C I T vs. M/S PUNAJB STATE WAREHOUSING CORP.

Appeal is allowed, impugned order dated

Bench: MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI,MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

147 of the Act for any assessment year prior to assessment year 2001-2002 for this purpose or pass any order under Section 154 of the Act rectifying any assessment order for prior years to disallow

C I T vs. M/S PUNAJB STATE WAREHOUSING CORP.

Appeal is allowed, impugned order dated

Bench: MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI,MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

147 of the Act for any assessment year prior to assessment year 2001-2002 for this purpose or pass any order under Section 154 of the Act rectifying any assessment order for prior years to disallow

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S. GENEX INDUSTRIES LTD.

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN

disallowance of deduction under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of this Court in Bright Enterprises (P.) Ltd.'s case (supra) and of the Supreme Court in S.A. Builders Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and another, 2007 (15) SCC 147

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, JALANDHAR vs. M/S SUPERTECH FORGINGS PVT LTD

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI,MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

147 on 30.03.2017 on the basis of the information received by the AO from the investigation wing in the form of statement recorded in the case of Sh. Madan Lal Pahuja. In the reasons recorded, the AO had mentioned that the purchases made from Madan Lal Pahuja M/s. Shiv BholeKirpa Traders Rs.1.05 Cr., Lovy Steel and Allied Industries Rs.0.17

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I LUDHIANA vs. M/S VERDHMAN TEXTILES LTD. LUDHIANA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI,MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

147 of the Income Tax Act, issued notice to the assessee under Section 148 of the Act. During the course of reassessment proceedings, the reasons recorded for reopening were served upon the assessee. Vide letter dated 22.01.2010, the assessee raised objection alleging it to be a review of the earlier decision of the Assessing Officer. The second objection

M/S INDUSTRIAL CABLES (INDIA) LTD., RAJP vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATIALA & OR

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN

Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh in ITA No.487/Chandi/1992 for the assessment year 1990-1991 disallowing the credit of Rs.89,854/- to the sister concerns on the specific ground that the advances given to the sisters concerns were not proved to be relating