ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. WARYAM STEEL CASTING PRIVATE LIMITED, KANGANWAL ROAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the Cross appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

justice are satisfied. 60. In State of J & K v. Bakshi Ghulam Mohammad AIR 1967 SC 122 the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the right of hearing cannot include the right of cross examination and the right must depend upon the circumstances of each case and must also depend on the statute under which the allegations are being enquired

CT EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JALANDHAR vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is Partly Allowed for\nStatistical Purposes as per the directions above

justice by\ndisallowing exemption on the ground that assessee is selling books, stationery,\nuniform, swimming accessories and running student hostel which is incidental to\nmain object of the society.\nSir, your attention is drawn to the fact that addition w.r.t. salaries have\nalready been deleted by Hon'ble CIT(A) itself and issue of advances given to\nspecified personshave already

BANUR BROTHER ,PATIALA vs. ITO-WARD-1, AMBALA

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed as and by way of remand to Ld

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

natural justice. It was further also contended that appellant was not given sufficient opportunity to participate and prosecute matter before first appellate authority, therefore impugned order passed by Ld. CIT(A) must be set aside. The Ld. AR on merits in respect of ground No. 2 & 3 has submitted as follows: 2.2.1 That the Appellant was a commission agent

INTERNATIONAL CUSTOMER RELATED MANAGEMENT SERVICES PVT LTD,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(1), MOHALI

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

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

TDS). The disallowance of interest expenditure was also challenged on the grounds that it was unjustified and inconsistent with the treatment accorded in earlier assessments. Lastly, the assessee contended that the assessment order was cryptic in nature and had been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice

TIRUPATI ENGINEERS AND CONTRUCTIONS,SANGRUR vs. ITO, SANGRUR

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) submitted that during appellate proceedings, several notices under Section 250 were issued but the assessee failed to file any written submissions or attend hearings. Considering repeated non-compliance, the CIT(A) held that the assessee was not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Relying on judicial precedents, it was observed that an appeal requires active prosecution and mere filing is insufficient. As the assessee provided no evidence or arguments in sup

natural justice. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the assessment order made by the Ld. AO ignoring the facts and circumstances of the case by passing an exparte order in a mechanical manner without ensuring proper service of hearing notices. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 4,19,620/- against

DR. JASWINDER SINGH THROUGH GPA SMT. JAGJIWAN KAUR,ROPAR vs. ITO, W-2(2), ROPAR

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

Natural Justice and as such the order passed is arbitrary and unjustified. 2. Without prejudice to the above, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 3,81,134/- and Rs. 37,560,/- made on account of alleged non deduction of TDS

HARYANA BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed

TDS was required to be deducted from the\nsaid payments, AO had not invoked the provisions of section\n40(a)(ia) of The Act, but however the said issue was raised by the\nAssessing officer during the course of Assessment proceedings, to\nwhich the Appellant has duly submitted his reply. The tribunal held\nthat -\n\n“The fact that

HARYANA BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION, CHANDIGARH

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed

TDS was required to be deducted from the\nsaid payments, AO had not invoked the provisions of section\n40(a)(ia) of The Act, but however the said issue was raised by the\nAssessing officer during the course of Assessment proceedings, to\nwhich the Appellant has duly submitted his reply. The tribunal held\nthat -\n\n“The fact that

HARYANA BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION, SECTOR 17

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed

TDS was required to be deducted from the\nsaid payments, AO had not invoked the provisions of section\n40(a)(ia) of The Act, but however the said issue was raised by the\nAssessing officer during the course of Assessment proceedings, to\nwhich the Appellant has duly submitted his reply. The tribunal held\nthat -\n“The fact that the Assessing

HARYANA BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION, CHANDIGARH

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed

TDS was required to be deducted from the\nsaid payments, AO had not invoked the provisions of section\n40(a)(ia) of The Act, but however the said issue was raised by the\nAssessing officer during the course of Assessment proceedings, to\nwhich the Appellant has duly submitted his reply. The tribunal held\nthat -\n“The fact that the Assessing

ITO, PATIALA vs. SH. KAMALPREET SINGH, PATIALA

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.224/Chandi/2015 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Acit-Circle Patiala Shri Balwinder Singh Patiala. Prop. M/S M.P. Traders बनाम/ Vs. (Represented By L/R Shri Simranpal Singh) # 986/3 Dhobi Ghat, Patiala. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Acrps-5840-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. Co. No.13/Chandi/2015 [In Ita No.224/Chandi/2015] (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Shri Balwinder Singh Acit-Ward-1 बनाम/ Prop. M/S M.P. Traders Patiala. (Represented By L/R Shri Simranpal Singh) Vs. # 986/3 Dhobi Ghat, Patiala. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Acrps-5840-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.225/Chandi/2015 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Acit-Circle Patiala Shri Kamalpreet Singh बनाम/ Vs. Patiala. Prop. M/S Saran Enterprises 4, Dlf Shopping Complex, Patiala. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Acbps-1831-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent)

TDS provisions u/s 194C. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred first appeal against the assessment order. Appellate Proceedings 3.1 The Ld. CIT(A) rejected the legal grounds of the assessee challenging jurisdiction of Ld. AO. On merits of addition u/s 68, the assessee contended that the report of handwriting expert was not confronted to the assessee which was in gross violation

ITO, PATIALA vs. SH. BALWINDER SINGH, PATIALA

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.224/Chandi/2015 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Acit-Circle Patiala Shri Balwinder Singh Patiala. Prop. M/S M.P. Traders बनाम/ Vs. (Represented By L/R Shri Simranpal Singh) # 986/3 Dhobi Ghat, Patiala. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Acrps-5840-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. Co. No.13/Chandi/2015 [In Ita No.224/Chandi/2015] (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Shri Balwinder Singh Acit-Ward-1 बनाम/ Prop. M/S M.P. Traders Patiala. (Represented By L/R Shri Simranpal Singh) Vs. # 986/3 Dhobi Ghat, Patiala. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Acrps-5840-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.225/Chandi/2015 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Acit-Circle Patiala Shri Kamalpreet Singh बनाम/ Vs. Patiala. Prop. M/S Saran Enterprises 4, Dlf Shopping Complex, Patiala. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Acbps-1831-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent)

TDS provisions u/s 194C. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred first appeal against the assessment order. Appellate Proceedings 3.1 The Ld. CIT(A) rejected the legal grounds of the assessee challenging jurisdiction of Ld. AO. On merits of addition u/s 68, the assessee contended that the report of handwriting expert was not confronted to the assessee which was in gross violation

SH. KAMALPREET SINGH,PATIALA vs. ACIT, PATIALA

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.224/Chandi/2015 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Acit-Circle Patiala Shri Balwinder Singh Patiala. Prop. M/S M.P. Traders बनाम/ Vs. (Represented By L/R Shri Simranpal Singh) # 986/3 Dhobi Ghat, Patiala. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Acrps-5840-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. Co. No.13/Chandi/2015 [In Ita No.224/Chandi/2015] (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Shri Balwinder Singh Acit-Ward-1 बनाम/ Prop. M/S M.P. Traders Patiala. (Represented By L/R Shri Simranpal Singh) Vs. # 986/3 Dhobi Ghat, Patiala. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Acrps-5840-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.225/Chandi/2015 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Acit-Circle Patiala Shri Kamalpreet Singh बनाम/ Vs. Patiala. Prop. M/S Saran Enterprises 4, Dlf Shopping Complex, Patiala. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Acbps-1831-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent)

TDS provisions u/s 194C. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred first appeal against the assessment order. Appellate Proceedings 3.1 The Ld. CIT(A) rejected the legal grounds of the assessee challenging jurisdiction of Ld. AO. On merits of addition u/s 68, the assessee contended that the report of handwriting expert was not confronted to the assessee which was in gross violation

T.S.RAGHAV,SUNDER NAGAR vs. ITO, SUNDER NAGAR

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

Bench: The Itat Chandigarh Tax Recovered Amounting Rs 1.65320/- Decided By A.O. Sunder Nagar & Ratified By The Cit Palampur H.P.

justice. Tek Singh Raghwa(Cont.) Through Counsel R.P. Sharma Adv Sunder Nagar Distt. Mandi H.P. 3. During the course of hearing the Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the delay if any occurred was due to pandemic of COVID-19, therefore the same may be condoned. 4. The Ld. CIT DR could not controvert the aforesaid contention

VARDHMAN POLYTEX LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT(TDS), LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi. Though Notices Were Issued Electronically Through The E-Filing Portal, The Assessee Contended That Such Notices Were Neither Brought To Their Knowledge Nor Received Through Any Alternative Means Such As Email Or Physical Intimation. Consequently, The Appeal Was Dismissed Ex Parte. It Was Further Submitted That The Issue Involved In The Present Appeal Is Legal In Nature & Does Not Require Examination Of Disputed Facts; Hence, The Matter May Be Adjudicated On Merits Without The Necessity Of A Remand To The Lower Authorities.

TDS u/s 194C of the I.T Act, 1961 on the freight payments amounting to Rs.4,43,600/- made to the transporter Sh. Rohtash Kumar Banwarilal Bhadu Prop. M/s. Shree Shyam Transport Co..." The AO observed that: "The assessee submitted a declaration under Section 194C(6) but did not provide any evidence of ownership of trucks. Backend verification of ITRs

SMT. URMILA GARG,SANGRUR vs. ITO, WARD, SANGRUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee’s are allowed

TDS amounting to Rs. 15,87,848/- corresponding to the interest income declared in the return and the compensation received. The case was processed under section 143(1) of the Act as such, thus, as on date the returned income stands to be assessed income and there was no mistake which was self evident and apparent from the record warranting

SHRI SATISH KUMAR,SANGRUR vs. ITO, WARD, SANGRUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee’s are allowed

TDS amounting to Rs. 15,87,848/- corresponding to the interest income declared in the return and the compensation received. The case was processed under section 143(1) of the Act as such, thus, as on date the returned income stands to be assessed income and there was no mistake which was self evident and apparent from the record warranting

SH. RAM LAL,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO, WARD-6(1), CHANDIGARH

justice should prevail over technical\nconsiderations, we condone the delay in filing these appeals.\n3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 463/Chd/2023 for A.Y\n2018-19 as a lead case for discussion wherein assessee has raised the\nfollowing effective grounds:\n1.\nThat having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case\nand