INCOME-TAX OFFICER, BATHINDA vs. SH. MOHAN LAL, BATHINDA

Bench: Sh. T. S. Kapoor & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 170/(Asr)/2015 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Pan: Aajpl8560B Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sh. Mohan Lal Prop. Ward-1(2), Bathinda. M/S Ramji Dass Bko, Vill. Bhagiwander, Tehsil Talwandi Sabo, Distt. Bathinda. (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS as per the provisions of section 194C of the Act, which attracted the mischief of the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The appellant contests this disallowance on the ground that these represented labour charges for job work of “bharai” and “nikasi” which were disbursed through the appellant’s employee jamadars, Sri Bikkar

SHRI SATISH KUMAR. S/O. SH. HANS RAJ ,HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-4, HOSHIARPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.संसंसंसं././././I.T.A No.258/Asr/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/A.Y.:2014-15 िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष" Shri Satish Kumar S/O Hans Raj, Vs. Principal Commissioner Of B-12, Mch-366/13, Billa Income-Tax-1, Jalandhar House, New Jagatpura, Hoshiarpur Pan: Aawpk 0932 D अपीलाथ" Appellant अपीलाथ" ""यथ"/Respondent ""यथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" ""यथ" ""यथ"

194C of the Act. However, the perusal of records suggest that there is nothing on record that TDS was deducted on these payments. The Pr.CIT further, observed that the assessee has debited Rs.5,91,030 as court fees paid for civil suit to recover Rs. 2,09,00,000 and Rs.17,53,638 against Kamaldeep Singh and M/s. Gupta Traders

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), SRINAGAR vs. M/S TRANS ASIA INDUSTRIES EXPOSITION (P) LTD, SRINAGAR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee and the revenue

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

7. In the next ground, the assessee has challenged confirmation of short deduction of tax at source on payment of professional fee of Rs.14,72,360/- being bad in law. 7.1 The AO notice that the appellant has not deducted tax of Rs. 14,72,360/- while making payment of legal and profession charges. and created a tax liability

THE TRANS ASIAN INDUSTRIES EXPOSITION PVT. LTD,SRINAGAR vs. THE ASSESING OFFICER(TDS), SRINAGAR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee and the revenue

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

7. In the next ground, the assessee has challenged confirmation of short deduction of tax at source on payment of professional fee of Rs.14,72,360/- being bad in law. 7.1 The AO notice that the appellant has not deducted tax of Rs. 14,72,360/- while making payment of legal and profession charges. and created a tax liability

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-IV,, PATHANKOT vs. THE GURDASPUR CENTRAL CO. OPBANK LTD, GURDASPUR

In the result, the ground no

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meenaandsh. Anikesh Banerjee

TDS are not attracted on the supply of pamphlets, banners and other stationery items to the assessee as the same does not fall in the definition of “work” by virtue of sub clause (e) of clause (iv) of the explanation of section 194C. The disallowance of Rs 34,90,828/- u/s 40a(ia) is therefore deleted.” The ld. Counsel further

MESAGE. NORTHERN TRASFORMERS. INDUSTRIAL ESTATE,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, SRINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA 329/Asr/2019 is partly

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

TDS on payment to transporter. The assessee was unable to mention any supporting case law in support of its reason for non-deduction of tax by contravening section 194C. Accordingly, this ground of the assessee is deleted. The addition amount of Rs. 49,573/- is upheld. 7

SH. AMRINDER SINGH DHIMAN,NAKODAR vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE PHAGWARA, PHAGWARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

7. Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia): 7.1 The assessee has made payment of Rs.28,565/- and Rs.2,04,867 under the head "clearing & forwarding charges" to M/s Orient Marine Lines Pvt Ltd. As per provisions of section 194C, tax was required to be deducted on said payment. Accordingly, assessee was raised a query in this regard, vide order sheet noting

MEASAGE TAU AGRO SALES PRIVATE LIMITED,FARIDKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(2), FEROZEPUR

In the result the ground no

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

7 The amount of Rs.35,270 on 13/02/2012 is for two bills of freight credited to the supplier M/s Mahaveer Foods no payment for these was made in cash-APB Pageno.136-139. Vouchers are at page no.171. The other observation regarding non-deduction of TDS under section 194-C is not applicable in this case as no oral or written agreement

MEASAGE.TAU AGRO SALES PRIVATE LIMITED,FARIDKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(4), FARIDKOT

In the result the ground no

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

7 The amount of Rs.35,270 on 13/02/2012 is for two bills of freight credited to the supplier M/s Mahaveer Foods no payment for these was made in cash-APB Pageno.136-139. Vouchers are at page no.171. The other observation regarding non-deduction of TDS under section 194-C is not applicable in this case as no oral or written agreement

PUNJAB STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION,HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - TDS-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeals filed are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

194C are not applicable on the facts of our case. 3. That the appellant seeks the permission to alter, amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal. 3. This is second round of appeal. In the first round of appeal, the ITAT has set aside the matter vide appellate order Nos. 494 to 496/Asr/2017 dated 26.03.2019 by observing

PUNJAB STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION,HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeals filed are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

194C are not applicable on the facts of our case. 3. That the appellant seeks the permission to alter, amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal. 3. This is second round of appeal. In the first round of appeal, the ITAT has set aside the matter vide appellate order Nos. 494 to 496/Asr/2017 dated 26.03.2019 by observing

PUNJAB STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION,HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS-1`, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeals filed are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

194C are not applicable on the facts of our case. 3. That the appellant seeks the permission to alter, amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal. 3. This is second round of appeal. In the first round of appeal, the ITAT has set aside the matter vide appellate order Nos. 494 to 496/Asr/2017 dated 26.03.2019 by observing

FIRST INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS LTD.,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.46/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13

TDS. The notice U/s 154 wasissued. None was present on behalf of the assessee. The exparte order was passed with addition of amount to Rs. 10,07,395/- &amount to Rs. 47,509/- which works out total amount to Rs. 10,54,904/- with the total income of the assessee. Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before

INDERJIT SINGH,PHAGWARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, PHAGAWARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Brajesh Kumar Singh

section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. That Appellant requests to add, amend or leave any grounds of appeal before the appeal is finally heard or disposed off.” 3. Brief facts emerging from records are that the assesseean individual (Mr. Inderjit Singh )is a partner of the partnership firm M/s Golden Auto Industries PAN: [AAKFG 9983E

M/S. ANAND TEXTILES ,PATHANKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 4 (1), AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Choudhry & Sh. O. P. Meenai.T.A. No. 674/Asr/2019 Assessment Year: 2008-09

7. Per contra the Ld. DR relied on the orders of lower authorities. 8. We have heard the rival submissions and find that hence the books of account are rejected then no other addition is required to be made, therefore above disallowance of Rs.3,24,775/- made by the AO on account of fabrication expenses is accordingly deleted. 9. Ground

SH. GURJINDER SINGH,AMRITSAR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, AMRITSAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

194C. This issue was duly discussed by the AO during assessment proceedings and detailed reply was submitted by the assessee vide Para 4 of reply filed on 28.11.2016. Complete detail of freight payments was filed and it was verified by the AO that freight payments to each truck was within the limit of TDS and for this reason

THE DY. COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX, JAMMU vs. M/S. THE JAMMU & KASHMIR BANK LTD,, SRINAGAR

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: Sh. T. S. Kapoor & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 298/(Asr)/2014 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Pan: Aaact6167G Dy. C. I. T., Vs. M/S. The Jammu & Kashmir Circle-1, 2Nd Floor Aayakar Bank Ltd., Corporate Head Bhawan, Railhead Complex, Quarters, M. A. Road, Jammu. Srinagar. (Appellant) (Respondent)

194C(2) of the Act and not u/s. 1941 of the Act and there is no allegation that this TDS is not deposited with the Government account. We are of the view that the provisions of section 40(a) (la) of the Act has two limbs one is where, inter alia, assessee has to deduct tax and the second where

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JAMMU, SRINAGAR vs. MESERS JAMMU & KASHMIR BANK LIMITED , SRINAGAR

In the result, the ground No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

7 & Others appeals The A.O. disallowed under sec. 40(a)(ia) of the Act a sum of Rs. 98441850/- for non- deduction of tax on interest on deposits paid by 5 branches of the appellant bank to Jammu Development Authority. The appellant, in his submission made during the appellate proceedings, has stated that no tax is required to be deducted