DAMANDEEP KAUR,MOHALI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE-2), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

104 | 261 | Resident |\n\nThus, the assessee's non-resident status under section 6 of the Act stands\nundisputed and accepted by all revenue authorities including the CIT(A) and\nthe BMA authority.\n\n12.\nThe assessee in written submissions has contended that once she is\naccepted as a non-resident, she automatically falls in the definition of “eligible\nassessee

M/S GLAXOSMITHKLINE ASIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue, stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

price of international transaction of export of goods. Re: Incorrect exclusion of comparable by the TPO In this regard, it is respectfully submitted that while applying TNMM, the following companies excluded by the TPO in the impugned order ought to be considered as comparable for the reasons tabulated as under: Company Reasons for Remarks of the applicant Name Remarks

ACIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S GLAXO SMITHKLINE ASIA PVT. LTD., GURGAON

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue, stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

price of international transaction of export of goods. Re: Incorrect exclusion of comparable by the TPO In this regard, it is respectfully submitted that while applying TNMM, the following companies excluded by the TPO in the impugned order ought to be considered as comparable for the reasons tabulated as under: Company Reasons for Remarks of the applicant Name Remarks

GLAXOSMITHKLINE ASIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue, stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

price of international transaction of export of goods. Re: Incorrect exclusion of comparable by the TPO In this regard, it is respectfully submitted that while applying TNMM, the following companies excluded by the TPO in the impugned order ought to be considered as comparable for the reasons tabulated as under: Company Reasons for Remarks of the applicant Name Remarks

ACIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S GLAXO SMITHKLINE ASIA PVT. LTD., GURGAON

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue, stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

price of international transaction of export of goods. Re: Incorrect exclusion of comparable by the TPO In this regard, it is respectfully submitted that while applying TNMM, the following companies excluded by the TPO in the impugned order ought to be considered as comparable for the reasons tabulated as under: Company Reasons for Remarks of the applicant Name Remarks

ACIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S GLAXO SMITHKLINE ASIA PVT. LTD., GURGAON

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue, stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

price of international transaction of export of goods. Re: Incorrect exclusion of comparable by the TPO In this regard, it is respectfully submitted that while applying TNMM, the following companies excluded by the TPO in the impugned order ought to be considered as comparable for the reasons tabulated as under: Company Reasons for Remarks of the applicant Name Remarks

GLAXOSMITHKLINE ASIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue, stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

price of international transaction of export of goods. Re: Incorrect exclusion of comparable by the TPO In this regard, it is respectfully submitted that while applying TNMM, the following companies excluded by the TPO in the impugned order ought to be considered as comparable for the reasons tabulated as under: Company Reasons for Remarks of the applicant Name Remarks

M/S GLAXO SMITHKLINE ASIA PVT. LTD.,NABHA vs. DCIT, C-4(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue, stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

price of international transaction of export of goods. Re: Incorrect exclusion of comparable by the TPO In this regard, it is respectfully submitted that while applying TNMM, the following companies excluded by the TPO in the impugned order ought to be considered as comparable for the reasons tabulated as under: Company Reasons for Remarks of the applicant Name Remarks

GLAXOSMITHKLINE ASIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue, stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

price of international transaction of export of goods. Re: Incorrect exclusion of comparable by the TPO In this regard, it is respectfully submitted that while applying TNMM, the following companies excluded by the TPO in the impugned order ought to be considered as comparable for the reasons tabulated as under: Company Reasons for Remarks of the applicant Name Remarks

M/S GLAXO SMITHKLINE ASIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, C-4(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue, stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

price of international transaction of export of goods. Re: Incorrect exclusion of comparable by the TPO In this regard, it is respectfully submitted that while applying TNMM, the following companies excluded by the TPO in the impugned order ought to be considered as comparable for the reasons tabulated as under: Company Reasons for Remarks of the applicant Name Remarks

GLAXOSMITHKLINE ASIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue, stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

price of international transaction of export of goods. Re: Incorrect exclusion of comparable by the TPO In this regard, it is respectfully submitted that while applying TNMM, the following companies excluded by the TPO in the impugned order ought to be considered as comparable for the reasons tabulated as under: Company Reasons for Remarks of the applicant Name Remarks

M/S GLAXO SMITHKLINE ASIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, C-4(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue, stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

price of international transaction of export of goods. Re: Incorrect exclusion of comparable by the TPO In this regard, it is respectfully submitted that while applying TNMM, the following companies excluded by the TPO in the impugned order ought to be considered as comparable for the reasons tabulated as under: Company Reasons for Remarks of the applicant Name Remarks

ACIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S GLAXO SMITHKLINE ASIA PVT. LTD., GURGAON

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue, stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

price of international transaction of export of goods. Re: Incorrect exclusion of comparable by the TPO In this regard, it is respectfully submitted that while applying TNMM, the following companies excluded by the TPO in the impugned order ought to be considered as comparable for the reasons tabulated as under: Company Reasons for Remarks of the applicant Name Remarks

KAKA SINGH ALIAS GULJAR SINGH,PATIALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , PATIALA

104, Mohindra Complex,\nKheri Gujran Road, Punjab-147001\nबनाम\nThe ITO\nWard-04, Patiala\nस्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: ACZPK4511F\nअपीलार्थी/Appellant\n\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by :\nराजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by :\nप्रत्यर्थी/Respondent\nShri Rakesh Cajla, Advocate(Virtual)\nShri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR\n\nआयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 1112/Chd/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year

SAROJ CHAUDHARY BALA,PANCHKULA vs. ITO, WARD-4, PANCHKULA

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

104, Mohindra Complex, Ward-04, Patiala Kheri Gujran Road, Punjab-147001 "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: ACZPK4511F अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Rakesh Cajla, Advocate(Virtual) राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1112/Chd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Pawan Kumar बनाम

SMT. SHANKRI DEVI,PANCHKULA vs. ACIT, PANCKULA CIRCLE, PANCHKULA

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

104, Mohindra Complex, Ward-04, Patiala Kheri Gujran Road, Punjab-147001 "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: ACZPK4511F अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Rakesh Cajla, Advocate(Virtual) राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1112/Chd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Pawan Kumar बनाम

BALBIR KUMAR HUF,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO , CHANDIGARH

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

104, Mohindra Complex, Ward-04, Patiala Kheri Gujran Road, Punjab-147001 "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: ACZPK4511F अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Rakesh Cajla, Advocate(Virtual) राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1112/Chd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Pawan Kumar बनाम

INCOME TAX OFFICER, FATEHABAD vs. MAHESH NAGPAL, FATEHABAD

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

104, Mohindra Complex, Ward-04, Patiala Kheri Gujran Road, Punjab-147001 "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: ACZPK4511F अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Rakesh Cajla, Advocate(Virtual) राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1112/Chd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Pawan Kumar बनाम