DAWN COTTAGE EMPORIUM,SRINAGAR vs. THE DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SRINAGAR

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

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

50,000/- was duly rejected for non-deduction of TDS, for violation of section 40(a) (ia). The sundry creditors

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)

section 40(A)(3) of the act in making payments exceeding Rs. 50,000 to various contractors and therefore Assessing Officer had rightly made the additions, it was submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly deleted these additions and therefore the order of the Assessing Officer be upheld. 4. The Ld. AR on the other hand submitted that Assessing Officer

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

GURU NANAK DEV HEALTH & EDUCATION SOCIETY,LUDHIANA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTIONS,), JALANDHAR

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

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

50,200/- was made. In view of this, the matter in both the appeals is restored to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudication afresh. It is also directed that if the assessee society, under the circumstances, is found to exist not solely for educational purposes, the Ld. CIT(A) will also consider the claim of the assessee

GURU NANAK DEV HEALTH & EDUCATION SOCIETY,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) WARD, JALANDHAR

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

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

50,200/- was made. In view of this, the matter in both the appeals is restored to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudication afresh. It is also directed that if the assessee society, under the circumstances, is found to exist not solely for educational purposes, the Ld. CIT(A) will also consider the claim of the assessee

GURU NANAK DEV HEALTH & EDUCATION SOCIETY,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) WARD, JALANDHAR

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

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

50,200/- was made. In view of this, the matter in both the appeals is restored to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudication afresh. It is also directed that if the assessee society, under the circumstances, is found to exist not solely for educational purposes, the Ld. CIT(A) will also consider the claim of the assessee

GURU NANAK DEV HEALTH & EDUCATION SOCIETY,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD (EXEMPTION), JALANDHAR

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

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

50,200/- was made. In view of this, the matter in both the appeals is restored to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudication afresh. It is also directed that if the assessee society, under the circumstances, is found to exist not solely for educational purposes, the Ld. CIT(A) will also consider the claim of the assessee

SHRI KEWAL KRISHAN,FEROZEPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD, ZIRA

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

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

TDS of Rs.4,07,893/- was effected on the said amount @ 20%+3% CESS. 8. In terms of the provisions of sub section (iv) of section 57, read with sub- clause (viii) of section 56(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the taxability of 50

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 u/s 194C for payment to transporter amount of Rs.22,850/- and Rs.26,723/- which is worked out total amount of Rs.49,573/- was added back with total income of the assessee.Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) upheld the addition made by AO. 3. Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before

M/S. PMS DIESELS,,PHAGWARA vs. ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PHAGWARA

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 65/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: 2006-07

TDS on the impugned sum. How could, then, one may ask, section 40(a)(ia) be regarded as applicable? The order by the tribunal, as apparent from the applicable monetary limits u/s. 268A of the Act, precluding the Revenue from challenging the same in further appeal, has attained finality. The impugned disallowance is accordingly deleted. For the next two sums

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

TDS returns, VAT returns, details of creditors, debtors, etc. As such, the issue of cash deposited during demonetization period and the source was duly explained by the assessee to the Assessing Officer and as such the 'financial results' along with the cash book of the assessee were properly examined and considered by the Assessing Officer, while framing the assessment

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

M/S. SATIA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUKTSAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA

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

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

TDS Certificate in Form 16A related to deduction of tax at source. The ld. AR fully denied that the assessee had no transaction with the RolmexInternational, as alleged by the revenue. The ld. AR placed that the details as below: I.T.A. No.193/Asr/2022 33 Assessment Year: 2018-19 “18. Addition of Rs. 4,57,32,318/- on account of alleged bogus

M/S MANAGING COMMITTEE SWAMI PREMANAND MAHAVIDALYA,HOSHIARPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION),, CHANDIGARH

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

TDS provisions or not? . xv. Provide the copy of financial statements for the last three financial years i.e. from F.Y. 2013-14 t0 F.Y. 2015-16. xvi. The note on activities of the society. xvii.Taxability in the case along with full ITR with computation for A.Y. 2014-15 t0 2016-17. xviii. Explanation of the nature of various funds reflected

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

50,00,000/- in the name of “Neha” from 02/12/2013 to 15/02/2014. The AO has failed to make necessary verification and enquiries from “Neha”. Even the complete detail of address etc. of “Neha” is not there on record. (v) Further, the cash book of M/s Apex Marketings shows that the assessee has claimed receipt of cash

SHRI VIJAY KUMAR GROVER ,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(3), SRINAGAR

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

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat

section 143(3) of IT Act. An addition of Rs. 3,62,607/- was made by him to the returned income of Rs.10,75,020/-&partly upheld by worthy CIT(A) to the extent of Rs. 2,50,000/- NOW THE ARGUMENTS GROUND NOS.1 to 5 Your Honour- As is a common knowledge, various expenses have to be incurred

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) CIRCLE-3, FEROZEPUR vs. MEASAGE OM SONS MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, FARIDKOT

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

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

50,84,399/- Addition on account of difference in valuation rate of the share issued by invoking the provisions of sec 56(2)(viib) of the Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) Rs. 3,38,60,465/- Addition on account of interest on TDS Rs. 2,38,149/- Disallowance of depreciation claimed on trucks in excess

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

In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well as cross objection of the Assessee are dismissed

Bench: Sh. N.K. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryassessment Year : 2012-13 The Ito Vs M/S Trans Asia Industries Exposition (Tds), Srinagar (P) Ltd., Nishant Srinagar Pan No: Amrt10683B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Charan Dass, Dr Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Ito Vs Smt. Farooqa Attar Anantnag, Kashmir(J&K) D/O Sh. Ghulam Nabi Attar R/O Shurath, Kulgam, Kashmir Pan No: Ajupa9254F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Charan Dass, Dr Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Ito Vs Sh. Ashok Kumar Sharma Ward-1(5), Samba, First Floor Prop. M/S Ishita Food Products Chander Complex, Highway, Birpur Industrial Area, National Bari Vijaypur, Samba Brahmana, Samba Pan No: Aprps1901C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : (Written Submission) Revenue By : Shri Charan Dass, Dr Assessment Year : 2008-09 The Dcit Vs Smt. Krishna Devi Educational Central Circle-Ii, Jalandhar Charitable Soceity, Langri, Chandigarh Road, Mahilpur, Hoshiarpur Pan No: Abifs7407A Appellant Respondent Cross Objection No. 30/Asr/2013 (In Ita No. 155/Asr/2013) Assessment Year : 2008-09

TDS), Srinagar (P) Ltd., Nishant Srinagar PAN NO: AMRT10683B Appellant Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Charan Dass, DR Assessment Year : 2009-10 The ITO Vs Smt. Farooqa Attar Anantnag, Kashmir(J&K) D/o Sh. Ghulam Nabi Attar R/o Shurath, Kulgam, Kashmir PAN NO: AJUPA9254F Appellant Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Charan Dass, DR Assessment Year