DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S WINSOME TEXTILES INDUSTRIES LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

TDS only if it includes "sum chargeable to tax" under Income Tax Act in India. In case such element is missing then no tax is to be deducted. Further, combined reading of section 4, Section 5 and section 9 would suggest that payments made to rfon resident as business commission can only be considered from the view point of section

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S WINSOME YARNS LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

TDS only if it includes "sum chargeable to tax" under Income Tax Act in India. In case such element is missing then no tax is to be deducted. Further, combined reading of section 4, Section 5 and section 9 would suggest that payments made to rfon resident as business commission can only be considered from the view point of section

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

section 13(1)(c) is to judge the reasonableness of the payments made to the members of the society and secondly and more importantly, there is no finding of the AO that the society is not working towards the objects of education etc. as defined in its Memorandum and Rules and Regulations. No case of siphoning off of the funds

DCIT,CIRCLE-1(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SCHOOL( MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

section 13(1)(c) is to judge the reasonableness of the payments made to the members of the society and secondly and more importantly, there is no finding of the AO that the society is not working towards the objects of education etc. as defined in its Memorandum and Rules and Regulations. No case of siphoning off of the funds

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

section 13(1)(c) is to judge the reasonableness of the payments made to the members of the society and secondly and more importantly, there is no finding of the AO that the society is not working towards the objects of education etc. as defined in its Memorandum and Rules and Regulations. No case of siphoning off of the funds

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

section 13(1)(c) is to judge the reasonableness of the payments made to the members of the society and secondly and more importantly, there is no finding of the AO that the society is not working towards the objects of education etc. as defined in its Memorandum and Rules and Regulations. No case of siphoning off of the funds

M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

section 13(1)(c) is to judge the reasonableness of the payments made to the members of the society and secondly and more importantly, there is no finding of the AO that the society is not working towards the objects of education etc. as defined in its Memorandum and Rules and Regulations. No case of siphoning off of the funds

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

section 13(1)(c) is to judge the reasonableness of the payments made to the members of the society and secondly and more importantly, there is no finding of the AO that the society is not working towards the objects of education etc. as defined in its Memorandum and Rules and Regulations. No case of siphoning off of the funds

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

section 13(1)(c) is to judge the reasonableness of the payments made to the members of the society and secondly and more importantly, there is no finding of the AO that the society is not working towards the objects of education etc. as defined in its Memorandum and Rules and Regulations. No case of siphoning off of the funds

M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

section 13(1)(c) is to judge the reasonableness of the payments made to the members of the society and secondly and more importantly, there is no finding of the AO that the society is not working towards the objects of education etc. as defined in its Memorandum and Rules and Regulations. No case of siphoning off of the funds

CHARAN SINGH,SIRSA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SIRSA,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Tribunal.

section 143(1), restricted the TDS credit to ₹16,221 on the ground that as per Form 26AS the total

M/S THE H.P. STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, BANIKHET BRANCH,CHAMBA vs. ITO (TDS), PALAMPUR

In the result all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R.Kumar

221 of the Income tax act, the appellant was asked to pay the interest amount on the amount so deposited which was also deposited. The necessary reconciliation statement o f TDS deducted, TDS paid before the survey, TDS paid after the survey, and amount reversed due to various reasons ci was earlier submitted

M/S THE H.P. STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,CHAMBA vs. ITO (TDS), PALAMPUR

In the result all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R.Kumar

221 of the Income tax act, the appellant was asked to pay the interest amount on the amount so deposited which was also deposited. The necessary reconciliation statement o f TDS deducted, TDS paid before the survey, TDS paid after the survey, and amount reversed due to various reasons ci was earlier submitted

M/S THE H.P. STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, DALHOUSIE BRANCH,CHAMBA vs. ITO (TDS), PALAMPUR

In the result all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R.Kumar

221 of the Income tax act, the appellant was asked to pay the interest amount on the amount so deposited which was also deposited. The necessary reconciliation statement o f TDS deducted, TDS paid before the survey, TDS paid after the survey, and amount reversed due to various reasons ci was earlier submitted

JANTA LAND PROMOTERS PVT LTD,MOHALI vs. THE PRINICIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CHANDIGARH-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

1. Mechanical and Arbitrary Invocation of Section 263 Without Independent or Minimal Enquiry by the Ld. PCIT The Ld. PCIT has not undertaken any independent enquiry or verification, but has merely proceeded on assumptions and conjectures, contrary to the ratio laid down in several judicial precedents as under: a) Hon’ble ITAT Chandigarh in the case of Smt. Teena Garg

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS, SHIMLA

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

1,97,56,418 6.15 2009-10 10,98,58,236 2,15,66,221 19.63 2010-11 24,52,79,523 3,26,20,633 13.29 4.27 2011-12 55,09,66,869 2,35,27,313 Considering the fall in GP for the year i.e. 4.27%, AO required the assessee to furnish the details of work executed

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

1,97,56,418 6.15 2009-10 10,98,58,236 2,15,66,221 19.63 2010-11 24,52,79,523 3,26,20,633 13.29 4.27 2011-12 55,09,66,869 2,35,27,313 Considering the fall in GP for the year i.e. 4.27%, AO required the assessee to furnish the details of work executed

M/S AJAY KUMAR SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

1,97,56,418 6.15 2009-10 10,98,58,236 2,15,66,221 19.63 2010-11 24,52,79,523 3,26,20,633 13.29 4.27 2011-12 55,09,66,869 2,35,27,313 Considering the fall in GP for the year i.e. 4.27%, AO required the assessee to furnish the details of work executed