M/S KESARWANI <ARKETING (P) LTD,,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT (OSD),, ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

194C of the Income Tax Act is not applicable therefore the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the income Tax Act are not attracted hence the addition was unwarranted and illegal. 6. That in any view of the matter addition of Rs. 2,45,832/- maintained by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) as per 11.2 of the order

M/S KESARWANI MARKETING (P) LTD,,ALLAHABAD vs. JT. C.IT,(OSD), ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

194C of the Income Tax Act is not applicable therefore the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the income Tax Act are not attracted hence the addition was unwarranted and illegal. 6. That in any view of the matter addition of Rs. 2,45,832/- maintained by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) as per 11.2 of the order

M/S KESARWANI MARKETING (P) LTD,,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT,(OSD), ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

194C of the Income Tax Act is not applicable therefore the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the income Tax Act are not attracted hence the addition was unwarranted and illegal. 6. That in any view of the matter addition of Rs. 2,45,832/- maintained by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) as per 11.2 of the order

M/S KESARWANI MARKETING(P).LTD.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT. CIT(OSD),, ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

194C of the Income Tax Act is not applicable therefore the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the income Tax Act are not attracted hence the addition was unwarranted and illegal. 6. That in any view of the matter addition of Rs. 2,45,832/- maintained by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) as per 11.2 of the order

ITO(TDS),, ALLAHABAD vs. LOK SEWA AYOG,, ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Ito (Tds), V. Public Service Commission 38, M.G. Marg, Civil Lines, (Lok Sewa Aayog), Allahabad,Up Uttar Pradesh, Stanley Road, Allahabad,Up Tan: Aldl00365B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Secretary, V. The Income Tax Officer (Tds), Public Service Commission Aaykar Bhawan, (Lok Sewa Aayog), 38, M.G. Marg, Uttar Pradesh, Allahabad,Up Stanley Road Allahabad,Up Tan: Aldl00365B (Appellant) (Respondent)

194C of the I.T. Act, 1961. On verification, it is found that the payments mentioned in the said list attracting TDS provisions are subjected to TDS and also covered in 26Q statements except the payments given in the table below where TDS has been short deducted as payees are in the status of Firm/Company on which TDS rate

SECRETARY, PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, UTTAR PRADESH,ALLAHABAD vs. IT OFFICER, T.D.S., ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Ito (Tds), V. Public Service Commission 38, M.G. Marg, Civil Lines, (Lok Sewa Aayog), Allahabad,Up Uttar Pradesh, Stanley Road, Allahabad,Up Tan: Aldl00365B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Secretary, V. The Income Tax Officer (Tds), Public Service Commission Aaykar Bhawan, (Lok Sewa Aayog), 38, M.G. Marg, Uttar Pradesh, Allahabad,Up Stanley Road Allahabad,Up Tan: Aldl00365B (Appellant) (Respondent)

194C of the I.T. Act, 1961. On verification, it is found that the payments mentioned in the said list attracting TDS provisions are subjected to TDS and also covered in 26Q statements except the payments given in the table below where TDS has been short deducted as payees are in the status of Firm/Company on which TDS rate

ITO(TDS),, ALLAHABAD vs. LOK SEWA AYOG,, ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Ito (Tds), V. Public Service Commission 38, M.G. Marg, Civil Lines, (Lok Sewa Aayog), Allahabad,Up Uttar Pradesh, Stanley Road, Allahabad,Up Tan: Aldl00365B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Secretary, V. The Income Tax Officer (Tds), Public Service Commission Aaykar Bhawan, (Lok Sewa Aayog), 38, M.G. Marg, Uttar Pradesh, Allahabad,Up Stanley Road Allahabad,Up Tan: Aldl00365B (Appellant) (Respondent)

194C of the I.T. Act, 1961. On verification, it is found that the payments mentioned in the said list attracting TDS provisions are subjected to TDS and also covered in 26Q statements except the payments given in the table below where TDS has been short deducted as payees are in the status of Firm/Company on which TDS rate

SECRETARY, PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, UTTAR PRADESH,ALLAHABAD vs. IT OFFICER, T.D.S., ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Ito (Tds), V. Public Service Commission 38, M.G. Marg, Civil Lines, (Lok Sewa Aayog), Allahabad,Up Uttar Pradesh, Stanley Road, Allahabad,Up Tan: Aldl00365B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Secretary, V. The Income Tax Officer (Tds), Public Service Commission Aaykar Bhawan, (Lok Sewa Aayog), 38, M.G. Marg, Uttar Pradesh, Allahabad,Up Stanley Road Allahabad,Up Tan: Aldl00365B (Appellant) (Respondent)

194C of the I.T. Act, 1961. On verification, it is found that the payments mentioned in the said list attracting TDS provisions are subjected to TDS and also covered in 26Q statements except the payments given in the table below where TDS has been short deducted as payees are in the status of Firm/Company on which TDS rate

MAHAVIR PRASAD SATISH CHANDRA,ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(3) , ALLAHABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year 2013-14

1- That in any view of the matter the assessment made on an income of Rs. 25,46,800/- by order dated 15-03-2016 passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act is bad both on the facts and in law and income declared in the return should have been accepted. 2- That in any view

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, MIRZAPUR vs. M/S. J.P.YADAV , SONEBHADRA

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA no

Bench: Shrivijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

194C, leading to additions being made by AO by invoking provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the 1961 Act, as alleged by Revenue, which later stood deleted by ld. CIT(A). So far as first issue is concerned, the Revenue has observed from Part B of Annexure-1 in the Tax Audit Report ( under the provisions of Section 44AB

M/S DEORA ELECTRIC WORKS,ALLAHABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1, ALLAHABAD

In the result, both appeals i

1,99,86,679/- on account of contractual receipt despite the fact that as per Rule 37BA the credit for TDS and paid to the Central Government shall be given for the assessment year for which such income is assessable, the assessee has failed to do so. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the fact that after

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1, ALLAHABAD vs. M/S DEORA ELECTRIC WORKS, ALLAHABAD

In the result, both appeals i

1,99,86,679/- on account of contractual receipt despite the fact that as per Rule 37BA the credit for TDS and paid to the Central Government shall be given for the assessment year for which such income is assessable, the assessee has failed to do so. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the fact that after