M/S STYLAM INDUSTRIES LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the Department’s appeal in for assessment year

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

TDS ignoring the detailed finding of the assessing officer that as per section 5 and section 9 of the Act the income is deemed to accrue or arise in India even if the services by the commission agents have been rendered abroad. Further since the right to receive the commission arises in India, the income of such commission agents

DCIT, C-1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S STYLAM INDUSTRIES LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, the Department’s appeal in for assessment year

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

TDS ignoring the detailed finding of the assessing officer that as per section 5 and section 9 of the Act the income is deemed to accrue or arise in India even if the services by the commission agents have been rendered abroad. Further since the right to receive the commission arises in India, the income of such commission agents

M/S STYLAM INDUSTRIES LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the Department’s appeal in for assessment year

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

TDS ignoring the detailed finding of the assessing officer that as per section 5 and section 9 of the Act the income is deemed to accrue or arise in India even if the services by the commission agents have been rendered abroad. Further since the right to receive the commission arises in India, the income of such commission agents

SH. DINKAR KHANNA,LUDHIANA vs. JCIT -1, CIRCLE 1(1), LUDHIANA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

TDS of Rs. 311746/- which is duly reflected in Form 26AS. 3. That the Worthy CIT(Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has also erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 1945/- on account of labour welfare fund employees share which was already disallowed by the assessee while filing the return of income. 4. That the Appellant craves leave for permission

ACIT, CIRCLE, PANCHKULA vs. M/S HARYANA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LTD., PANCHKULA

In the result, we upheld the

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

section 36 of the Act. Further the assessee has not deducted TDS under section 194A of the Act. Hence, the provision

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)

36(1)(vii) of the Act. Basis section 147 the Department / Revenue contends that a mere perusal of Section 147 reveal that there is no reference or mention explicity or impliedly to a new tangible information as claimed by the assessee to the effect that there must be a new tangible information for reopening of the assessment

M/S KAPSONS FASHION PVT. LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, C-2(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt.Diva Singh & Smt.Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.1014 To 1016/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2013-14

TDS had been deducted on the service tax component of A.Ys. 2011-12 to 2013-14 certain bills raised which was not in the nature of income. A detail explaining the difference as above was also filed. But, we have noted from the order of the Ld.CIT(A), that no cognizance of the same has been taken while adjudicating

SURYA MOTORS,ABOHAR vs. DCIT, CC-3, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 302/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Surya Motors, Vs. The Dcit, Near Dav Campus, बनाम Central Circle-3, Hanuman Road, Ludhiana Abohar "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aadfs2727B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : None ( Written Submissions ) राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Dharam Vir, Jcit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 27.05.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24.06.2024 आदेश/Order Per Dr. Krinwant Sahay, A.M.: Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ludhiana (Herein Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’ ) Dated 10.03.2023. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- 1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Rejecting The Claim Of Tds Of Rs. 41157/- Relating To National Insurance Co. Ltd.

36,993/- on the basis of 26AS dt. 28/12/2019. In place of 26AS dt. 24/09/2018 though there was no variation in returned income. Further, in, response to requisition all information called for from time to time were furnished. But the Assessing Officer assessed the Assessee on an income of Rs. 8,65,846/- u/s 143(3) vide order dt. 29/09/2021

M/S PUNJAB CHEMICALS & CROP. PROTECTION LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ADDL. CIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2008-09

section 36(1)(iii). This being allowable as business expenditure, the disallowance made on this account be deleted. 2. As per the facts and circumstance of the case and as per the provisions of law, the pispute Resolution Panel has erred in its directions, and the assessing officer has erred in disallowing

PUNJAB CHEMICALS & CROP. PROTECTION LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2008-09

section 36(1)(iii). This being allowable as business expenditure, the disallowance made on this account be deleted. 2. As per the facts and circumstance of the case and as per the provisions of law, the pispute Resolution Panel has erred in its directions, and the assessing officer has erred in disallowing

DCIT, C-5, LUDHIANA vs. M/S SATYAM AUTO COMPONENTS LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are hereby

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shrisanjay Gargआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 1500/Chd/2017 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Dcit, Circle-5, Vs. M/S Satyam Auto Components Ludhiana Pvt Ltd., G.T.Road, Hero बनाम Nagar, Ludhiana

36(l)(iii), where assessee used borrowed funds for acquisition of fixed assets? 4. Ground No.1: The issues raised vide ground No.1 is as to whether the expenditure incurred on training of the employees is to be treated as capital expenditure or Revenue expenditure. The Assessing Officer treated the expenditure as capital in nature observing that the expenditure incurred

DCIT, C-5, LUDHIANA vs. M/S SATYAM AUTO COMPONENTS LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are hereby

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shrisanjay Gargआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 1500/Chd/2017 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Dcit, Circle-5, Vs. M/S Satyam Auto Components Ludhiana Pvt Ltd., G.T.Road, Hero बनाम Nagar, Ludhiana

36(l)(iii), where assessee used borrowed funds for acquisition of fixed assets? 4. Ground No.1: The issues raised vide ground No.1 is as to whether the expenditure incurred on training of the employees is to be treated as capital expenditure or Revenue expenditure. The Assessing Officer treated the expenditure as capital in nature observing that the expenditure incurred

M/S PUNJAB TOURISM DEVELOPMENET CORPORATION LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ao)

36:- “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellate order of the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals 1, Chandigarh under section 250 (6) is not a speaking order. 2. That the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals 1, Chandigarh has erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 35,61,462/ of administrative expenses

M/S PUNJAB TOURISM DEVELOPMENET CORPORATION LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ao)

36:- “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellate order of the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals 1, Chandigarh under section 250 (6) is not a speaking order. 2. That the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals 1, Chandigarh has erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 35,61,462/ of administrative expenses

M/S PUNJAB TOURISM DEVELOPMENET CORPORATION LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ao)

36:- “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellate order of the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals 1, Chandigarh under section 250 (6) is not a speaking order. 2. That the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals 1, Chandigarh has erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 35,61,462/ of administrative expenses

M/S PUNJAB TOURISM DEVELOPMENET CORPORATION LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ao)

36:- “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellate order of the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals 1, Chandigarh under section 250 (6) is not a speaking order. 2. That the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals 1, Chandigarh has erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 35,61,462/ of administrative expenses

M/S STEEL STRIPS INFRASTRUCTURES LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 732 /Chd/2018 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/s Steel Strips Ltd. बनाम The Asst. CIT Central Circle-II Chandigarh SCO 49-50, Sector 26, Chandigarh स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AACCS5077J प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent अपीलार्थी/Appellant निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by : Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A, Ms. Muska Garg, C.A राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Shri Ved Parkash Kalia, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of Hea

Section 36(2)(i). Secondly, the assessee failed to furnish essential details such as the PAN, address, and a formal agreement with Ms. Joginder Paul Kaur, raising doubts about the genuineness of the transaction. It was also pointed out that no TDS

M/S KAPSONS AGENCIES PVT. LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. JCIT, R-III, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Smt.Diva Singh & Smt.Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1010, 1011 & 1013/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 2011-12 & 2013-14

section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. The assessee contended that the said facts was evident from the sanction letter of the bank granting term loan and the letter written by the assessee to the Manager of the bank requesting to reimburse the expenditure. The Ld.Counsel for the assessee contended that these were additional documents being submitted which were very

DSM SINOCHEM PHARMACEUTICALS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NAWANSHAHR vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 253/ चंडीगढ़/2016(िन.व. 2011-12)

36(1)(iii) can be made if no loan has been taken for investment in capital work in progress, and further for the verification of this fact, we remit the matter back to the file of the AO with a direction to ascertain the utilization of various loans taken by the assessee and thereafter decide the issue in accordance with