ASSTT.EXCISE TAXATION COMMISSONER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) PALAMPUR

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

Bench: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MAMIDANNA SATYA RATNA SRI RAMACHANDRA RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL

13) Though, learned counsel for the Excise & Taxation Department of the State of Himachal Pradesh, which is the appellant herein contended that Section 206 C(1-C) of the Income Tax Act is not attracted since the collection of toll under the Himachal Pradesh Tolls Act, 1975 is not in force at a Toll Plaza, but said contention

ASSTT.EXCICETAXATION COMMISSIONER NAHAN vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

Bench: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MAMIDANNA SATYA RATNA SRI RAMACHANDRA RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL

13) Though, learned counsel for the Excise & Taxation Department of the State of Himachal Pradesh, which is the appellant herein contended that Section 206 C(1-C) of the Income Tax Act is not attracted since the collection of toll under the Himachal Pradesh Tolls Act, 1975 is not in force at a Toll Plaza, but said contention

ASST.EXCISE TAXATION COMMISSIONER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(TDS) PALAMPUR

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

Bench: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MAMIDANNA SATYA RATNA SRI RAMACHANDRA RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL

13) Though, learned counsel for the Excise & Taxation Department of the State of Himachal Pradesh, which is the appellant herein contended that Section 206 C(1-C) of the Income Tax Act is not attracted since the collection of toll under the Himachal Pradesh Tolls Act, 1975 is not in force at a Toll Plaza, but said contention

ASSTT.EXCISE TAXATION COMMISSIONER vs. ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

Bench: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MAMIDANNA SATYA RATNA SRI RAMACHANDRA RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL

13) Though, learned counsel for the Excise & Taxation Department of the State of Himachal Pradesh, which is the appellant herein contended that Section 206 C(1-C) of the Income Tax Act is not attracted since the collection of toll under the Himachal Pradesh Tolls Act, 1975 is not in force at a Toll Plaza, but said contention

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX SHIMLA vs. M/S AMBUJA DARLA KASHLOG MANGOO

Bench: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE L. NARAYANA SWAMY,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTSNA REWAL DUA

13 to 16/Chd/2019. Secondly, monetary limit for filing appeals in income tax cases before High Courts is upto 1.00 crore. In support of his submission, the learned Counsel has referred to the Notification dated 8.8.2019, issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board Direct Taxes, Judicial Section. Thirdly, the learned Counsel submits that under

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SHIMLA vs. MS SOLAN DISTRICT TRUCK OPERATORS TRANSPORT CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD DARLAGHAT THROUGH PRESIDENT

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTSNA REWAL DUA

TDS of Rs. 45,73,528 and tax paid after original assessment of Rs. 1,71,00,320. The Department contends that the works “any amount” will not include the interest which accrued to the respondent for not refunding Rs. 45,73,528 for 57 months. We see no merit in this argument. The interest component will partake the character