PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK,BILASPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), MANDI

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

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

penalty order of Ld. Income Tax Officer TDS Mandi is unjustified and against the law 4. That Ld. Income Tax Officer

THE ASSISTANT EXCISE & TAXATION COMMISSIONER ,NAHAN vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE, SHIMLA

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.903 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2007-08 The Assistant Excise & बनाम The Additional Cit, Taxation Commissioner, Tds Range, Nahan Shimla "थायीलेखासं./Pan/Tan No: Ptla12468B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

penalty u/s 271CA to the Additional CIT TDS Range, Shimla who issued a show cause dated 3.9.2008 and thereafter, again

THE ASSISTANT EXCISE & TAXATION COMMISSIONER ,SHIMLA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE, SHIMLA

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.903 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2007-08 The Assistant Excise & बनाम The Additional Cit, Taxation Commissioner, Tds Range, Nahan Shimla "थायीलेखासं./Pan/Tan No: Ptla12468B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

penalty u/s 271CA to the Additional CIT TDS Range, Shimla who issued a show cause dated 3.9.2008 and thereafter, again

THE ASSISTANT EXCISE & TAXATION COMMISSIONER ,NAHAN vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE, SHIMLA

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.903 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2007-08 The Assistant Excise & बनाम The Additional Cit, Taxation Commissioner, Tds Range, Nahan Shimla "थायीलेखासं./Pan/Tan No: Ptla12468B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

penalty u/s 271CA to the Additional CIT TDS Range, Shimla who issued a show cause dated 3.9.2008 and thereafter, again

THE ASSISTANT EXCISE & TAXATION COMMISSIONER ,SHIMLA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE, SHIMLA

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.903 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2007-08 The Assistant Excise & बनाम The Additional Cit, Taxation Commissioner, Tds Range, Nahan Shimla "थायीलेखासं./Pan/Tan No: Ptla12468B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

penalty u/s 271CA to the Additional CIT TDS Range, Shimla who issued a show cause dated 3.9.2008 and thereafter, again

STATE BANK OF INDIA LOCAL HEAD OFFICE CHANDIGARH,CHANDIGARH vs. ADDL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(TDS) CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed

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

TDS), Chandigarh initiated penalty proceedings under section 271C of the Act and levied penalty equal to the amount of tax allegedly

SH. SAURABH KAUSHIK,PANCHKULA vs. ITO, WARD 2(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: The Disposal Of The Same.

penalty u/s 234E of the Act. • Sh. Gurpreet Singh vs. The ACIT, TDS [ITAT, Chandigarh, ITA No. 526/CHD/ 2022 dtd. 15.09.2022] 5. Although

SHRISHTI TECHNOLOGIES,BADDI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PARWANOO

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

TDS is not deducted as required u/s194l of the Act. Thus, 30% of the total expenses towards godown Rent is disallowed of Rs.2,01 ,600/-and added back to the Income of the assessee. 4. The penalty

HEALTH BIOTECH LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: the disposal of the same.

TDS caused by financial constraints and that excess depreciation was claimed under a bona fide belief, and hence penalty was not leviable

SUNDEEP KAPILA,HIMACHAL PRADESH vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER CENTRAL, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

penalty. As noted above, the AO had found that it was the admitted case that the assessee had defaulted in deduction of TDS

SUNDEEP KAPILA,HIMACHAL PRADESH vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER CENTRAL, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

penalty. As noted above, the AO had found that it was the admitted case that the assessee had defaulted in deduction of TDS

SUNDEEP KAPILA,HIMACHAL PRADESH vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER CENTRAL, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

penalty. As noted above, the AO had found that it was the admitted case that the assessee had defaulted in deduction of TDS

M/S EFFIEL ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH

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

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

penalty, Rs.3,60,281/- by applying provisions of Section 56(2)(viib) of the Income Tax Act, Rs.2,05,835/- u/s 40a(ia) for non-deduction of TDS

M/S EFFIEL ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. LD.JCIT, (OSD), CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH

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

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

penalty, Rs.3,60,281/- by applying provisions of Section 56(2)(viib) of the Income Tax Act, Rs.2,05,835/- u/s 40a(ia) for non-deduction of TDS

GURDEEP SINGH HUF,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO, WARD 5(5), CHANDIGARH

TDS\ncredit u/s 199. Accordingly, the AO held the interest of Rs.34,65,610/- to be\ntaxable, added the same to the returned income, determined assessed\nincome at Rs.38,16,700/-, and initiated penalty

SAT PAL,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(5), , CHANDIGARH

TDS\ncredit u/s 199. Accordingly, the AO held the interest of Rs.34,65,610/- to be\ntaxable, added the same to the returned income, determined assessed\nincome at Rs.38,16,700/-, and initiated penalty

BALVINDER SINGH,FATEHABAD vs. ITO WARD-1, FATEHABAD

TDS\ncredit u/s 199. Accordingly, the AO held the interest of Rs.34,65,610/- to be\ntaxable, added the same to the returned income, determined assessed\nincome at Rs.38,16,700/-, and initiated penalty

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

TDS\ncredit u/s 199. Accordingly, the AO held the interest of Rs.34,65,610/- to be\ntaxable, added the same to the returned income, determined assessed\nincome at Rs.38,16,700/-, and initiated penalty