DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SMT. MANJIT KAUR, CHANDIGARH

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

201, Sector 16-A, Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AETPK0153M Appeal against the order of CIT(A)-3, Gurgaon dated 28.10.2016 आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos. 48 to 50/CHD/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2011-12 The DCIT, Central Circle-1, Sh. Paramjit Singh, बनाम Chandigarh H.N o.4197, Sector 68, Mohali "थायी लेखा सं

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. PARAMJIT SINGH, MOHALI

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

201, Sector 16-A, Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AETPK0153M Appeal against the order of CIT(A)-3, Gurgaon dated 28.10.2016 आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos. 48 to 50/CHD/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2011-12 The DCIT, Central Circle-1, Sh. Paramjit Singh, बनाम Chandigarh H.N o.4197, Sector 68, Mohali "थायी लेखा सं

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. KULWANT SINGH, MOHALI

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

201, Sector 16-A, Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AETPK0153M Appeal against the order of CIT(A)-3, Gurgaon dated 28.10.2016 आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos. 48 to 50/CHD/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2011-12 The DCIT, Central Circle-1, Sh. Paramjit Singh, बनाम Chandigarh H.N o.4197, Sector 68, Mohali "थायी लेखा सं

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SMT. JASWANT KAUR, MOHALI

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

201, Sector 16-A, Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AETPK0153M Appeal against the order of CIT(A)-3, Gurgaon dated 28.10.2016 आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos. 48 to 50/CHD/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2011-12 The DCIT, Central Circle-1, Sh. Paramjit Singh, बनाम Chandigarh H.N o.4197, Sector 68, Mohali "थायी लेखा सं

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. PARAMJIT SINGH, MOHALI

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

201, Sector 16-A, Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AETPK0153M Appeal against the order of CIT(A)-3, Gurgaon dated 28.10.2016 आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos. 48 to 50/CHD/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2011-12 The DCIT, Central Circle-1, Sh. Paramjit Singh, बनाम Chandigarh H.N o.4197, Sector 68, Mohali "थायी लेखा सं

VARDHMAN POLYTEX LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT(TDS), LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi. Though Notices Were Issued Electronically Through The E-Filing Portal, The Assessee Contended That Such Notices Were Neither Brought To Their Knowledge Nor Received Through Any Alternative Means Such As Email Or Physical Intimation. Consequently, The Appeal Was Dismissed Ex Parte. It Was Further Submitted That The Issue Involved In The Present Appeal Is Legal In Nature & Does Not Require Examination Of Disputed Facts; Hence, The Matter May Be Adjudicated On Merits Without The Necessity Of A Remand To The Lower Authorities.

201(1) can be fastened on the deductor. It is pertinent to note that the requirement introduced by way of amendment in Section 194C(6) of the Act, effective from Assessment Year 2016-17, mandating the deductor to obtain and retain a declaration along with the PAN of the transporter, cannot be applied retrospectively to earlier assessment years. The statute

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

201(1A) to pay simple interest at 12 per cent per annum on the amount of such tax from the date on which such tax was deductible to the date on which such tax is actually paid. The most important expression in section 195(1) consists of the words "chargeable under the provisions of the Act". A person paying interest

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

201(1A) to pay simple interest at 12 per cent per annum on the amount of such tax from the date on which such tax was deductible to the date on which such tax is actually paid. The most important expression in section 195(1) consists of the words "chargeable under the provisions of the Act". A person paying interest

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

201(1A) to pay simple interest at 12 per cent per annum on the amount of such tax from the date on which such tax was deductible to the date on which such tax is actually paid. The most important expression in section 195(1) consists of the words "chargeable under the provisions of the Act". A person paying interest

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

201(1A) to pay simple interest at 12 per cent per annum on the amount of such tax from the date on which such tax was deductible to the date on which such tax is actually paid. The most important expression in section 195(1) consists of the words "chargeable under the provisions of the Act". A person paying interest

SH. SOURABH JAIN,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, W-2(3), LUDHIANA

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

disallowance stating that the assessee is not saved by amendment made to section 40(a)(ia) w.e.f. 1.4.2013 as per which if the assessee is not deemed to an assessee in default under the 1 s t proviso to sub-section (1) of section 201

M/S PRESTIGE INTERNATIONAL,PANCHKULA vs. ADDL. CIT, PANCHKULA RANGE, PANCHKULA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptam/S Prestige International, Vs. The Addl.Cit, 267, Industrial Area, Panchkula Range, Phase-1, Panchkula. Panchkula. Pan: Aaifp3677L (Appellant) (Respondent)

201(1) and Section 40(a)(ia). The action of the AO in making addition of Rs.4,50,000/- by disallowing

PUNJAB SMALL INDUSTRIES AND EXPORT CORPORATION LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

disallowance for AY 2016–17, we direct the AO to consider the assessee’s claim for deduction of Rs.82,78,750/- in AY 2017–18, if otherwise found in order, in accordance with the provisions of Section 43B of the Act. 5 9. In the result, Ground No. 2 is partly allowed for statistical purposes. 9. In the result, this

DCIT, C-5, LUDHIANA vs. M/S HERO CYCLES LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed and the Cross

disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee. 25. Being aggrieved the assessee carried the matter to the Ld. CIT(A) and furnished the written submission which had been incorporated in para 11.1 of the impugned order, for the cost of repetition the same is not reproduced herein. 25.1 The Ld. CIT(A) forwarded the written submissions

MUKESH MALHOTRA ,SHIMLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , SHIMLA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) despite the submission of Form 26A, which proves that the deductees had paid the taxes.The Ld. AR has relied on the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act which has been inserted by the Finance Act, 2012 w.e.f. 1.4.2013, which reads as under:- “Provided further that where an assessee fails

MUKESH MALHOTRA,SHIMLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , SHIMLA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) despite the submission of Form 26A, which proves that the deductees had paid the taxes.The Ld. AR has relied on the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act which has been inserted by the Finance Act, 2012 w.e.f. 1.4.2013, which reads as under:- “Provided further that where an assessee fails

MUKESH MALHOTRA ,SHIMLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , SHIMLA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) despite the submission of Form 26A, which proves that the deductees had paid the taxes.The Ld. AR has relied on the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act which has been inserted by the Finance Act, 2012 w.e.f. 1.4.2013, which reads as under:- “Provided further that where an assessee fails

MUKESH MALHOTRA ,SHIMLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , SHIMLA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) despite the submission of Form 26A, which proves that the deductees had paid the taxes.The Ld. AR has relied on the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act which has been inserted by the Finance Act, 2012 w.e.f. 1.4.2013, which reads as under:- “Provided further that where an assessee fails