VINOD KUMAR TANDON,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT(CPC),, BEGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

1) however, since there is a delay as per the respective acts governing the PF and ESI, therefore, the issue is now settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services (P.) Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-1 (Supra) in paragraph nos. 31 to 55 as under:- “31. Section 43B falls in Part

TRIVENI GLASS LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3), ALLAHABAD

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

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao& Shri Ramit Kochar

36 filed with tribunal.The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ld. CIT(A) should have called for remand report from AO before rejecting the contentions of the assessee. 13.2 The Ld. DR on the other hand submitted that the matteris required to be set aside to the file of Assessing Officer for verification of the contentions of assessee. A.Ys

TRIVENI GLASS LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3) , ALLAHABAD

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

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao& Shri Ramit Kochar

36 filed with tribunal.The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ld. CIT(A) should have called for remand report from AO before rejecting the contentions of the assessee. 13.2 The Ld. DR on the other hand submitted that the matteris required to be set aside to the file of Assessing Officer for verification of the contentions of assessee. A.Ys

TRIVENI GLASS LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3), ALLAHABAD

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

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao& Shri Ramit Kochar

36 filed with tribunal.The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ld. CIT(A) should have called for remand report from AO before rejecting the contentions of the assessee. 13.2 The Ld. DR on the other hand submitted that the matteris required to be set aside to the file of Assessing Officer for verification of the contentions of assessee. A.Ys

KESARWANI & C0.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT., ALLAHABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

iv. On account of disallowance of interest – Rs.33,570/-. v. On account of disallowance of diesel expenses – Rs.8,70,985/-. vi. On account of disallowance of commission on sales Rs.11,20,165/-. 4. Aggrieved with the said additions, the assessee went in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Before the ld. CIT(A), it challenged the order passed under section

KESARWANI & CO.,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT,, ALLAHABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

iv. On account of disallowance of interest – Rs.33,570/-. v. On account of disallowance of diesel expenses – Rs.8,70,985/-. vi. On account of disallowance of commission on sales Rs.11,20,165/-. 4. Aggrieved with the said additions, the assessee went in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Before the ld. CIT(A), it challenged the order passed under section

KESARWANI & C0,,ALLAHABAD vs. JT CIT,, ALLAHABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

iv. On account of disallowance of interest – Rs.33,570/-. v. On account of disallowance of diesel expenses – Rs.8,70,985/-. vi. On account of disallowance of commission on sales Rs.11,20,165/-. 4. Aggrieved with the said additions, the assessee went in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Before the ld. CIT(A), it challenged the order passed under section