ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR vs. M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD., JHARSUGUDA

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

194C applies only to labour contract and not to a composite contract of construction of an infrastructure facility. 3 IT(SS)A No.77 & ITA Nos.320,296,88, 141,89,142,13/CTK/2023 &CO No.02/CTK/2023 3. The Ld. CIT(A) was not correct in holding that the infrastructure facility executed by the assessee (Contractor) can be considered to be owned

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR vs. M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD., JHARSUGUDA

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

194C applies only to labour contract and not to a composite contract of construction of an infrastructure facility. 3 IT(SS)A No.77 & ITA Nos.320,296,88, 141,89,142,13/CTK/2023 &CO No.02/CTK/2023 3. The Ld. CIT(A) was not correct in holding that the infrastructure facility executed by the assessee (Contractor) can be considered to be owned

M/S. SHREE BAALAJI ENGICONS LIMITED,JHARSUGUDA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

194C applies only to labour contract and not to a composite contract of construction of an infrastructure facility. 3 IT(SS)A No.77 & ITA Nos.320,296,88, 141,89,142,13/CTK/2023 &CO No.02/CTK/2023 3. The Ld. CIT(A) was not correct in holding that the infrastructure facility executed by the assessee (Contractor) can be considered to be owned

ASST. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, SAMBALPUR vs. SHREE BALAJI ENGICON LIMITED, BELPAHAR RS

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

194C applies only to labour contract and not to a composite contract of construction of an infrastructure facility. 3 IT(SS)A No.77 & ITA Nos.320,296,88, 141,89,142,13/CTK/2023 &CO No.02/CTK/2023 3. The Ld. CIT(A) was not correct in holding that the infrastructure facility executed by the assessee (Contractor) can be considered to be owned

M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD.,BELPAHAR, JHARSUGUDA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

194C applies only to labour contract and not to a composite contract of construction of an infrastructure facility. 3 IT(SS)A No.77 & ITA Nos.320,296,88, 141,89,142,13/CTK/2023 &CO No.02/CTK/2023 3. The Ld. CIT(A) was not correct in holding that the infrastructure facility executed by the assessee (Contractor) can be considered to be owned

M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD.,BELPAHAR, JHARSUGUDA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

194C applies only to labour contract and not to a composite contract of construction of an infrastructure facility. 3 IT(SS)A No.77 & ITA Nos.320,296,88, 141,89,142,13/CTK/2023 &CO No.02/CTK/2023 3. The Ld. CIT(A) was not correct in holding that the infrastructure facility executed by the assessee (Contractor) can be considered to be owned

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR vs. M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD., JHARSUGUDA

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

194C applies only to labour contract and not to a composite contract of construction of an infrastructure facility. 3 IT(SS)A No.77 & ITA Nos.320,296,88, 141,89,142,13/CTK/2023 &CO No.02/CTK/2023 3. The Ld. CIT(A) was not correct in holding that the infrastructure facility executed by the assessee (Contractor) can be considered to be owned

M/S. SHREE SHYAMJEE CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BAGDEHI vs. ITO (TDS), SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.215/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Shree Shyamji Constructions Vs Income Tax Officer(Tds), Pvt. Ltd., Sambalpur Main Road, Bagdehi, District : Jharsuguda-768220 Pan No. :Aajcs 0480 J (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri M.K.Kedia, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 23/04/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/04/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 07.04.2023, Passed By The Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar In Din & Document No.Itba/Apl/S/91/2023-24/1051928453(1) For The Assessment Year 2017-2018 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Assessee Is In Construction Business Has Purchased Cement & Bricks From Ocl India Ltd. & Shivkashi Enterprises, Respectively. It Was Submitted That The Purchases Were On For Sales Meaning That The Bill, Purchase Cost Included The Cost Of Transportation. It Was The Submission That For The Purpose Of Billing The Supplier Had Shown Freight Separately But The Assessee Has Paid Consolidated Amount For The Purchase Of The Material. The Assessee Has Not Undertaken The Transportation Of The Cement Or Bricks On Its Own. It 2 Was The Submission That The Ao On The Ground That The Assessee Has Shown The Transportation Cost As Per The Bills Separately In Its Account, Had Held That The Assessee Had Not Deducted Tds As Per The Provisions Of Section 194C Of The Act & Consequently Levied A Liability U/S.201 Of The Act. It Was The Submission That This Liability Was Upheld By The Ld. Cit(A). Ld. Ar Placed Before Us A Copies Of The Bill For The Purchases, Which Are As Follows :-

Section 194C of the Act and consequently levied a liability u/s.201 of the Act. It was the submission that this liability was upheld by the ld. CIT(A). Ld. AR placed before us a copies of the bill for the purchases, which are as follows :- 3 3. It was the submission that the bills specifically showed that the inclusive term

SMT. POONAM PUJARI,ROURKELA vs. PR. CIT, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathanbefore Member & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2014-15

6 | 9 Assessment Year : 2014-15 nor bogus by the Pr. CIT. Merely for the reason that the assessee has not complied with the provisions of section 194C of the Act , the disallowance was made u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. The case of the assessee is not of the guilty by furnishing of any inaccurate particulars nor with

K.P. PRIME ASSETS PVT. LTD.,CUTTACK vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1) , CUTTACK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee and revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

section 194C does not warrant any deduction on purchase of materials. The circumstantial back ground of the events involved in this case clearly leads to the contumacious nature of the assessee to inflate expenses and squeeze the generation of income to avoid tax liability. Otherwise, how can a & ITA No.67/CTK/2020 hotel employee be entrusted to supply sand to the project

ACIT, CIRCLE- 2(1), CUTTACK vs. K P PRIME ASSETS (P) LTD. , CUTTACK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee and revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

section 194C does not warrant any deduction on purchase of materials. The circumstantial back ground of the events involved in this case clearly leads to the contumacious nature of the assessee to inflate expenses and squeeze the generation of income to avoid tax liability. Otherwise, how can a & ITA No.67/CTK/2020 hotel employee be entrusted to supply sand to the project