D, Chandigarh Sanjay Sardana Salary Rent Interest Salary Rent Interest Salary Rent Interest 6. S/o Shri Gian

DCIT,CIRCLE-1(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SCHOOL( MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

68 8 4,94,000 3,51,451 D/o Shri R.K. Chhabra, # 3085 Sector 21 D, Chandigarh Sanjay Sardana Salary Rent Interest Salary Rent Interest Salary Rent Interest 6. S/o Shri Gian

M/S SADASHIV VENTURES,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 33/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S Sadashiv Ventures, Vs. The Dcit, बनाम Circle-1, Sco 9, Sector 7, Chandigarh Madhya Marg, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Abufs6758C अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hering ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Goyal, Advocate & Shri Ashok Goyal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Jcit, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 13.08.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04.09.2024

92,882/- under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in respect of losses without any finding substantiating the addition. 3

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) was filed by the Market Committee, Dabwali, before the AO, stating that as per their ITA 146,147 & 148/CHD/2021 A.Y. 2011-12, 2015-16 & 2016-17 13 office record available, there was no firm registered as M/s Gaja Nand Pardeep Kumar, Shop No.209, New Grain Market, Dabwali during the year 2010-11. On 11.12.2018, a reply

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) was filed by the Market Committee, Dabwali, before the AO, stating that as per their ITA 146,147 & 148/CHD/2021 A.Y. 2011-12, 2015-16 & 2016-17 13 office record available, there was no firm registered as M/s Gaja Nand Pardeep Kumar, Shop No.209, New Grain Market, Dabwali during the year 2010-11. On 11.12.2018, a reply

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) was filed by the Market Committee, Dabwali, before the AO, stating that as per their ITA 146,147 & 148/CHD/2021 A.Y. 2011-12, 2015-16 & 2016-17 13 office record available, there was no firm registered as M/s Gaja Nand Pardeep Kumar, Shop No.209, New Grain Market, Dabwali during the year 2010-11. On 11.12.2018, a reply

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 of the Act. i. A. P. Refinery (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT [2015] 174 TTJ 41 (Chandigarh ITAT) ii. Principal CIT vs. N. C. Cables Ltd. [2017] 98 CCH 10 (Delhi) iii. CIT vs. Shokeen Properties (P) Ltd. [2015] 92 CCH 67 (Delhi) iv. Principal CIT vs. Softline Creation Pvt. Ltd. [2016] 387 ITR 636 (Delhi

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 of the Act. i. A. P. Refinery (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT [2015] 174 TTJ 41 (Chandigarh ITAT) ii. Principal CIT vs. N. C. Cables Ltd. [2017] 98 CCH 10 (Delhi) iii. CIT vs. Shokeen Properties (P) Ltd. [2015] 92 CCH 67 (Delhi) iv. Principal CIT vs. Softline Creation Pvt. Ltd. [2016] 387 ITR 636 (Delhi

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 of the Act. i. A. P. Refinery (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT [2015] 174 TTJ 41 (Chandigarh ITAT) ii. Principal CIT vs. N. C. Cables Ltd. [2017] 98 CCH 10 (Delhi) iii. CIT vs. Shokeen Properties (P) Ltd. [2015] 92 CCH 67 (Delhi) iv. Principal CIT vs. Softline Creation Pvt. Ltd. [2016] 387 ITR 636 (Delhi