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

disallow the expenditure In this regard it is stated as under: Provisions as per Income Tax Act:- a. Section 195 states that a person responsible for making payment to non-corporate nonresident assessee or to a company other than domestic company, of any interest other than interest on securities) or any other sum ( not being salary) is required

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

disallow the expenditure In this regard it is stated as under: Provisions as per Income Tax Act:- a. Section 195 states that a person responsible for making payment to non-corporate nonresident assessee or to a company other than domestic company, of any interest other than interest on securities) or any other sum ( not being salary) is required

DCIT, C-4(1), 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

disallow the expenditure In this regard it is stated as under: Provisions as per Income Tax Act:- a. Section 195 states that a person responsible for making payment to non-corporate nonresident assessee or to a company other than domestic company, of any interest other than interest on securities) or any other sum ( not being salary) is required

SHRI RAJA RAM,YAMUNA NAGAR vs. ITO-WARD-3, YAMUNA NAGAR

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

Bench: Shri N.K.Sainihearing Through Video Conferencing

disallowance made by the A.O. by following the amended provisions in clause (va) to sub-section (1) of section 36 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, wherein Explanation 2 has been inserted to clarify that the provisions of section 43B does not apply and deemed to never have been applied for the purposes of determining the “due date

SANCHI MANAGEMENT SERVICES PVT.LTD,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO-WARD-5(2), CHANDIGARH

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

Bench: Shri N.K.Sainihearing Through Video Conferencing

disallowance made by the A.O. by following the amended provisions in clause (va) to sub-section (1) of section 36 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, wherein Explanation 2 has been inserted to clarify that the provisions of section 43B does not apply and deemed to never have been applied for the purposes of determining the “due date

SHRI RAJA RAM,YAMUNA NAGAR vs. ITO-WARD-3, YAMUNA NAGAR

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

Bench: Shri N.K.Sainihearing Through Video Conferencing

disallowance made by the A.O. by following the amended provisions in clause (va) to sub-section (1) of section 36 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, wherein Explanation 2 has been inserted to clarify that the provisions of section 43B does not apply and deemed to never have been applied for the purposes of determining the “due date

WINSOME TEXTILE INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

192 (Delhi) and CIT v. Batra Bhatta Co. [2008] 174 Taxman 444 (Delhi) and eventually held thus :— "9. In the present case, we find that the first sentence of the so-called reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer is mere information received from the Deputy Director of Income-tax (Investigation). The second sentence is a direction given by the 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)

192 of the Act, as against under section 195 of the Act. The tax has been deducted by the assessee under wrong provision. It is not a case where the assesse has not deducted tax at source at all. The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. S.K. Tekriwal (supra) has upheld the decision of Tribunal

M/S DSM SINOCHEM PHARMACEUTICALS INDIA PVT. LTD. ,TOANSA vs. DCIT, C-1(1), 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)

192 of the Act, as against under section 195 of the Act. The tax has been deducted by the assessee under wrong provision. It is not a case where the assesse has not deducted tax at source at all. The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. S.K. Tekriwal (supra) has upheld the decision of Tribunal

KARNAIL SINGH,UK vs. JCIT (OSD) INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

disallowances made in the assessment due to differences of opinion between the AO and assessee. Hence no penalty should be levied in this case. 7. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) and AO erred in not considering that the Appellant had neither concealed particulars of income nor filed inaccurate particulars

KARNAIL SINGH,UK vs. JCIT (OSD) INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

disallowances made in the assessment due to differences of opinion between the AO and assessee. Hence no penalty should be levied in this case. 7. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) and AO erred in not considering that the Appellant had neither concealed particulars of income nor filed inaccurate particulars

KARNAIL SINGH,UK vs. JCIT (OSD) INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

disallowances made in the assessment due to differences of opinion between the AO and assessee. Hence no penalty should be levied in this case. 7. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) and AO erred in not considering that the Appellant had neither concealed particulars of income nor filed inaccurate particulars

KARNAIL SINGH,UK vs. JCIT (OSD) INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

disallowances made in the assessment due to differences of opinion between the AO and assessee. Hence no penalty should be levied in this case. 7. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) and AO erred in not considering that the Appellant had neither concealed particulars of income nor filed inaccurate particulars

KARNAIL SINGH,UK vs. JCIT (OSD) INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

disallowances made in the assessment due to differences of opinion between the AO and assessee. Hence no penalty should be levied in this case. 7. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) and AO erred in not considering that the Appellant had neither concealed particulars of income nor filed inaccurate particulars

KARNAIL SINGH,UK vs. JCIT (OSD) INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

disallowances made in the assessment due to differences of opinion between the AO and assessee. Hence no penalty should be levied in this case. 7. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) and AO erred in not considering that the Appellant had neither concealed particulars of income nor filed inaccurate particulars

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(3) of IT Act. In this regard it is submitted that Sh G S Sardana is the chairman of the Manav Mangal Schools. Sh. Sanjay Sardana and Sandeep Sardana are two Directors of the Manav Mangal Schools having three schools (Manav Mangal High School, Sector 21, Chandigarh, Manav Mangal School Sector 11 Panchkula and Manav Mangal Smart School

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(3) of IT Act. In this regard it is submitted that Sh G S Sardana is the chairman of the Manav Mangal Schools. Sh. Sanjay Sardana and Sandeep Sardana are two Directors of the Manav Mangal Schools having three schools (Manav Mangal High School, Sector 21, Chandigarh, Manav Mangal School Sector 11 Panchkula and Manav Mangal Smart School

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(3) of IT Act. In this regard it is submitted that Sh G S Sardana is the chairman of the Manav Mangal Schools. Sh. Sanjay Sardana and Sandeep Sardana are two Directors of the Manav Mangal Schools having three schools (Manav Mangal High School, Sector 21, Chandigarh, Manav Mangal School Sector 11 Panchkula and Manav Mangal Smart School