PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, JALANDHAR vs. M/S MAX INDIA LTD

Appeal is hereby dismissed in limine

Bench: MR. JUSTICE GURMEET SINGH SANDHAWALIA,MS. JUSTICE HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘1961 Act’), is directed against the order dated 24.09.2021 (Annexure A-3) of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar (for short, the ‘Tribunal’) passed in ITA-121/Asr/2018 for the assessment year 2014-15. 2. The substantial questions of law which are sought to be raised

LALIT SINGLA R/O SARAI ALBEL SINGH OUTSIDE LAHORI GATE PATIALA PUNJAB vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TEX PATIALA PUNJAB

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE VIVEK PURI

260A of the Income Tax Act 1961 (for short 'the Act') for the assessment year 2011-12 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Chandigarh in ITA No. 227/CHD/2016 dated 18.4.2017 whereby the Tribunal had set aside the order of CIT and remand the assessment case of the appellant to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision after

BALJINDER SINGH SALANA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATIALA

Bench: MR. JUSTICE GURMEET SINGH SANDHAWALIA,MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI

disallowance of expenses on account of wages paid to labour and without any material on record against the assessee? (iii) Whether the ITAT has erred in applying the provision of section-44AD for calculating the net profit ratio at 8% of the gross receipt which was treated as income of the assesse? (iv) Whether net profit ratio of earlier years

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CHANDIGARH vs. M/S IMPROVEMENT TRUST BATHINDA

The appeals are hereby dismissed

Bench: MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL,MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA

260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') against the order dated 31.08.2015 of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short 'I.T.A.T.'). The Tribunal quashed the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT), cancelling the registration of assessee-Trust. 3. As per the appellant, following substantial questions of law arise for consideration of this Court : (i)Whether

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX FARIDABAD vs. M/S PIYUSH COLONIZERS LTD.

The appeal is dismissed

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

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act') against the order dated 28.12.2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short, 'the Tribunal') claiming following substantial questions of law: “(i) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (A) and the Ld. ITAT have erred on facts

BHARTI BHUSHAN JINDAL vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LUDHIANA

Bench: MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL,MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘IT Act’), for Assessment Year 2004-2005 is preferred against order dated 13.07.2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench ‘B’, Chandigarh (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) in ITA No.459/Chd/2011. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE 2. Brief facts of the case, as per pleadings, are that the appellant is engaged

ST. BANK OF PTIALA, PATIALA vs. COMM. OF INCOME TAX, PATIALA & ANR.

Appeal is allowed

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL,MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 is seeking setting aside of order dated 06.06.2008 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (for short ‘Tribunal’) for the Assessment Year 1995-96. 2. Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that only one issue is involved namely disallowance

CIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LTD.

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL,MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘1961 Act’) is seeking setting aside of order dated 28.05.2008 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh (for short ‘ITAT’). 2. The appellant has raised following questions for adjudication by this Court:- i. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ITAT was right

C I T vs. M/S GLAXO SMITHKLINE CONSUMER HEALTHCARE LTD.

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL,MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘1961 Act’) is seeking setting aside of order dated 21.09.2007 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh (for short ‘ITAT’). 2. The appellant has raised following questions for adjudication by this Court:- i. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ITAT was right

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CONSUMER HEALTHCARE LTD

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL,MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘1961 Act’) is seeking setting aside of order dated 05.04.2016 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh (for short ‘ITAT’). 2. The appellant has raised following questions for adjudication by this Court:- (i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

CIT CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CONSUMER

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL,MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘1961 Act’) is seeking setting aside of order dated 28.02.2005 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh. 2. The appellant has raised following questions for adjudication by this Court:- (i) Whether on facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT is right in law in permitting the change

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -II, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S GLAXO SMITHKLINE CONSUMERS, PATIALA

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL,MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘1961 Act’) is seeking setting aside of order dated 31.01.2025 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh. DEEPAK BISSYAN 2026.01.28 10:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document ITA-645-2008; and ITA-263-2009 -2- 3. The appellant has raised following questions for adjudication by this

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -II, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CONSUMER HEALTH CARE LTD.(NOW GLAXO SMITHKLINE CONSUMER HEALTHCARE LTD.)

Appeal stands disposed of

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL,MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is seeking setting aside of order dated 31.01.2025 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh. 2. The appellant has raised following questions for adjudication by this Court:- (i) Whether on facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT is right in law in permitting the change in method of accounting

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

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, has been filed against the order dated 31.03.2011 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh, whereby appeal filed by the assessee-M/s Verdhman Textiles Ltd. has been accepted and order dated 26.11.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), Ludhiana relating to the assessment year 2007-2008 has been

(O&M) M/S KULDIP SOOD ENTERPRISES vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LUDHIANA

The appeal stands dismissed

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

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 17.10.2000 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench 'A' Chandigarh (for short 'the Tribunal') passed in Income Tax Appeal No. 999/Chandi/1993 for A.Y. 1988-89 claiming the following questions of law:- (a) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, order Annexure

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX FARIDABAD vs. M/S NHPC LTD

The appeals stand disposed of

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) against the order dated 30-9-2014 (Annexure A-III) passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) in ITA No. 2618/Del/2008 for Assessment Year 2005- 2006, claiming the following substantial questions of law:- 1. “Whether, on the facts