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

Appeals are disposed of in the terms indicated as above

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

TDS) adjustment in respect of the statement filed by the assessee with regard to tax deducted at source by levying fee under Section 234E of the Act. However, after if assessee fails to pay the fee for the period of delay, then the assessing authority has all the powers to levy fee while processing the statement under section

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"

8. No doubt, clause (a) of the Explanation 2 to section 263 deems the order to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue in case order is passed without making enquiries or verification which should have been made in the opinion of Pr.CIT. In our opinion, for the applicability of clause (a) of Explanation, it is necessary

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

8. The ld. AR further respectfullyrelied on the orders of the Hon’ble Apex Court and High Court which are as follows: - 8.1. The relincewas placed on following judgments related nature of income as capital receipt:- 8.1.1. Ambika Cotton Mills Ltd.v.Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, [2013] 40 taxmann.com 171 (Chennai - Trib.) “15. This leaves us with the issue regarding addition

M/S EMBROCIA FARMS PVT LTD. ,PATHANKOT vs. D.C.I.T, CIRCLE-6,, PATHANKOT

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is (in ITA No

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. Nos. 561/Asr/2018 & 284/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07

Section 154(8) makes this further clear, i.e., that any order of amendment u/s. 154(1) r/w sec. 154(4) has to be a result of a conscious decision by the concerned authority to either amend or not to amend the order sought to be rectified. The time frame stipulated thereby is, even as clarified in SBI v. ITO (TDS

MESERS EMBROCIA FARMS PVT LTD,PATHANKOT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6, PATHANKOT

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is (in ITA No

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. Nos. 561/Asr/2018 & 284/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07

Section 154(8) makes this further clear, i.e., that any order of amendment u/s. 154(1) r/w sec. 154(4) has to be a result of a conscious decision by the concerned authority to either amend or not to amend the order sought to be rectified. The time frame stipulated thereby is, even as clarified in SBI v. ITO (TDS

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

TDS was made by the Ld. AO in accordance with the reporting as per Tax Audit Report which was not added back in Computation of Income at the time of filing of Return of Income. I.T.A. No.407/Asr/2019 5 Assessment Year: 2015-16 3.3. Further, the disallowance amount of Rs. 5,28,924/- was made on account of depreciation claimed

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

TDS of Rs. 6.66 lakhs on the ground that I.T.A. No.123/Asr/2022 5 Assessment Year: 2015-16 such amount was not deposited by the employer. This Court in such background after referring to Section 205 of the Act held and observed.” 3.2 The ld. counsel for the assessee further relied on the order of the Karnataka High Court in the case

M/S. IQBAL MEMORIAL TRUST ,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), SRINAGAR

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

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

TDS “8. statement and issuance of intimation under section 200A in respect thereof, an adjustment could also be made in respect

MESERS SPEED SURYA MOVIES ,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

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

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act by the Finance Act (No. 2) 2014 is applicable retrospectively. 8. In view of the amended provisions, the expenses incurred by the assessee without deducting the TDS

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

section 234C - Held, yes Circular & Notification : CBDT’s Circular No. 261, dated 8- 8-1979.” 2. Moody's Analytics Knowledge Services (India) (P.) Ltd. v.Income-tax Officer (TDS

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 , HOSHIAPUR vs. SHRI HARPINDER SINGH GILL , HOSHIARPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

section 96 of the RFCTLAAR Act, the compensation received is eligible for exemption from Income-tax without considering the fact that assessee has acted on a pre- designed and manipulative manner in order to make evasion of taxes and hatched a conspiracy for abetment of tax evasion by way of colourful device. Decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

DIRECTOR PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY FRUIT RESEARCH,HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), JALANDHAR

section 234E of the Act. ITA N0s. 130 to 135/Asr/ 2019 4 (A.Ys.2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Director Punjab Agricultural Uni. Vs ITO (TDS) 8

DIRECTOR PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY FRUIT RESEARCH ,HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), JALANDHAR

section 234E of the Act. ITA N0s. 130 to 135/Asr/ 2019 4 (A.Ys.2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Director Punjab Agricultural Uni. Vs ITO (TDS) 8

DIRECTOR PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY FRUIT RESEARCH ,HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), JALNDHAR

section 234E of the Act. ITA N0s. 130 to 135/Asr/ 2019 4 (A.Ys.2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Director Punjab Agricultural Uni. Vs ITO (TDS) 8

DIRECTOR PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY FRUIT RESEARCH,HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), JALANDHAR

section 234E of the Act. ITA N0s. 130 to 135/Asr/ 2019 4 (A.Ys.2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Director Punjab Agricultural Uni. Vs ITO (TDS) 8

DIRECTOR PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY FRUIT RESEARCH,HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), JALANDHAR

section 234E of the Act. ITA N0s. 130 to 135/Asr/ 2019 4 (A.Ys.2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Director Punjab Agricultural Uni. Vs ITO (TDS) 8

DIRECTOR PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY FRUIT RESEARCH,HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), JALANDHAR

section 234E of the Act. ITA N0s. 130 to 135/Asr/ 2019 4 (A.Ys.2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Director Punjab Agricultural Uni. Vs ITO (TDS) 8

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 u/s 200(A) of the Act is a vitiated order having been passed in an arbitrary manner and is thus bad in law and void ab- initio and also the fees of Rs.18,400/- levied therein is illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction. 8. That in view of the facts and circumstances of the case