SH. JASBIR SINGH ANAND,JADADHRI vs. ACIT, CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result all the above appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Garg

section 200A and 234E, it is apparent that the levy of fee for late filing of TDS statements is mandatory. 7.2 Further, charging of fee u/s 234E for delay in filing TDS statements is a mandatory levy of fee provided in the statute whose constitutional validity has been upheld by Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case

SH. JASBIR SINGH ANAND,JADADHRI vs. ACIT, CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result all the above appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Garg

section 200A and 234E, it is apparent that the levy of fee for late filing of TDS statements is mandatory. 7.2 Further, charging of fee u/s 234E for delay in filing TDS statements is a mandatory levy of fee provided in the statute whose constitutional validity has been upheld by Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case

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.

Section 234E of the Act. Therefore, in case, there is a default or delay in submitting the TDS statements, a late fee shall be levied as contemplated u/s 234E of the Act and the A.O. shall compute such fee while processing the statements of TDS u/s. 200A in accordance with the provisions of sec. 234E. Thus

M/S SONALAC PAINTS AND COATINGS LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS), VAISHALI JURISDICTION AT ITO, TDS-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Smt. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Sonalac Paints & Coatings Ltd., Vs. The Dcit, Sco Plot No. 768, Indl. Area, Cpc(Tds),Vaishali , Phase-Ii, Chandigarh. Ghaziabad Pan No. Aaics4995D Current Jurisdiction: Ito(Tds-1)Chandigarh. & Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Nagpal Trading Co., Vs. The Dcit, Sco No. 1037, Sector 22-B, Cpc(Tds),Vaishali , Chandigarh. Ghaziabad Pan No. Aaefn0052F Current Jurisdiction: Ito(Tds-1)Chandigarh

268 and the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Dundlod Shikshan Sansthan v. Union of India [2015] 63 taxmann.com 243 in this regard. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee has come up in appeal before us raising the following common grounds in both the appeals: 1. That on the facts, circumstances of the case

M/S CHILL POINT ENGINEERS PVT LTD,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GAZIABAD

In the result, all appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Chill Point Engineers P.Ltd., Vs. The Dcit, H.No. 2217, Hem Kutir, Cpc(Tds), Vaishali, Mani Majra, Ghaziabad Chandigarh. Current Jurisdiction: Pan No. Aabcc5144R Ito(Tds-1)Chandigarh. & Assessment Year: 2013-14

268 and the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Dundlod Shikshan Sansthan v. Union of India [2015] 63 taxmann.com 243 in this regard. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee has come up in appeal before us raising the following common grounds in all the appeals: 1. That on the facts, circumstances of the case

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 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. That on law, facts and circumstances of the case, the Worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Ld. AO in making disallowance of Rs. 30,45,000/- as prior period expenses without considering the fact the expense was paid at a later date due to pending negotiation

M/S GLAXOSMITHKLINE ASIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

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

268 (Del) -C1T v. Rockinan Cycle Industries Ltd.: 331 ITR 401 (P&H) (FB) -CIT v. EKL Appliances Ltd. : 345 ITR 241 (Del HC) It is a settled position that the expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business would be allowable as deduction under section 37(1) of the Act, even if it results

M/S BNK INVESTMENTS,CHANDIGARH vs. JCIT (TDS), CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

268 1756756 26800 657 65700 7. Thus a penalty of Rs. 65,700/- was imposed u/s 272A(2)(k) of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A), contending that the delay in filing of TDS return was due to non-availability of PAN details of various persons to whom

ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SML ISUZU LTD., CHANDIGARH

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

TDS particulars was wholly unjustified. [Para 7] As regards second ground for reopening the assessment, the dividend income received during the year was claimed as exempt and the same was accepted in the assessment order passed under section 143(3). The reason for reopening the assessment was that in the absence of particulars it could not be said that

M/S MAHADEV STEET INDUSTRIES,MANDI GOBINDGARH vs. ITO, W-2, MANDI GOBINDGARH

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarm.A. Nos. 66 To 67/Chd/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos. 1354 To 1355/Chd/2012 Decided Vide Order 01.11.2018) "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 2008-09 M/S Punjab Infrastructure The Dcit (Tds), बनाम Development Board, Chandigarh Sco 33-35, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No Aaalp0048F / Ptlp 10093G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

268 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). 2. It has been contended that the Department had filed the appeals before the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court against the common order of the Tribunal dated 30.09.2015. That the matter in these appeals were remanded by the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court vide combined order

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

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

TDS. Now, evidently, the department cannot be allowed to approbate and reprobate, as has wrongly been done in the present case. The following are some of the decisions on this issue : 1. Union of India Vs British India Corporation 268 ITR 481 (S.C) 2. 217 Taxmann 247 (Guj) CIT vs. Jayantkumar Motichand Doshi 3. 217 Taxman

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

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

TDS. Now, evidently, the department cannot be allowed to approbate and reprobate, as has wrongly been done in the present case. The following are some of the decisions on this issue : 1. Union of India Vs British India Corporation 268 ITR 481 (S.C) 2. 217 Taxmann 247 (Guj) CIT vs. Jayantkumar Motichand Doshi 3. 217 Taxman

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

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

TDS. Now, evidently, the department cannot be allowed to approbate and reprobate, as has wrongly been done in the present case. The following are some of the decisions on this issue : 1. Union of India Vs British India Corporation 268 ITR 481 (S.C) 2. 217 Taxmann 247 (Guj) CIT vs. Jayantkumar Motichand Doshi 3. 217 Taxman

DCIT, C-4, LUDHIANA vs. AARTI INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, LUDHIANA

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1619/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09 The Dcit, Circle-4, बनाम M/S Aarti Steels Ltd., Ludhiana G.T. Raod, Miller Ganj, Ludhiana. "थायीलेखासं./Pan No:Aabca4455D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

TDS and advance taxes, refund of Rs.24,47,550/- was claimed by the assessee. The assessment in this case was completed by the Assessing officer making various additions to the income of the assessee which was deleted in appeals upto the ITAT, thus, restoring the assessed income to that returned by the assessee originally. The Assessing officer while passing

DCIT, C-4, LUDHIANA vs. AARTI INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, LUDHIANA

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1619/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09 The Dcit, Circle-4, बनाम M/S Aarti Steels Ltd., Ludhiana G.T. Raod, Miller Ganj, Ludhiana. "थायीलेखासं./Pan No:Aabca4455D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

TDS and advance taxes, refund of Rs.24,47,550/- was claimed by the assessee. The assessment in this case was completed by the Assessing officer making various additions to the income of the assessee which was deleted in appeals upto the ITAT, thus, restoring the assessed income to that returned by the assessee originally. The Assessing officer while passing

DCIT, C-4, LUDHIANA vs. M/S AARTI STEELS LIMITED, LUDHIANA

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1619/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09 The Dcit, Circle-4, बनाम M/S Aarti Steels Ltd., Ludhiana G.T. Raod, Miller Ganj, Ludhiana. "थायीलेखासं./Pan No:Aabca4455D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

TDS and advance taxes, refund of Rs.24,47,550/- was claimed by the assessee. The assessment in this case was completed by the Assessing officer making various additions to the income of the assessee which was deleted in appeals upto the ITAT, thus, restoring the assessed income to that returned by the assessee originally. The Assessing officer while passing

M/S FASTWAY TRANSMISSION (P) LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH

In the result the captioned appeals of the assessee are

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

TDS had been deducted only on the interest component of the payments made by the lessee and not on the principal components. I. That the purchase bills of these assets revealed that the asset has been billed to Fastway Transmission (P) Ltd. recognizing the assessee as primary buyer and user. J. That the lessor has also treated the agreement

M/S FASTWAY TRANSMISSION (P) LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result the captioned appeals of the assessee are

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

TDS had been deducted only on the interest component of the payments made by the lessee and not on the principal components. I. That the purchase bills of these assets revealed that the asset has been billed to Fastway Transmission (P) Ltd. recognizing the assessee as primary buyer and user. J. That the lessor has also treated the agreement

M/S FASTWAY TRANSMISSION (P) LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH

In the result the captioned appeals of the assessee are

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

TDS had been deducted only on the interest component of the payments made by the lessee and not on the principal components. I. That the purchase bills of these assets revealed that the asset has been billed to Fastway Transmission (P) Ltd. recognizing the assessee as primary buyer and user. J. That the lessor has also treated the agreement