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

1) along with questionnaire were issued, which were duly replied by AJAY PRASHER 2023.06.02 09:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document ITA No.56 of 2019 (O&M) 2023:PHHC:077580-DB -2- the assessee. After considering the replies filed by the assessee, the Assessing Officer made addition amounting to Rs.4.15 crores, under Section 68

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MS GOBIND DHAM RENEWABLE ENERGY PVT LTD

Bench: The Revenue Authorities Related To Source Of Source. In Our Considered View The Assessee Submitted Pan, Returns Of Income, Audited Financial Statements, Transactions Through Banking Channels. The Ld. Ar Invited Our Attention To The Jawala Ram 2024.12.10 17:53 I Attest To The Accuracy & Authenticity Of This Document

Section 68, for undisclosed credit, the concerned assessee has to satisfy the identity of the party to the banking transactions, filing of the Income Tax Returns and credit worthiness. The DR as well as the appellant here do not raise objections regarding the genuineness of the identity of the party of the banking transactions and of filing of Income

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

68. It was further recorded by the Appellate Authority that the appellant was able to give particulars of persons who had donated the amounts and the donors were never examined by the Assessing Officer to prove otherwise and there was nothing to show that the specific direction to the donor had to be in writing as to how the donations

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

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

1. The pre wherein a s b ju L &M) HE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA CHANDIGAR ISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( )-II, NEW DELHI Vs. NGH BAIDWAN **** HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SU **** Mrs. Urvashi Dhugga, Sr. Standi for the appellant. **** RAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) -2023 Application for condonation of wed and accordingly delay

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

1,00,000/- and ` 70,000/- in various years from 2003 to 2006. Copies of the bank statements have been also placed in order to confirm the submissions made by the appellant with regard to the fact that the amount of ` 5,00,000/- was still due to be paid and the Income Tax authorities had wrongfully added the said