GULMARG DEVLOPMENT AUTHORITY,BARAMULA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), SRINAGAR

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

section 250 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre and came to know of the fact as on 17.02.2023, when the appellant/DDO received the phone call from the jurisdictional ITO TDS SRINAGAR regarding the initiation of recovery proceedings of outstanding demand of Rs 17,25,946/- against your TAN. The DDO told the Income Tax Officer that the appeal

GULMARG DEVLOPMENT AUTHORITY ,BARAMULA vs. INCOME TAX OFICER ( TDS), SRINAGAR

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

section 250 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre and came to know of the fact as on 17.02.2023, when the appellant/DDO received the phone call from the jurisdictional ITO TDS SRINAGAR regarding the initiation of recovery proceedings of outstanding demand of Rs 17,25,946/- against your TAN. The DDO told the Income Tax Officer that the appeal

GULMARG DEVLOPMENT AUTHORITY ,BARAMULA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS) , SRINAGAR

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

section 250 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre and came to know of the fact as on 17.02.2023, when the appellant/DDO received the phone call from the jurisdictional ITO TDS SRINAGAR regarding the initiation of recovery proceedings of outstanding demand of Rs 17,25,946/- against your TAN. The DDO told the Income Tax Officer that the appeal

BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS,JK BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS vs. ITO (TDS), SRINAGAR, SILK FACTORY ROAD SRINAGAR

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the assessees are allowed for

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing)

section 250 of the 4 I.T.A. No. 237 & 238/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 and 2013-14 Income Tax Act common 1961, during the proceedings. Under the circumstances, he was compelled to believe that appellant has nothing to submit against the addition made by the assessing officer and same was confirmed. In our view, the act of the Addl

BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS,JK BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS vs. ITO (TDS), SRINAGAR, ITO (TDS), SRINAGAR

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the assessees are allowed for

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing)

section 250 of the 4 I.T.A. No. 237 & 238/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 and 2013-14 Income Tax Act common 1961, during the proceedings. Under the circumstances, he was compelled to believe that appellant has nothing to submit against the addition made by the assessing officer and same was confirmed. In our view, the act of the Addl

SANT SOLIDER ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC-TDS, GHAZIBAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee through in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

TDS, 378 Lajpat Nagar, Jalandhar, Ghaziabad Aayakar Bhavan, Punjab – 144 001 Sector-3, Vaishali, [PAN: AAHCS 0525L] Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201010 (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee by Sh. Abhinav Vijh, C. A. Revenue by Sh. S. M. Surendranath, D. R. Date of Hearing 30.11.2021 Date of Pronouncement 03.12.2021 ORDER Per Bench: These appeals are filed by the assessees feeling aggrieved

SANT SOLDIER ENGINEERS AND CONTRCTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX .CPC-TDS, GHAZIBAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee through in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

TDS, 378 Lajpat Nagar, Jalandhar, Ghaziabad Aayakar Bhavan, Punjab – 144 001 Sector-3, Vaishali, [PAN: AAHCS 0525L] Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201010 (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee by Sh. Abhinav Vijh, C. A. Revenue by Sh. S. M. Surendranath, D. R. Date of Hearing 30.11.2021 Date of Pronouncement 03.12.2021 ORDER Per Bench: These appeals are filed by the assessees feeling aggrieved

SANT SOLIDER ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC-TDS, GHAZIBAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee through in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

TDS, 378 Lajpat Nagar, Jalandhar, Ghaziabad Aayakar Bhavan, Punjab – 144 001 Sector-3, Vaishali, [PAN: AAHCS 0525L] Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201010 (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee by Sh. Abhinav Vijh, C. A. Revenue by Sh. S. M. Surendranath, D. R. Date of Hearing 30.11.2021 Date of Pronouncement 03.12.2021 ORDER Per Bench: These appeals are filed by the assessees feeling aggrieved

SANT SOLDIER ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee through in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

TDS, 378 Lajpat Nagar, Jalandhar, Ghaziabad Aayakar Bhavan, Punjab – 144 001 Sector-3, Vaishali, [PAN: AAHCS 0525L] Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201010 (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee by Sh. Abhinav Vijh, C. A. Revenue by Sh. S. M. Surendranath, D. R. Date of Hearing 30.11.2021 Date of Pronouncement 03.12.2021 ORDER Per Bench: These appeals are filed by the assessees feeling aggrieved

SHRI HARINDER PAL SINGH,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

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

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

250 (6) of the Income Tax Act 1961, [in brevity the Act] for A.Y. 2015-16.The impugned order was emanated from the order of the ld. Joint I.T.A. No.123/Asr/2022 2 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD) Central Circle-1, Jalandhar,(in brevity the AO) order passed u/s 154 of the Act date of order 26.02.2021. The assessee took

SPARROW SECURITY SERVICES ,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1), JAMMU

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

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

250(6) of the Income Tax Act, is bad in law as the same has been disposed off without examining the merits of the case. 3. That the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 4807613/- on account of employer and employee contribution paid after the due date as per statute by not appreciating that the same

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

250(6) of the Income Tax Act 1961, (in brevity the Act) for A.Y. 2013-14. The impugned order was originated from the order of the ld. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-VI, Pathankot (in brevity the AO) order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act date of order 29.03.2016. The revenue has taken the following grounds

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

250 of the Income Tax Act,1961 dated 25.04.2024which has arisen from the order of the AO, CPC, Bengaluru dated 17.12.2020 passed u/s 154of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2 I.T.A. No. 369/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 2. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee in Form No. 36 are as follows: “1. That on facts and circumstances

SURJIT MEMORIAL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,FEROZEPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD ( EXEMPTIONS), AMRITSAR

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

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

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in brevity the Act) for assessment year 2015-16. The impugned order was emanated from the order of the ld. CPC-TDS, (in brevity the ld. AO) order passed u/s 200A of the Act. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds: I.T.A. No. 189/Asr/2022 2 Assessment Year: 2015-16 “1. THE LATE

SMT. SATYAWATI MARWAHA THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SH, CHANDER SHEIKHAR MARWAHA,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal for Asstt

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which has emanated from the order of the 2 I.T.A. Nos. 346 & 347/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 DCIT, Central Circle, Jalandhar passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act, 1961 dated 29.03.2022. 2. Grounds of appeal taken by the assessee in ITA No. 346/Asr/2024 for A.Y. 2014-15 in Form

SMT. SATYAWATI MARWAHA THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SH. CHANDER SHEIKHAR MARWAHA,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal for Asstt

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which has emanated from the order of the 2 I.T.A. Nos. 346 & 347/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 DCIT, Central Circle, Jalandhar passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act, 1961 dated 29.03.2022. 2. Grounds of appeal taken by the assessee in ITA No. 346/Asr/2024 for A.Y. 2014-15 in Form

NARINDER AND COMPANY,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(5), JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

4. The learned Pr. CIT initiated proceedings under section 263 of the Act vide show cause notice u/s 263 vide letter No. 2607 dated 22.02.2022; pointing out certain discrepancies in the Assessment Order. The learned Pr. CIT observed that the order of the Ld. Assessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue in as much

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

250 (6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in brevity the Act) for A.Ys. 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2015-16. The impugned orderswere originated from the order of the ld. Income Tax Officer, I.T.A. Nos. 323 to 325/Asr/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15 to 2015-16 2 Ward-3(2) Ferozepur, (in brevity the AO). The orders were passed