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)

section 40(a)(ia). Thus, in the light of aforesaid decision, we hold that no disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act is warranted

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

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

disallowance of Rs. 90,20,655 under section 40(a)(i) of the Act, with respect to purchase of vaccine

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)

40(a)(ia): Disallowed 30% of Rs. 19,27,329 paid as interest to six ex-employees without TDS, as required under Chapter XVII-B. The appellant argued the payments were salary-related, but the Commissioner upheld the disallowance, confirming Section

M/S APEX BUILDERS, LUDHIANA vs. ITO, W-2(1), LUDHIANA

The appeal is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member)

section 40(a)(ia), the AO disallowed the entire amount of Rs . 2,24,305 under the said section. 4.2 Further

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

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 588/Chd/2018 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2012-13 The DCIT C-V, Ludhiana बनाम M/s Hero Cycles Ltd. Hero Nagar, G.T. Road Ludhiana स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAACH4073P अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 473/Chd/2018 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2012-13 M/s Hero Cycles Ltd. Hero Nagar, G.T. Road Ludhiana बनाम The ACIT C-V, Ludhiana स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAACH4073P

Section 36(1) (iii). In para 4 the AO made disallowance of interest u/s 14A at Rs. 141510213/- , in para 6 made disallowance of interest u/s 36(1)(iii) at Rs. 40

ITO, W-2, BARNALA vs. THE TRUCK OPERATOR UNION, BARNALA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt.Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavthe Ito बनाम The Truck Operator Union, Ward-2, Barnala Dhanaula Road, Barnala "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaaat6497M

Section 40- A (3) only empowers the assessing officer to disallow the deduction claimed as expenditure in respect of which

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 of Rs. 37,25,543/- under section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS on payments made to pay channels

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 of Rs. 37,25,543/- under section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS on payments made to pay channels

MUKESH MALHOTRA ,SHIMLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SHIMLA, SHIMLA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

Disallowance of Rs. 37,25,543/- under section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS on payments made to pay channels

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 of Rs. 37,25,543/- under section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS on payments made to pay channels

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 of Rs. 37,25,543/- under section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS on payments made to pay channels

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)

section 40(a)(ia) would be applicable with retrospective effect, calling for no disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The assessee

HEALTH BIOTECH LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: the disposal of the same.

disallowance of expenditure under section 40(a)(ia) due to non-deposit of tax deducted at source within the prescribed

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

40,472/-. The Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed an amount of Rs. 7.58 Lacs under Rule 8D(3)i.e; half percent of the average value of the investment. 9.10 The Ld. DR submitted the following arguments: Arguments of Department on disallowance of expenditure u/s 14 A rw rule 8 D: 1. S. 14A has been amended by introduction

ACIT, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS. BECTORS FOOD SPECIALTIES PVT. LTD., LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

40,472/-. The Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed an amount of Rs. 7.58 Lacs under Rule 8D(3)i.e; half percent of the average value of the investment. 9.10 The Ld. DR submitted the following arguments: Arguments of Department on disallowance of expenditure u/s 14 A rw rule 8 D: 1. S. 14A has been amended by introduction

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

40,472/-. The Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed an amount of Rs. 7.58 Lacs under Rule 8D(3)i.e; half percent of the average value of the investment. 9.10 The Ld. DR submitted the following arguments: Arguments of Department on disallowance of expenditure u/s 14 A rw rule 8 D: 1. S. 14A has been amended by introduction

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

40,472/-. The Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed an amount of Rs. 7.58 Lacs under Rule 8D(3)i.e; half percent of the average value of the investment. 9.10 The Ld. DR submitted the following arguments: Arguments of Department on disallowance of expenditure u/s 14 A rw rule 8 D: 1. S. 14A has been amended by introduction

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA vs. M/S MRS.BECTORS FOOD SPECILTIES LTD, LUDHIANA

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

40,472/-. The Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed an amount of Rs. 7.58 Lacs under Rule 8D(3)i.e; half percent of the average value of the investment. 9.10 The Ld. DR submitted the following arguments: Arguments of Department on disallowance of expenditure u/s 14 A rw rule 8 D: 1. S. 14A has been amended by introduction