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

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

Transfer Pricing Officer made a variation to the Arm's Length\nPrice and valued the transaction at Rs.517.82 per share. In other words, he\nrecommended a variation in the Arm's Length Price. In these circumstances, the\nPetitioner would certainly be an eligible Assessee as contemplated under Section\n144C(15)(b) (i) of the IT Act. Since this variation

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

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

Transfer Pricing Officer made a variation to the Arm's Length\nPrice and valued the transaction at Rs.517.82 per share. In other words, he\nrecommended a variation in the Arm's Length Price. In these circumstances, the\nPetitioner would certainly be an eligible Assessee as contemplated under Section\n144C(15)(b) (i) of the IT Act. Since this variation

SARASWATI AGRO CHEMICALS (INDIA) PVT. LTD,MOHALI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), MOHALI

In the result, the transfer pricing adjustment so made by the AO and confirmed by the ld CIT(A) amounting to Rs 89,22,420/- is hereby set-aside and the ground of appeal is allowed

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

2) and 142(1) were issued. Further during the course of assessment proceeding, the AO referred the matter to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) to determine the Arms Length Price in respect of certain specified domestic transactions entered into by the assessee with its associate enterprises. 3.1 During the course of Transfer Pricing proceedings, there was no compliance

CENTRIENT PHARMACEUTICALS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNJAB vs. DCIT/ ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 1201/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22

144C read with section 1448 of the Act in pursuance of directions dated 26 September 2024 issued by Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP). In facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. AO/ Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) and Ld. DRP have: 1. erred in making transfer pricing adjustment of INR 166,00,63,165 to total income declared

PAREXEL INTERNATIONAL SERVICES INDIA PVT.LTD,,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-5(1),(NEAC), CHANDIGARH

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

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

Sections 144C(13), 143(3A) and 143(3B) of the Act to the extent prejudicial to the Appellant, is bad in law and is liable to be quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Panel erred in upholding the action of the Ld. Transfer Pricing

SH. RAJINDER SINGH BEDI,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT (INTL. TAXATION), CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 538/Chd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Rajinder Singh Bedi, The Dcit, (Int.Taxation ), 1368, Sector 40-B, Vs Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Afwpb3355A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.06.2025 Hybrid Hearing O R D E R

144C of the Income Tax Act The Assessing Officer is directed to complete the assessment as per the above directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel. The Assessing Officer shall place a copy of these directions as annexure to the final order, to be read as a part of the order. While passing the final order, the Assessing Officer shall incorporate

DCIT, C-1(1) , CHANDIGARH vs. M/S FIDELITY INFORMATION SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, the cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

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

2. Firstly, we shall taken up the appeal of the Revenue wherein the only effective ground relates to the deletion of addition of Rs. 9,21,58,400/- on account of foreign travelling expenses which has been disallowed by the AO under section 37(1) of the Act. 3. In this regard, briefly the facts of the case are that

NEERU ARORA,CHANDIGARH vs. CIRCLE-1, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms indicated above

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

144C(2) on 31.03.2023, along with Form No. 35A and various annexures, challenging the year of taxability, the incorrect application of section 50C, and the denial of deduction for the cost of acquisition. 8. The assessee contended that the transfer of the capital asset was completed in A.Y. 2010-11 when possession was handed over and full consideration was received

M/S JOSAN INDUSTRIES,JALALABAD vs. DCIT, CL-1, INTL. TAXATION, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed as indicated

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 64 To 66/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Josan Industries, Vs. The Dcit Circle-1, बनाम Jalalabad, International Taxation, H.O., Guruharshai, Chandigarh Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Aaafj7294F अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

2(3), Abohar. 4. That the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in law in reopening the assessment by issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act in as much as there has been no escapement of income and as such the order passed is illegal, arbitrary and unjustified. 5. That the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in law as well

M/S JOSAN INDUSTRIES,JALALABAD vs. DCIT, CL-1, INTL. TAXATION, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed as indicated

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 64 To 66/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Josan Industries, Vs. The Dcit Circle-1, बनाम Jalalabad, International Taxation, H.O., Guruharshai, Chandigarh Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Aaafj7294F अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

2(3), Abohar. 4. That the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in law in reopening the assessment by issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act in as much as there has been no escapement of income and as such the order passed is illegal, arbitrary and unjustified. 5. That the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in law as well

M/S JOSAN INDUSTRIES,JALALABAD vs. DCIT, CL-1, INTL. TAXATION, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed as indicated

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 64 To 66/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Josan Industries, Vs. The Dcit Circle-1, बनाम Jalalabad, International Taxation, H.O., Guruharshai, Chandigarh Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Aaafj7294F अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

2(3), Abohar. 4. That the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in law in reopening the assessment by issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act in as much as there has been no escapement of income and as such the order passed is illegal, arbitrary and unjustified. 5. That the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in law as well

AUTHORGEN TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,MOHALI vs. ITO, WARD 6(1), CHANDIGARH

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

2)(b) and hence such an action is bad in law. 3. On the facts and under the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO erred in invoking Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 even though the appellant being resident, has provided complete explanation about the nature and source of sum so credited

M/S AUTHORGEN TECHNOLOGIES PVT.LTD,MOHALI vs. PR.CIT-1, CHANDIGARH

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

2)(b) and hence such an action is bad in law. 3. On the facts and under the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO erred in invoking Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 even though the appellant being resident, has provided complete explanation about the nature and source of sum so credited