THE GURDASPUR CENTRAL COOP BANK LTD,GURDASPUR vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE- VI,, PATHANKOT

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 681/Asr/2017 (And Stay Application No. 01/Asr/2018) Assessment Year: 2014-15

VI, Pathankot Bazar, Gurdaspur [PAN: AAAAT 0711A] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Vinamar Gupta & Vibhore Gupta (CAs.) Respondent by: Smt. Prabhjot Kaur CIT (D.R.) Date of Hearing: 07.03.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 24.05.2018 ORDER Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is an Appeal by the Assessee agitating the Order by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Amritsar ('CIT(A)', for short

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3, AMRITSAR vs. SHRIMATI RAJ RANI ARORA, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

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

TDS returns filed by the assessee showing the amount of tax deducted at source on interest paid to the loan creditors. This also proves the genuineness of the loan advanced by Sh. Amandeep Singh to the appellant in the year under consideration. Moreover, the identity of Sh. Amandeep Singh is established as he attended before

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -IV, KAPURTHALA vs. M/S PUNJAB GRAMIN BANK, KAPURTHALA

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Ravish Sood

24,800/-. Subsequently, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment under Sec. 143(2) of the IT Act. 3. During the course of the assessment proceedings it was observed by the A.O that the assessee bank had made interest payments amounting to Rs. 2,45,58,987/- to M/s I.K.G. Punjab Technical University (hereinafter referred

SHRI ARSHAD MOHD MALIK,JAMMU vs. INMCVOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2 (4), UDHAMPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

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

TDS return of Department. And the department had filed the correction return during the Assessment proceedings . Further in reply dated 22.12.2016 copy of the Acknowledgement of the revised return of the PMGSY div. Ramban was also furnished. The changes in I.T.A. No.168/Asr/2020 3 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Form 26 AS were effected by the PMGSY Department before the Assessment order

MEASAGE BHAI INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,MOGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, MOGA

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

TDS and had duly deposited it as required. From the perusal of record it can be Very well worked out that there was actual movement of goods and that our client had actually production purchased the goods / wheat, which he had used for its The detail of all the purchases is as under: S. Bill Dated Amount Goods Vehicle