DCIT, C-1 (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH vs. THE INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ENGINEERS SOCIETY, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Section 11 of the\nIncome Tax Act. This Rs.20/- is to be disallowed and\nbrought to tax.\n9.5 The AO has disallowed the payments made to Global\nEducational Consultants and Shubhdeep Consultants.\nHe\nwas of the view that Global Educational Consultants is the\nconcern of Mrs. Kalpana Thakur who is wife of the Secretary\nITA No.52/CHD/2023

THE H.P.STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,SIRMOUR vs. ITO(TDS), SOLAN

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the Assessee are\r\nallowed

TDS)'s action of levyingtax and interest on\r\nsuch cases.\r\n2.\r\nThe learned CIT(A) failed in appreciating the scheme and logic behind sec.194A and\r\nthe correct legal position in this behalf.\r\n3.\r\nThe exemption provided under section 19iA(3

THE H.P.STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,SIRMOUR vs. ITO(TDS), SOLAN

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the Assessee are\nallowed

TDS)'s action of levyingtax and interest on\nsuch cases.\n2. The learned CIT(A) failed in appreciating the scheme and logic behind sec.194A and\nthe correct legal position in this behalf.\n3. The exemption provided under section 19iA(3

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

PRINCIPAL RAJIV GANDHI GOVT. AYURVEDIC COLLEGE ,PAPROLA vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD (ITO, TDS), PALAMPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

TDS return was filed late is not disputed. Section 234E which charges fees for late filing of return reads as under: 234E. Fee for default in furnishing statements.— (1) Without prejudice to the provisions of the Act, where a person fails to deliver or cause to be delivered a statement within the time prescribed in sub-section (3

PRINCIPAL RAJIV GANDHI GOVT. AYURVEDIC COLLEGE ,PAPROLA vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD (ITO, TDS), PALAMPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

TDS return was filed late is not disputed. Section 234E which charges fees for late filing of return reads as under: 234E. Fee for default in furnishing statements.— (1) Without prejudice to the provisions of the Act, where a person fails to deliver or cause to be delivered a statement within the time prescribed in sub-section (3

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

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

S.P. SINGLA CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

TDS deducted and credited to the Central Govt. account.” 9.1 The ld. Counsel for the assessee explained that further the AO while completing assessment under Section 153A read with Section 143(3

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

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

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