ITO, W-6(5), MOHALI vs. SMT. GURDEV KAUR, KHARAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Disposal Of Appeal.”

price of land at Rs. 2,30,00,000/- and taking the sale consideration of land at Rs. 62,70,000/- + 10,45,000/-). In fact this cash was available with the assessee only out of the sale proceeds of 54 Bigha 13 Biswa & 4 Biswasi and another piece of land of land for Rs.2

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA vs. SHREE BALAJI PROCESSORS, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas, the 29

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 499/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 The Ito, Vs. Shree Balaji Processors, बनाम Ward-1(3), Tajpur Road, Ludhiana Opp. Central Jail, Ludhiana 141010 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Actfs8428B अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent & C.O. No. 09/Chd/2024 ( In आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 499/Chd/2023) "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Shree Balaji Processors, Vs. The Ito, बनाम Tajpur Road, Ward-1(3), Opp. Central Jail, Ludhiana Ludhiana 141010 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Actfs8428B अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 26.06.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20.08.2024

price realized by him. Meaning thereby that, the assessee would send the goods to the said person and as soon as the said person sells those goods from the Kolkata Office, the proceeds which he would realize from the sales of the said goods would be deposited in the bank account of the assessee. The profit margin at which

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

Bench: The Said Resolution To Enhance Authorized Share Capital.

deposited the cash towards share application money and provisions of section 269SS are not applicable in such case. It was also explained that total share application money received during the year amounts to Rs. 2948 Lacs out of which only Rs. 175 Lacs was received in cash. The assessee company is a Public Limited Company and accounts of the entity

SSHRI KULDIP SINGH,CHANDIGARH vs. PR.CIT-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Paresh M. Joshiआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 103/Chd/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Kuldeep Singh, Vs. The Pr. Cit-1, 2010, बनाम Chandigarh Sec 21-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Bllps7083L अपीलाथ"/ Assessee ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Ajay Jain, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Rohit Sharma, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03.12.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30.01.2025 आदेश/Order Per Paresh M. Joshi, Jm : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee U/S 253 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Herein Referred To As ‘The Act’] Before This Tribunal. The Assessee Is Aggrieved By The Order Bearing No. Itba/Rev/F/ Revs/ 250 /2020-21/1031467646 (1) Dated 14.03.2021 Of Ld. Pcit, Chandigarh-1 Passed U/S 263 Of The Act. The Relevant A.Y.

price of Rs. 80,35,000/- of the said residential flat, I have paid sum of Rs.. 28,10,000/- from my bank account through bank remittances and the sum of Rs 5,35,000/- were paid in cash, the cash flow statement has already been provided to your goodself in the previous reply. Further, my sister has paid

SH. BAKSHISH SINGH,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO WARD -5(2), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 417/Chd/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Bakshish Singh. Vs. The Ito, बनाम H.No. 11, Ground Floor, Ward 5(2), Sectro41-A, Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Brfps8672D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent (Virtual Hearing) "नध"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Maninder Arora, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 21.02.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 13.03.2024

transfers of Rs. 24,00,000/- from Karnataka Bank, this had wrongly been claimed as cash withdrawal forming the source of the opening cash in hand as on 1.4.2011; that even in the appellate proceedings, no explanation had been offered with regard thereto; that thus, only a balance of Rs. 2,25,000/- was left as explanation for the opening

M/S ANAND ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SANGURUR vs. PR.CIT, PATIALA

In the result, all the appeals of the respective assessees stands allowed

cash and were allegedly converted into accommodation entries on the same day or the next day. The AO went on to conclude that, thus, the assessee firm had not undertaken any business activity during the year. 2.4 In the assessment order, the AO also made a reference to the statement of Shri G.K. Garg, the Auditor of S.P. Singla Group

M/S CHENAB CONSTRUCTION,SANGRUR vs. PCIT, PATIALA

In the result, all the appeals of the respective assessees stands allowed

cash and were allegedly converted into accommodation entries on the same day or the next day. The AO went on to conclude that, thus, the assessee firm had not undertaken any business activity during the year. 2.4 In the assessment order, the AO also made a reference to the statement of Shri G.K. Garg, the Auditor of S.P. Singla Group

M/S GANGA CONSTRUCTIONS,SANGURUR vs. PCIT, PATIALA

In the result, all the appeals of the respective assessees stands allowed

cash and were allegedly converted into accommodation entries on the same day or the next day. The AO went on to conclude that, thus, the assessee firm had not undertaken any business activity during the year. 2.4 In the assessment order, the AO also made a reference to the statement of Shri G.K. Garg, the Auditor of S.P. Singla Group

M/S AMBEY ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS,NEW DELHI vs. PR.CIT, PATIALA

In the result, all the appeals of the respective assessees stands allowed

cash and were allegedly converted into accommodation entries on the same day or the next day. The AO went on to conclude that, thus, the assessee firm had not undertaken any business activity during the year. 2.4 In the assessment order, the AO also made a reference to the statement of Shri G.K. Garg, the Auditor of S.P. Singla Group

M/S HIMALYAN CONSTRUCTION AND ENGINEERS,SANGRUR vs. PCIT, PATIALA

In the result, all the appeals of the respective assessees stands allowed

cash and were allegedly converted into accommodation entries on the same day or the next day. The AO went on to conclude that, thus, the assessee firm had not undertaken any business activity during the year. 2.4 In the assessment order, the AO also made a reference to the statement of Shri G.K. Garg, the Auditor of S.P. Singla Group

M/S HIND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERS CONTRCTORS,SANGRUR vs. PR.CIT, PATIALA

In the result, all the appeals of the respective assessees stands allowed

cash and were allegedly converted into accommodation entries on the same day or the next day. The AO went on to conclude that, thus, the assessee firm had not undertaken any business activity during the year. 2.4 In the assessment order, the AO also made a reference to the statement of Shri G.K. Garg, the Auditor of S.P. Singla Group

M/S AMAR CONTRUCTION AND ENGINEER ,SANGRUR vs. PCTI, PATIALA

In the result, all the appeals of the respective assessees stands allowed

cash and were allegedly converted into accommodation entries on the same day or the next day. The AO went on to conclude that, thus, the assessee firm had not undertaken any business activity during the year. 2.4 In the assessment order, the AO also made a reference to the statement of Shri G.K. Garg, the Auditor of S.P. Singla Group

M/S ADARSH CONSTRUCTIONS AND ENGINEERS,SANGRUR vs. PR.CIT, PATIALA

In the result, all the appeals of the respective assessees stands allowed

cash and were allegedly converted into accommodation entries on the same day or the next day. The AO went on to conclude that, thus, the assessee firm had not undertaken any business activity during the year. 2.4 In the assessment order, the AO also made a reference to the statement of Shri G.K. Garg, the Auditor of S.P. Singla Group

M/S OMKAR ENGINEER AND CONTRACTOR,SANGRUR vs. PCTI, PATIALA

The appeals of the assessees stand allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

cash and were allegedly converted into accommodation entries on the same day or the next day. The AO went on to conclude that, thus, the assessee firm had not undertaken any business activity during the year. 2.4 In the assessment order, the AO also made a reference to the statement of Shri G.K. Garg, the Auditor of S.P. Singla Group

M/S SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION,SANGRUR vs. PCIT, PATIALA

The appeals of the assessees stand allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

cash and were allegedly converted into accommodation entries on the same day or the next day. The AO went on to conclude that, thus, the assessee firm had not undertaken any business activity during the year. 2.4 In the assessment order, the AO also made a reference to the statement of Shri G.K. Garg, the Auditor of S.P. Singla Group

M/S MAA BHAGWATI ENTERPRISES,SANGRUR vs. PCIT, PATIALA

The appeals of the assessees stand allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

cash and were allegedly converted into accommodation entries on the same day or the next day. The AO went on to conclude that, thus, the assessee firm had not undertaken any business activity during the year. 2.4 In the assessment order, the AO also made a reference to the statement of Shri G.K. Garg, the Auditor of S.P. Singla Group

M/S OM CONTRACTOR AND ENGINEERS,SANGRUR vs. PCIT, PATIALA

The appeals of the assessees stand allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

cash and were allegedly converted into accommodation entries on the same day or the next day. The AO went on to conclude that, thus, the assessee firm had not undertaken any business activity during the year. 2.4 In the assessment order, the AO also made a reference to the statement of Shri G.K. Garg, the Auditor of S.P. Singla Group

SMT. TEENA GARG,CHANDIGARH vs. PCIT, PANCHKULA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

deposit\nand purchase of property. After filing detailed reply in his case\nexplaining source of property partly out of loan funds and balance\nout of his independent sources, assessment was finalized by ITO-\nWard-3, Ambala by passing assessment order dated 20.02.2017 u/s\n143(3) of the Act wherein the case was assessed at returned income.\nCopy of assessment order