SH. SURENDRA KUMAR WADHWA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2009-10 Mr. Surendra Kumar Wadhwa, C/O- Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward -20(2), Mr. Ajay Kumar Sharma, 14, School New Delhi Lane, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi Gir/Pan : Aabpw0250F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Ajay Kumar Sharma, Adv. Respondent By Smt. Rishpal Bedi, Jcit (Dr) Date Of Hearing 18.04.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 08.06.2016 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal Of The Assessee Is Directed Order Dated 27/01/2014 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-V, New Delhi For Assessment Year 2000-10, Raising Following Grounds: 1. That, The Assessment Order & The Appellate Order Are Based On Conjucture & Surmises & Against The Facts Of The Case & The Law Laid Down In This Respect. 2. That, The Assessing Officer & The Hon’Ble Cit (A) Has Errored In Taxing The Commission Payable Of Rs. 4,08,080 In This Year, While This Amount Belongs To The Subsequent Year When The Bills Were Raised & The Amount Was Received. The Appellant Has Never Offered To Tax In This Year Rs. 4,08,080. The Submission Of The Assessing Officer In This Respect Is His Words & Not The Words Of The Appellant. The Affidavit Can Be Submitted For The Confirmation Of This Submission. 3. That, The Hon’Ble Cit (A) Has Errored In Considering The Loan Processing Fees As A Capital Expenditure Instead Of Revenue Expenditure. The Loan Processing Fees Payable To Bank Is A Bank Charges For Rendering Services For Granting The Loan For Car For Business Purpose. This Amount Cannot Be Considered As Capital Expenditure. This Is Revenue Expenditure. 4. That, The Hon’Ble Cit (A) Has Errored In Saying That The Amount Of Rs. 3,90,579 May Be Reduced From The Income For The A.Y. 2010- 11 If Such Amount Has Indeed Been Taxed Twice.

196A, section 196B, section 196C and section 196D to be treated as an income received. The purpose of section 198 is not to carve out an exception to section 145 of the Act. Section 199 of the Act has two objectives - one to declare the tax deducted at source as payment of tax on behalf of the person on whose

DCIT, LUCKNOW vs. SAHARA INDIA FINANCIAL CORP. LTD.,, LUCKNOW

In the result both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and COs of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

TDS Ward-2, Lucknow is reproduced as below:- “All the functions of Assessing Officer under Chapter XVIIB, BB & D, Chapter XXI and Chapter XXII of the Act in respect of such areas, or such persons or classes of persons mentioned below:- All persons responsible for paying any income or sum of the nature mentioned in section 192 to 194, 194A

DCIT, LUCKNOW vs. SAHARA INDIA FINANCIAL CORP. LTD.,, LUCKNOW

In the result both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and COs of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

TDS Ward-2, Lucknow is reproduced as below:- “All the functions of Assessing Officer under Chapter XVIIB, BB & D, Chapter XXI and Chapter XXII of the Act in respect of such areas, or such persons or classes of persons mentioned below:- All persons responsible for paying any income or sum of the nature mentioned in section 192 to 194, 194A

MANNU BHATIA,UAE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1)(2), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmash. Mannu Bhatia Vs. Acit, 1704, Mesk Tower, International Tax Al Marsa Road, Dubai Circle 1(1)(2) Marina, Dubai, Uae Pan : Afnpb4279A (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 196A) of Rs 160315 (ii) In regard of purchase of property, you are requested to provide following details- (a) Details of property. Mannu Bhatia 3 (b) Copy of purchase deed/builder buyer agreement in response to said property. (c) Bank account statement reflecting the payment made for said property (d) Explain the source of payment made to acquire these properties

TRETA E TECHNOLOGIES COMPANY PVT LTD,GURGAON vs. ACIT CIRCLE-25(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Vijay Pal Raoआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.9734/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 बनाम Treta E Technologies Company Pvt. Ltd. Acit Ca M.R. Sahu, M Sahu & Associates, Ca Vs. Circle 25(2) H.No. 651, Ff, Sector-10A, Room No. 196A, Near Meenakshi Public School, C.R. Building, Gurgaon, Haryana. New Delhi. Pan No. Aadct1733B अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

196A, Near Meenakshi Public School, C.R. Building, Gurgaon, Haryana. New Delhi. PAN No. AADCT1733B अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by Shri M.R. Sahu, CA Revenue by Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date of hearing: 23.09.2021 24.09.2021 उ"ोषणाक"तारीख/Pronouncement on आदेश /O R D E R PER VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. This appeal by the assessee