ELCHICO HOTELS & RESTAURANTS PRIVATE LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC(TDS), ALLAHABAD

In the result, the Appeal No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

Section 234E of the Act is charging provision i.e. substantive provision which could not be applied retrospectively, unless it is expressly provided in the Act, to levy the late fee for any delay in filing the TDS statement for 6

ELCHICO HOTELS & RESTAURANTS PRIVATE LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC(TDS), ALLAHABAD

In the result, the Appeal No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

Section 234E of the Act is charging provision i.e. substantive provision which could not be applied retrospectively, unless it is expressly provided in the Act, to levy the late fee for any delay in filing the TDS statement for 6

ELCHICO HOTELS & RESTAURANTS PRIVATE LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CPC (TDS) , ALLAHABAD

In the result, the Appeal No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

Section 234E of the Act is charging provision i.e. substantive provision which could not be applied retrospectively, unless it is expressly provided in the Act, to levy the late fee for any delay in filing the TDS statement for 6

ELCHICO HOTELS & RESTAURANTS PRIVATE LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC(TDS), ALLAHABAD

In the result, the Appeal No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

Section 234E of the Act is charging provision i.e. substantive provision which could not be applied retrospectively, unless it is expressly provided in the Act, to levy the late fee for any delay in filing the TDS statement for 6

ELCHICO HOTELS & RESTAURANTS PRIVATE LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC(TDS), ALLAHABAD

In the result, the Appeal No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

Section 234E of the Act is charging provision i.e. substantive provision which could not be applied retrospectively, unless it is expressly provided in the Act, to levy the late fee for any delay in filing the TDS statement for 6

ELCHICO HOTELS & RESTAURANTS PRIVATE LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC(TDS), ALLAHABAD

In the result, the Appeal No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

Section 234E of the Act is charging provision i.e. substantive provision which could not be applied retrospectively, unless it is expressly provided in the Act, to levy the late fee for any delay in filing the TDS statement for 6

ELCHICO HOTELS & RESTAURANTS PRIVATE LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC(TDS), ALLAHABAD

In the result, the Appeal No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

Section 234E of the Act is charging provision i.e. substantive provision which could not be applied retrospectively, unless it is expressly provided in the Act, to levy the late fee for any delay in filing the TDS statement for 6

ELCHICO HOTELS & RESTAURANTS PRIVATE LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC(TDS), ALLAHABAD

In the result, the Appeal No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

Section 234E of the Act is charging provision i.e. substantive provision which could not be applied retrospectively, unless it is expressly provided in the Act, to levy the late fee for any delay in filing the TDS statement for 6

ELCHICO HOTELS & RESTAURANTS PRIVATE LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC(TDS), ALLAHABAD

In the result, the Appeal No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

Section 234E of the Act is charging provision i.e. substantive provision which could not be applied retrospectively, unless it is expressly provided in the Act, to levy the late fee for any delay in filing the TDS statement for 6

ELCHICO HOTELS & RESTAURANTS PRIVATE LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC(TDS), ALLAHABAD

In the result, the Appeal No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

Section 234E of the Act is charging provision i.e. substantive provision which could not be applied retrospectively, unless it is expressly provided in the Act, to levy the late fee for any delay in filing the TDS statement for 6

M/S. RITHWIK RK JOINT VENTURE,HYDERABAD vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ALLAHABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

Section 1191) of the IT Act, 1961. 6. Details of grants receipts during the period under consideration with documentary support/ sanctioned orders of the concerned Department/organization 7. Evidences/Vouchers of expenditure made during the period under consideration debited in the income and expenditure account. 8. Details of the secured Loan. i. Name and address of the Bank. ii. Copy of confirmation

M/S RITHWIK RK JOINT VENTURE vs. PR. CIT, ALLAHABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

Section 1191) of the IT Act, 1961. 6. Details of grants receipts during the period under consideration with documentary support/ sanctioned orders of the concerned Department/organization 7. Evidences/Vouchers of expenditure made during the period under consideration debited in the income and expenditure account. 8. Details of the secured Loan. i. Name and address of the Bank. ii. Copy of confirmation

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

section is highly unjustified. 6- That in any view of the matter the appellant reserves his right to take any fresh grounds of appeal before hearing of appeal.” 2. The only issue involved in this appeal is regarding disallowance of Rs.22,73,457/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s. 40(a)(ia) as the assessee has not deducted TDS

KESARWANI MARKETING(P) LTD.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT,, ALLAHABAD

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

6. That in any view of the matter a sum of Rs. 13,64,337.00 out of the addition of Rs. 19,74,401.00 made by the assessing officer as per Para 8 of the order and as maintained by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as per Para 10.2 of his order is highly unjustified and incorrect

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

6. That in any view of the matter a sum of Rs. 13,64,337.00 out of the addition of Rs. 19,74,401.00 made by the assessing officer as per Para 8 of the order and as maintained by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as per Para 10.2 of his order is highly unjustified and incorrect

M/S. SUBHASH STONE INDUSTRIES (P) LTD.,NAINITAL vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

Section 143(3) , reiterated the additions of Rs. 6,26,650/- made by the AO in the original assessment order dated 21.12.2010 passed u/s 143(3) of the 1961 Act. The aforesaid additions of Rs. 6,26,650/- were made mostly by disallowing the business expenses claimed by the assessee under various heads, and details are as under : a) Disallowance

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

In the result, both appeals i

6 (Six) credits made in TDS certificate in respect of BSNL ED. Jodhpur. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 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

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

In the result, both appeals i

6 (Six) credits made in TDS certificate in respect of BSNL ED. Jodhpur. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 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