DE vs. ON PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMMUVS.DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2, JAMMU

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

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

TDS deduction in violation of provisions of the section 194H of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 9. Considering factual matrix

DE vs. ON PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMMUVS.ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2, JAMMU

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

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

TDS deduction in violation of provisions of the section 194H of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 9. Considering factual matrix

SH. SADA RAM CHAWLA,TARN TARAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), TARNTARAN

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

Bench: Sh. Ravish Sood & Dr. M. L. Meena

section 194H and since no tax was deducted by disallowing the same u/s. 40a(ia) whereas the Appellant is not having any payer and payee relationship with the retailers as retailers are not providing any services to the company and not to the appellant. The Appellant is only transferring/redistributing money received from Reliance as per their directions 3. That

MEASAGE POOJA FLOOR MILLS ,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), AMRITSAR

Bench: Shri L. P. Sahu & Shri Ravish Sood

194H of the Act, had not declined its liability but had deferred the furnishing of the reply to the next date. On the basis of the aforesaid facts the ITO(TDS) treated the assessee as being in default U/ss. 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act for A.Y. 2015-16. As the purchase bills pertaining

MEASAGE POOJA FLOOR MILLS,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- TDS, AMRITSAR

Bench: Shri L. P. Sahu & Shri Ravish Sood

194H of the Act, had not declined its liability but had deferred the furnishing of the reply to the next date. On the basis of the aforesaid facts the ITO(TDS) treated the assessee as being in default U/ss. 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act for A.Y. 2015-16. As the purchase bills pertaining

MEASAGE POOJA FLOOR MILLS ,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- TDS , AMRITSAR

Bench: Shri L. P. Sahu & Shri Ravish Sood

194H of the Act, had not declined its liability but had deferred the furnishing of the reply to the next date. On the basis of the aforesaid facts the ITO(TDS) treated the assessee as being in default U/ss. 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act for A.Y. 2015-16. As the purchase bills pertaining

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

194H of the I.T Act, 1961. 3. That the appellant craves for permission to add, delete or amend the Grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing of appeal.” 4. None attended for the assessee although the notice of fixing the appeal for hearing has been got served through the ITO, (TDS), Srinagar /Addl

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

194H of the I.T Act, 1961. 3. That the appellant craves for permission to add, delete or amend the Grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing of appeal.” 4. None attended for the assessee although the notice of fixing the appeal for hearing has been got served through the ITO, (TDS), Srinagar /Addl