ITO (TDS), PATIALA vs. M/S S.A. SINGH & CO., BHAWANIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

TDS u/s 194C for freight payment made to the Truck Operator Union (through the assessee company) is that of the M/s Pepsico India Holding Pvt. Ltd. and not that of the assessee company. The provisions of Section 194C are not attracted where the assessee subsequently raises the invoices on behalf of the Truck Operator Union and collects and disburse

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) Vardhman Park, Chandigarh Punjab-141001 Road, Ludhiana, Punjab-141123 "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAACV5821H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Ashish Aggarwal, C.A (Virtual) राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 08/07/2025 उदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 08/07/2025 आदेश

M/S SUSHIL KUMAR GUPTA & COMPANY,AMBALA CITY vs. PR.CIT, PANCHKULA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

TDS.” 8.9 It was accordingly submitted that the matter relating to verification of genuineness of expenses with specific reference to the large payment made under section 194C of the Act have been duly inquired into and examined by the AO and thereafter the order under section 143(3

SH.H.P.SINGH & OTHERS,MOHALI vs. ITO (TDS-2), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.236 To 238/Chd/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2011-12 & 2012-13 H.P. Singh & Others, बनाम The Ito (Tds-2), 39 West, Chandigarh Maloya, Village Bheloppur, Sector 122, Mohali "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aaefh8681G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

section 201(1A), whereas in ITA No. 238/Chd/2021, the AO had passed the order u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act and the additions have been made u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act on account of non-deduction of TDS u/s 194C of the Act. Therefore, considering these submissions made by both the parties, our findings and directions contained

SH.H.P.SINGH & OTHERS,MOHALI vs. ITO-WARD-6(4), MOHALI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.236 To 238/Chd/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2011-12 & 2012-13 H.P. Singh & Others, बनाम The Ito (Tds-2), 39 West, Chandigarh Maloya, Village Bheloppur, Sector 122, Mohali "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aaefh8681G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

section 201(1A), whereas in ITA No. 238/Chd/2021, the AO had passed the order u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act and the additions have been made u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act on account of non-deduction of TDS u/s 194C of the Act. Therefore, considering these submissions made by both the parties, our findings and directions contained

SH.H.P.SINGH & OTHERS,MOHALI vs. ITO (TDS-2), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.236 To 238/Chd/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2011-12 & 2012-13 H.P. Singh & Others, बनाम The Ito (Tds-2), 39 West, Chandigarh Maloya, Village Bheloppur, Sector 122, Mohali "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aaefh8681G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

section 201(1A), whereas in ITA No. 238/Chd/2021, the AO had passed the order u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act and the additions have been made u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act on account of non-deduction of TDS u/s 194C of the Act. Therefore, considering these submissions made by both the parties, our findings and directions contained

ITO, WARD 2(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S LONGIA ENGINEERS, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

TDS u/s 194C and are not forming part of receipts of Rs 1,30,94,241/- as shown in Form 26AS. The fact that the labour charges are not treated as works contracts under VAT laws doesn't take the same outside the ambit of section 194C of the Act. The receipts thus disclosed by the assessee in its profit/loss

WWICS ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED,MOHALI vs. THE DCIT/ACIT, TDS, CHANDIGARH

The appeal stands partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.654/Chandi/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) M/S Wwics Estates Private Limited Dcit / Acit Tds बनाम/ Vs. A-12, Industrial Area, Phase-6 Sector 17 Mohali. Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Tan No. Aaacw-3524-A / Ptlw-10174-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Tejmohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15-07-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23-07-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2015- 16 Arises Out Of The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 03-10-2022 In The Matter Of An Order Passed By Ld. Ao U/S 201(1) & (Ia) On 23-03-2022 Raising Certain Demand Against The Assessee. Having Heard Rival Submissions & Upon Perusal Of Case Records, The Appeal Is Disposed-Off As Under.

3. TDS on purchase of land for Rs.12.94 Crores 3.1 The assessee, during the course of real estate business, purchased certain land during the year. The Ld. AO held that the assessee was liable to deduct TDS u/s 194-IA whereas the assessee claimed that the lands were agricultural land and therefore, TDS provisions would not be applicable

MUKESH MALHOTRA,SHIMLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , SHIMLA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

section 194C of Act and during the assessment proceedings the AO issued show cause notice to the assessee and asked as to why TDS as required u/s 194C of the Act was not deducted on the payments to various pay channels. During assessment proceedings the assesseefiled details in respect of the parties to whom subscriptions payment are made after deduction

MUKESH MALHOTRA ,SHIMLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , SHIMLA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

section 194C of Act and during the assessment proceedings the AO issued show cause notice to the assessee and asked as to why TDS as required u/s 194C of the Act was not deducted on the payments to various pay channels. During assessment proceedings the assesseefiled details in respect of the parties to whom subscriptions payment are made after deduction

MUKESH MALHOTRA ,SHIMLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , SHIMLA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

section 194C of Act and during the assessment proceedings the AO issued show cause notice to the assessee and asked as to why TDS as required u/s 194C of the Act was not deducted on the payments to various pay channels. During assessment proceedings the assesseefiled details in respect of the parties to whom subscriptions payment are made after deduction

MUKESH MALHOTRA ,SHIMLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SHIMLA, SHIMLA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

section 194C of Act and during the assessment proceedings the AO issued show cause notice to the assessee and asked as to why TDS as required u/s 194C of the Act was not deducted on the payments to various pay channels. During assessment proceedings the assesseefiled details in respect of the parties to whom subscriptions payment are made after deduction

MUKESH MALHOTRA ,SHIMLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , SHIMLA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

section 194C of Act and during the assessment proceedings the AO issued show cause notice to the assessee and asked as to why TDS as required u/s 194C of the Act was not deducted on the payments to various pay channels. During assessment proceedings the assesseefiled details in respect of the parties to whom subscriptions payment are made after deduction

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH vs. UNIPRO TECHNO INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the order of the ld CIT(A) is confirmed and the grounds of appeal taken by the Revenue are dismissed

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

TDS) while granting certificate of lower deduction of tax, the Assessing Officer in the preceding and succeeding years, as also with the view taken by the Assessing Officer in the case of another assessee undertaking identical work, it cannot be said that any error had crept in the order of the Assessing Officer causing prejudice to the revenue and therefore

VIKAS MEHTA,NEW ANAJ MANDI, RANIA, SIRSA vs. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX CPC BANGALURU JOA INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SIRSA, HARYANA

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

section 194Q are not applicable on the appellant who it merely a Kacha Arhtiya/Pakka Arhtiya/Commission Basis. 3. That the Ld. The Commissioner of Income Tax, ADDL/JCIT (A)-4, Kolkata has erred in not considering the act that the assessee was mainly acting as commission agent/Kacha Arhtiya and he was earning commission from the parties who has deducted TDS U/s 194Q

PUNJAB SMALL INDUSTRIES AND EXPORT CORPORATION LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

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

194C; (v) "rent" shall have the same meaning as in clause (i) to the Explanation to section 194-I; (vi) "royalty" shall have the same meaning as in Explanation 2 to clause (vi) of sub- section (1) of section 9;” 6.6 Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, provides for the disallowance of certain expenses

ASSISTANT CONTROLLER F&A DIRECTORATE OF INDUSTRIES,SHIMLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), WARD SHIMLA

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) came to be dismissed without adjudication on merits, primarily on the ground that there was delay in filing of the appeal and that the assessee failed to respond to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A).

3 wherever applicable. The assessee neither made any direct payment to contractors nor claimed any expenditure in its own books so as to attract the provisions of section 194C of the Act. 11. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that taxes, including TDS

DISTRICT ELECTION OFFICE HAMIRPUR, SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE OFFICE,HAMIRPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, (TDS) MANDI, MANDI

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed for Statistical Purposes

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 462/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 District Election Office, The Ito (Tds), बनाम Sub Divisional Magistrate Mandi Office, Vs. Hamirpur 171001 "थायी लेखा सं./ Pan No: Ptldi1969Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Hybrid Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Vishal Mohan, Sr. Advocate With Sh. Abhinav, Advocate (Virtual) राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 13.10.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am : Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 06.02.2025 Passed By The Ld. Addl. / Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Mumbai For A.Y. 2018-19. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:

TDS), बनाम Sub Divisional Magistrate Mandi Office, Vs. Hamirpur 171001 "थायी लेखा सं./ PAN NO: PTLDI1969Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( HYBRID HEARING ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. Vishal Mohan, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Abhinav, Advocate (Virtual) राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing

KAMLA RETAIL LTD., NOW KNOWN AS M/S ETHOS LTD.,,CHANDIGARH vs. ADDL. CIT, R-I, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly

Bench: Smt.Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavm/S. Kamla Retail Ltd. Additional Cit, Range-1, बनाम Now Known As Ethos Limited, Chadigarh. Sco-88-89, Sector 8-C, Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aadck2345N

section 40(a)(ia) are equally attracted which provides for the allowability of expenses in the year in which the TDS has been deducted and paid. In the instant case, it is a matter of record that the assessee has paid and accounted for these expenses in the books of accounts in the financial year relevant to the impugned assessment