STATE BANK OF INDIA,GWALIOR vs. CIT A, GWALIOR

In the result, ITA No.42/Agr/2018 is allowed for statistical

80- State Bank of ITO (TDS), AAACS8577K 83 City Center, BPLS07281B A.Y.2013-14 India, Branch- Gwalior nimari bye paas road Tikamgarh 47-49/Ag/2018 84- State Bank of ITO (TDS), AAACS8577K 86 City Center, BPLS06686B A.Y.2013-14 India, Branch- Gwalior Orcha, Tikamgarh 87- 40-41/Ag/2018 State Bank of ITO (TDS), AAACS8577K 88 City Center, BPLS11862E A.Y.2013-14 India, Branch- Gwalior karchal, Sheopur

STATE BANK OF INDIA,GWALIOR vs. CIT A , GWALIOR

In the result, ITA No.42/Agr/2018 is allowed for statistical

80- State Bank of ITO (TDS), AAACS8577K 83 City Center, BPLS07281B A.Y.2013-14 India, Branch- Gwalior nimari bye paas road Tikamgarh 47-49/Ag/2018 84- State Bank of ITO (TDS), AAACS8577K 86 City Center, BPLS06686B A.Y.2013-14 India, Branch- Gwalior Orcha, Tikamgarh 87- 40-41/Ag/2018 State Bank of ITO (TDS), AAACS8577K 88 City Center, BPLS11862E A.Y.2013-14 India, Branch- Gwalior karchal, Sheopur

TOMAR AND BROTHERS,ETAWAH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2)(5), ETAWAH

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: :Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2014-15

80,000/- under the said section.” 8. Both the authorities below had noted several expenses incurred by the assessee to be without TDS

GARRISON ENGINEER (E/M) AIR FORCE STATION,MAHARJPUR vs. JCIT(TDS),, BHOPAL

In the result, ITA Nos. 128 to 131/Agr/2021 and ITA Nos

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

80,600/- (i.e., Rs.100 per day) vide orders dated 20.03.2020 passed under Section 272A(2)(k) of the Act. The details of such penalties are as under : Quarterly statement Form No. 24Q 24Q 24Q 24Q Quarter Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Due date of filing 15.07.2011 15.10.2011 31.01.2012 15.05.2012 Date of filing Not filed Not filed Not filed Not filed TDS

GARRISON ENGINEER (E/M),MAHARAJPUR vs. JCIT., (TDS), BHOPAL

In the result, ITA Nos. 128 to 131/Agr/2021 and ITA Nos

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

80,600/- (i.e., Rs.100 per day) vide orders dated 20.03.2020 passed under Section 272A(2)(k) of the Act. The details of such penalties are as under : 3 | P a g e ITA No. Quarterly Quarter Due date Date of TDS

GARRISON EMGOMEER (E/M),AIR FIRCE STATION,MAHARAJPUR vs. JCIT.(TDS), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, ITA Nos. 128 to 131/Agr/2021 and ITA Nos

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

80,600/- (i.e., Rs.100 per day) vide orders dated 20.03.2020 passed under Section 272A(2)(k) of the Act. The details of such penalties are as under : 3 | P a g e ITA No. Quarterly Quarter Due date Date of TDS

GARRISON EMGOMEER (E/M) AIR FORCE STATION , MAHARAJPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (TDS),, BHOPAL

In the result, ITA Nos. 128 to 131/Agr/2021 and ITA Nos

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

80,600/- (i.e., Rs.100 per day) vide orders dated 20.03.2020 passed under Section 272A(2)(k) of the Act. The details of such penalties are as under : 3 | P a g e ITA No. Quarterly Quarter Due date Date of TDS

GARRISON ENGINEER(E/M),MAHARAJPUR vs. ITO.,(TDS), , GWALIOR

In the result, ITA Nos. 128 to 131/Agr/2021 and ITA Nos

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

80,600/- (i.e., Rs.100 per day) vide orders dated 20.03.2020 passed under Section 272A(2)(k) of the Act. The details of such penalties are as under : 3 | P a g e ITA No. Quarterly Quarter Due date Date of TDS

GARRISON ENGINEER (E/M),GWALIOR vs. ITO,(TDS),, GWALIOR

In the result, ITA Nos. 128 to 131/Agr/2021 and ITA Nos

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

80,600/- (i.e., Rs.100 per day) vide orders dated 20.03.2020 passed under Section 272A(2)(k) of the Act. The details of such penalties are as under : 3 | P a g e ITA No. Quarterly Quarter Due date Date of TDS

GARRISON ENGINEER (E/M),GWALIOR vs. ITO.(TDS), GWALIOR, GWALIOR

In the result, ITA Nos. 128 to 131/Agr/2021 and ITA Nos

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

80,600/- (i.e., Rs.100 per day) vide orders dated 20.03.2020 passed under Section 272A(2)(k) of the Act. The details of such penalties are as under : 3 | P a g e ITA No. Quarterly Quarter Due date Date of TDS

GARRISON ENGINEER (E/M), MAHARAJPUR vs. ITO.,(TDS), GWALIOR

In the result, ITA Nos. 128 to 131/Agr/2021 and ITA Nos

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

80,600/- (i.e., Rs.100 per day) vide orders dated 20.03.2020 passed under Section 272A(2)(k) of the Act. The details of such penalties are as under : 3 | P a g e ITA No. Quarterly Quarter Due date Date of TDS

M/S R.K. BAJPAI,AURAIYA vs. CIT -1, AGRA

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenam/S R.K. Bajpai, Vs..Dcit,Circle-1, Dibiyapur, Auraiya. Agra. Panno.Aaffr8521G (Assessee) (Revenue)

TDS has been made as per the provisions of Section 1941 and 194J of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Whereas, these payments have been made to different persons and no single payment or aggregate of payments made to a single person is outside the limit prescribed u/s 1941 and 194J of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In the account rent

ACIT CIRCLE-4, AGRA vs. JHANSI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JHANSI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meenajhansi Development Authority Vs..Dcit Circle-4, Commissionerycompus, Agra. Jhansi. (Now The Dy. Cit Panno.Aaalj0068K (Exemption) Ghaziabad. (Assessee) (Revenue) Acit, 4(1), Vs..Jhansi Development Agra. Authority (Now The Dy. Cit Commissionerycompus, Jhansi. (Exemption) Ghaziabad. Panno.Aaalj0068K (Revenue) (Assessee)

80,601- out of total addition of Rs.20,28,52,965/- made by the AO on account of sale of shopping complexes, residential houses / commercial spaces etc. without appreciating the facts that the assessee never recognized revenue from the above sale in the past nor ever treated them as business receipts in his books of accounts

JHANSI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JHANSI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-4, AGRA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meenajhansi Development Authority Vs..Dcit Circle-4, Commissionerycompus, Agra. Jhansi. (Now The Dy. Cit Panno.Aaalj0068K (Exemption) Ghaziabad. (Assessee) (Revenue) Acit, 4(1), Vs..Jhansi Development Agra. Authority (Now The Dy. Cit Commissionerycompus, Jhansi. (Exemption) Ghaziabad. Panno.Aaalj0068K (Revenue) (Assessee)

80,601- out of total addition of Rs.20,28,52,965/- made by the AO on account of sale of shopping complexes, residential houses / commercial spaces etc. without appreciating the facts that the assessee never recognized revenue from the above sale in the past nor ever treated them as business receipts in his books of accounts

JHASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JHANSI vs. DY. C.I.T., CIRCLE-4, AGRA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meenajhansi Development Authority Vs..Dcit Circle-4, Commissionerycompus, Agra. Jhansi. (Now The Dy. Cit Panno.Aaalj0068K (Exemption) Ghaziabad. (Assessee) (Revenue) Acit, 4(1), Vs..Jhansi Development Agra. Authority (Now The Dy. Cit Commissionerycompus, Jhansi. (Exemption) Ghaziabad. Panno.Aaalj0068K (Revenue) (Assessee)

80,601- out of total addition of Rs.20,28,52,965/- made by the AO on account of sale of shopping complexes, residential houses / commercial spaces etc. without appreciating the facts that the assessee never recognized revenue from the above sale in the past nor ever treated them as business receipts in his books of accounts

RAJVEER SINGH YADAV CONTRACTOR,ETAWAH vs. ITO-2(2)(5), , ETAWAH

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

80,313/- on trading expenses overlooking the fact that never ever in past assessee has been assessed at such exorbitant rate of Profit which is not real in the business of Contract for civil construction. 3. BECAUSE, while confirming the addition the Ld CIT(A) was highly unjustified in confirming ad- hoc disallowance of Rs. 47,88,313/- ignoring

SHRI OM PRAKASH SINGH,MATHURA vs. ACIT CIRCLE-3, AGRA

In the result appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

TDS. 9. BECAUSE, while making the assessment the authorities below made various observations/ conclusions which are contrary to facts available on records. While making the addition submission made and evidences filed have been rejected arbitrarily. 10. BECAUSE, the order appealed against is arbitrary, illegal, contrary to the facts, material on record, law and principles of natural justice. The ‘appellant’ reserves

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-4(1), AGRA vs. DR. ANIL KUMAR VERMA, AGRA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the C

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaa.Y. :2009-10

80 lakhs and donation has been made from Syndicate Bank a/c to Sai Charitable Trust who has charged interest of Rs. 46,794/- who has direct nexus with the donation given and he confirmed the disallowance to the extent of Rs. 46,794/-. 29. Feeling aggrieved by the order, the Revenue is in appeal before