DCIT, TDS, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S PUNJAB STATE CIVIL SUPPLY CORPN. LTD., SIRHIND

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

80G of the Act , it was apparent that the assessee was entitled to claim deduction on the amount of money paid by him as donation as per the relevant provisions. That the use of expression ‘any sum paid’ contemplates payment of an amount of money and does not contemplate donation in kind. Therefore, the Tribunal held that even in section

ITO (TDS), PATIALA vs. THE DISTT. MANAGER, FATEHGARH SAHIB

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

80G of the Act , it was apparent that the assessee was entitled to claim deduction on the amount of money paid by him as donation as per the relevant provisions. That the use of expression ‘any sum paid’ contemplates payment of an amount of money and does not contemplate donation in kind. Therefore, the Tribunal held that even in section

ACIT (TDS), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S PUNJAB STATE GRAIN PROCUREMENT CORP. LTD., BARNALA

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

80G of the Act , it was apparent that the assessee was entitled to claim deduction on the amount of money paid by him as donation as per the relevant provisions. That the use of expression ‘any sum paid’ contemplates payment of an amount of money and does not contemplate donation in kind. Therefore, the Tribunal held that even in section

THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER (F&A) (PERSONAL RESPONSIBLE),SHIMLA vs. ITO (TDS), SHIMLA

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

80G of the Act , it was apparent that the assessee was entitled to claim deduction on the amount of money paid by him as donation as per the relevant provisions. That the use of expression ‘any sum paid’ contemplates payment of an amount of money and does not contemplate donation in kind. Therefore, the Tribunal held that even in section

THE PUNJAB STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY,ROPAR vs. ACIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

80G of the Act , it was apparent that the assessee was entitled to claim deduction on the amount of money paid by him as donation as per the relevant provisions. That the use of expression ‘any sum paid’ contemplates payment of an amount of money and does not contemplate donation in kind. Therefore, the Tribunal held that even in section

ITO (TDS-2), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S PUNJAB STATE GRAINS PROCUREMENT CORP. LTD., MOHALI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

80G of the Act , it was apparent that the assessee was entitled to claim deduction on the amount of money paid by him as donation as per the relevant provisions. That the use of expression ‘any sum paid’ contemplates payment of an amount of money and does not contemplate donation in kind. Therefore, the Tribunal held that even in section

DCIT (TDS), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S PUNJAB STATE GRAINS PROCUREMENT CORP. LTD., FATEHGARH SAHIB

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

80G of the Act , it was apparent that the assessee was entitled to claim deduction on the amount of money paid by him as donation as per the relevant provisions. That the use of expression ‘any sum paid’ contemplates payment of an amount of money and does not contemplate donation in kind. Therefore, the Tribunal held that even in section

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S DISTRICT MANAGER PUNJAB,

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

80G of the Act , it was apparent that the assessee was entitled to claim deduction on the amount of money paid by him as donation as per the relevant provisions. That the use of expression ‘any sum paid’ contemplates payment of an amount of money and does not contemplate donation in kind. Therefore, the Tribunal held that even in section

ITO (TDS-2), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S PUNJAB STATE GRAINS PROCUREMENT CORP. LTD., MOHALI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

80G of the Act , it was apparent that the assessee was entitled to claim deduction on the amount of money paid by him as donation as per the relevant provisions. That the use of expression ‘any sum paid’ contemplates payment of an amount of money and does not contemplate donation in kind. Therefore, the Tribunal held that even in section

ITO, CHANDIGARH vs. THE MANAGER DISTT. OFFICE,, MOHALI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

80G of the Act , it was apparent that the assessee was entitled to claim deduction on the amount of money paid by him as donation as per the relevant provisions. That the use of expression ‘any sum paid’ contemplates payment of an amount of money and does not contemplate donation in kind. Therefore, the Tribunal held that even in section

ITO (TDS), PATIALA vs. THE DISTT. MANAGER, FATEHGARH SAHIB

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

80G of the Act , it was apparent that the assessee was entitled to claim deduction on the amount of money paid by him as donation as per the relevant provisions. That the use of expression ‘any sum paid’ contemplates payment of an amount of money and does not contemplate donation in kind. Therefore, the Tribunal held that even in section

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S DISTRICT MANAGER PUNJAB, SANGRUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

80G of the Act , it was apparent that the assessee was entitled to claim deduction on the amount of money paid by him as donation as per the relevant provisions. That the use of expression ‘any sum paid’ contemplates payment of an amount of money and does not contemplate donation in kind. Therefore, the Tribunal held that even in section

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S DISTRICT MANAGER PUNJAB, SANGRUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

80G of the Act , it was apparent that the assessee was entitled to claim deduction on the amount of money paid by him as donation as per the relevant provisions. That the use of expression ‘any sum paid’ contemplates payment of an amount of money and does not contemplate donation in kind. Therefore, the Tribunal held that even in section

THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER (F&A) (PERSONAL RESPONSIBLE),SHIMLA vs. ITO (TDS), SHIMLA

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

80G of the Act , it was apparent that the assessee was entitled to claim deduction on the amount of money paid by him as donation as per the relevant provisions. That the use of expression ‘any sum paid’ contemplates payment of an amount of money and does not contemplate donation in kind. Therefore, the Tribunal held that even in section

DCIT (TDS), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S PUNJAB STATE GRAINS PROCUREMENT CORP. LTD., FATEHGARH SAHIB

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

80G of the Act , it was apparent that the assessee was entitled to claim deduction on the amount of money paid by him as donation as per the relevant provisions. That the use of expression ‘any sum paid’ contemplates payment of an amount of money and does not contemplate donation in kind. Therefore, the Tribunal held that even in section

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

transferred to the members or to these people or concerns and they had procured bogus commission income. No such document has been brought to my notice by the AO or Survey Report that establishes trail of transfer of cash clandestinely to the members of the society. Hence, if there is bogus commission raised by the members of the society, Ld.AO

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

transferred to the members or to these people or concerns and they had procured bogus commission income. No such document has been brought to my notice by the AO or Survey Report that establishes trail of transfer of cash clandestinely to the members of the society. Hence, if there is bogus commission raised by the members of the society, Ld.AO

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

transferred to the members or to these people or concerns and they had procured bogus commission income. No such document has been brought to my notice by the AO or Survey Report that establishes trail of transfer of cash clandestinely to the members of the society. Hence, if there is bogus commission raised by the members of the society, Ld.AO