PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), GURGAON vs. M/S DHG MARKETING PVT.LTD

Appeal is dismissed

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

Section 68 of the Act on account of unexplained credits relating to share capital received by the assessee during the relevant

OM PARKASH vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 AAYAKAR BHAWAN JALANDHAR

Bench: MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA,MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN

68,859,00 Cr. Total 4,60,581.00 Cr. 5. In the absence of any confirmation from the above parties, it was held that the trading liability amounting to Rs.4,60,581/- had ceased to exist as per provisions of Section

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX NEW DELHI vs. MANJIT SINGH BAIDWAN

Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

68 83/Mum/2014 which al decision. Accordingly, in t circumstance of the present cas herein above considering the Tribunal in the case of DCIT, ITA No. 802/ infirmity in the order of he same. We have heard arties and perused the cases relied upon by the lowed the deductions u/s t the amended provisions n as the claim of the ment

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS CHANDIGARH vs. M/S VISHAV MANAV RUHANI KENDRA

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 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench ‘B’ passed in ITA No.899/Chd/2019 dated 21.05.2020 (Annexure A-3). 2. Counsel for the appellant has pressed the following substantial question of law:- “(ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

RANJIT SINGH GHUMAN vs. C I T

Bench: The Revenue Authorities That A Sum Of ` 5,00,000/- Was Still Due To Be Paid & Varinder Singh 2024.05.21 13:43 I Attest To The Accuracy & Authencity Of This Order/Judgment

Section 158 BC (c) on 26.02.2002 by the CIT, Jalandhar and while making other VARINDER SINGH 2024.05.21 13:43 I attest to the accuracy and authencity of this order/judgment ITA No. 216 of 2007 -3- additions, ` 5,00,000/- have been added as undisclosed investment made to acquire the rights of his sister-in-law in the family property. Total