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

c) to (f) of section 200A(1) of the Act is prospective in nature. 11. The Appellant craves leave to add, to alter to amend the above ground of appeal at the time of hearing.” 3. Following common ground of appeal nos. 1 to 6 and 7 to 10 have been raised in all the appeals. Ground

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

c) to (f) of section 200A(1) of the Act is prospective in nature. 11. The Appellant craves leave to add, to alter to amend the above ground of appeal at the time of hearing.” 3. Following common ground of appeal nos. 1 to 6 and 7 to 10 have been raised in all the appeals. Ground

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

c) to (f) of section 200A(1) of the Act is prospective in nature. 11. The Appellant craves leave to add, to alter to amend the above ground of appeal at the time of hearing.” 3. Following common ground of appeal nos. 1 to 6 and 7 to 10 have been raised in all the appeals. Ground

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

c) to (f) of section 200A(1) of the Act is prospective in nature. 11. The Appellant craves leave to add, to alter to amend the above ground of appeal at the time of hearing.” 3. Following common ground of appeal nos. 1 to 6 and 7 to 10 have been raised in all the appeals. Ground

RAJIV MEHRA ,AMRITSAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE , LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

delay of 10 days condoned and the appeal is admitted on merits. 4. The ld. counsel contended that the penalty is confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) without application of mind as the ld. Assessing Officer has imposed the penalty by issuing a notice u/s 271(1)(c) r.w.s. 274 dated 06.12.2019 without specific charge by striking

SHRI ALTAF HUSAIN SHAH,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1), SRINAGAR

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

6) of Income-tax Act, 1961 (in brevity the Act), date of order 29.01.2020 for assessment year 2001-02. The impugned order was originated from the order of ld. Income-tax Officer, Ward -1(1), Srinagar (in brevity AO), order passed u/s. 144/147, date of order 30.12.2008. 2 Altaf Husain Shah v. ITO 2. The brief fact of the case