THE ADDL. CIT RANGE -1, INDORE vs. M/S PRAKASH OILS LTD., DHAR

In the result, the above captioned appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

TDS on freight nor filed the requisite documents u/s 194C(7) of the Act and accordingly applied the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and disallowed the freight expenses. The appellant through its written submissions has submitted that provision of section 194C(6

JARNALBEER SINGH BHATIA,KHANDWA vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL-3, INDORE

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniit(Ss)A Nos.19 To 23/Ind/2023 & Ita No.226/Ind/2023 Ays : 2013-14 To 2018-19 Jarnalbeer Singh Bhatia, Dcit/Acit, बनाम/ Bhatia Transport (Central)-3, Vs. Services, Indore. Old Indore Lines, Pandhana Road, Khandwa (Pan: Aixpb4565C) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

6) and 194C(7) need to be read together and once there is violation of section 194C disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) is attracted ? IT(SS)A No.25/Ind/2023 – A.Y. 2014-15: 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in accepting the additional evidence filed by assessee

THE ACIT CENTRAL-3, INDORE vs. JARNALBEER SINGH BHATIA, KHANDWA

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniit(Ss)A Nos.19 To 23/Ind/2023 & Ita No.226/Ind/2023 Ays : 2013-14 To 2018-19 Jarnalbeer Singh Bhatia, Dcit/Acit, बनाम/ Bhatia Transport (Central)-3, Vs. Services, Indore. Old Indore Lines, Pandhana Road, Khandwa (Pan: Aixpb4565C) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

6) and 194C(7) need to be read together and once there is violation of section 194C disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) is attracted ? IT(SS)A No.25/Ind/2023 – A.Y. 2014-15: 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in accepting the additional evidence filed by assessee

DISTT WOMAN & CHILD DEV OFFICER VIDISHA,VIDISHA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS-2), BHOPAL

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

TDS is required to be deducted under Section 194C for contracts that are purely for the sale of goods." Since the payments made by the appellant are for the sale of prepared food items to beneficiaries, the transactions are purely of a commercial nature and do not constitute a "work contract" as defined under Section 194C of the Act. 6

DISTT WOMAN & CHILD DEV OFFICER VIDISH,VIDISHA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS- 2), BHOPAL

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

TDS is required to be deducted under Section 194C for contracts that are purely for the sale of goods." Since the payments made by the appellant are for the sale of prepared food items to beneficiaries, the transactions are purely of a commercial nature and do not constitute a "work contract" as defined under Section 194C of the Act. 6

DISTT WOMAN & CHILD DEV OFFICER VIDISHA,VIDISHA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS-2), BHOPAL

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

TDS is required to be deducted under Section 194C for contracts that are purely for the sale of goods." Since the payments made by the appellant are for the sale of prepared food items to beneficiaries, the transactions are purely of a commercial nature and do not constitute a "work contract" as defined under Section 194C of the Act. 6

MAHATMA GANDHI STATE INSTITUTE OF RURAL DEVELOPEMENT,ADHARTAL vs. ACIT TDS, BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

6)\n\nThe appellant\nThe respondent\nCIT\nCIT(A)\nDepartmental Representative\nGuard File\n\nBy order\nSenior Private Secretary\nIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal\nIndore Bench, Indore", "summary": { "facts": "The assessee filed an appeal after a delay of 151 days due to unavoidable circumstances. The case concerns the incorrect application of Section 194J instead of Section 194C for TDS

THE ITO (TDS) -1 , BHOPAL vs. MADHYA PRADESH RAJYA AJEEVIKA FORUM, BHOPAL

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shrib.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2015-16 I.T.O.(Tds)-1, Madhya Pradesh Rajya Bhopal Ajeevika Forum, 3Rd Floor, Beej Bhawan, बनाम/ Arera Hills, Vs. Bhopal

6. On perusal of same, it is very much clear that the CBDT has categorically clarified that the payments made to PIAs under MKSP attracts TDS u/s 194C. Notably, the CBDT is an apex income-tax authority in terms of section

M/S ROCKBED RENOVATORS LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE PCIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanirockbed Renovators Ltd. Pr. Cit-1 7-A, Panjabi Bagh Raisen Road Bhopal Govindpura Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaacr7151G Assessee By Shri Gagan Tiwari Ar Revenue By Ms. Ila Parmar, Cit- Dr Date Of Hearing 10.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 12.06.2024

TDS u/s 194C and therefore, if some of the parties have not responded to the notice issued u/s 133(6(. The assessee cannot be held liable for the same and consequently cannot be parished by disallowing the claim of expenses which is otherwise supported by the relevant evidences. 3.3 In support of his contention he has relied upon the decision

DISTRICT ORGANISOR TRIBAL WELFARE BHOPAL,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS)- 1, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

194C of the Act. The BDA has also deducted TDS from payment made to sub-contractor as per the reply furnished. Thus, there exist contract between BDA and assessee tax deductor in furtherance which he has made the payments and the provisions of TDS u/s.194C are clearly attracted in respect of payment to BDA. (b). Though, it has been submitted

DISTRICT ORGANISOR TRIBAL WELFARE BHOPAL,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS)- 1, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

194C of the Act. The BDA has also deducted TDS from payment made to sub-contractor as per the reply furnished. Thus, there exist contract between BDA and assessee tax deductor in furtherance which he has made the payments and the provisions of TDS u/s.194C are clearly attracted in respect of payment to BDA. (b). Though, it has been submitted

DISTRICT ORGANISOR TRIBAL WELFARE BHOPAL,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS)- 1, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

194C of the Act. The BDA has also deducted TDS from payment made to sub-contractor as per the reply furnished. Thus, there exist contract between BDA and assessee tax deductor in furtherance which he has made the payments and the provisions of TDS u/s.194C are clearly attracted in respect of payment to BDA. (b). Though, it has been submitted

DISTRICT ORGANISOR TRIBAL WELFARE BHOPAL,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS)- 1, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

194C of the Act. The BDA has also deducted TDS from payment made to sub-contractor as per the reply furnished. Thus, there exist contract between BDA and assessee tax deductor in furtherance which he has made the payments and the provisions of TDS u/s.194C are clearly attracted in respect of payment to BDA. (b). Though, it has been submitted

DISTRICT ORGANISOR TRIBAL WELFARE BHOPAL,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS)-1, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

194C of the Act. The BDA has also deducted TDS from payment made to sub-contractor as per the reply furnished. Thus, there exist contract between BDA and assessee tax deductor in furtherance which he has made the payments and the provisions of TDS u/s.194C are clearly attracted in respect of payment to BDA. (b). Though, it has been submitted

DISTRICT ORGANISOR TRIBAL WELFARE BHOPAL,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS)- 1, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

194C of the Act. The BDA has also deducted TDS from payment made to sub-contractor as per the reply furnished. Thus, there exist contract between BDA and assessee tax deductor in furtherance which he has made the payments and the provisions of TDS u/s.194C are clearly attracted in respect of payment to BDA. (b). Though, it has been submitted

RAJ KUMAR PALIA,BHOPAL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - ITARSI, CAMP AT BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year:2009-10 Raj Kumar Paliya Dcit/Acit M/S. Da Construction

TDS was required to be deducted u/s 194C but was not deducted.” [emphasis supplied] 3.2 Aggrieved, the assessee again carried matter in appeal to CIT(A) whereupon the CIT(A) upheld the disallowance of depreciation but restricted disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) to 30% of Rs. 2,16,333/- taking into account the subsequent clarificatory amendment made by Govt

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RATLAM vs. SHRI SURESH CHAND JAIN, MEGHNAGAR DIST. JHABUA

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue for A

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani & Acit 5(1) Shri Suresh Chand Jain Indore 99, Thandla Road, Vs. Meghnagar,Jhabua (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent/ Assessee) Pan:Aezpj 2697F Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Respondent By None Date Of Hearing 09.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 12 .09.2023

6 of 18 ITA No.791/Ind/2017 & ITANo.431/Ind/2018 Shri Suresh Chan Jain Page 7 of 18 6.1. On appeal the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition in para 5.3 as under: “5.3 Ground No.3 & 10:- Through these grounds of appeal the appellant has challenged the addition of Rs.95,99,872/- on account Page 7 of 18 ITA No.791/Ind/2017 & ITANo.431/Ind/2018 Shri Suresh Chan

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RATLAM, RATLAM vs. SHRI SURESH CHAND JAIN, JHABUA

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue for A

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani & Acit 5(1) Shri Suresh Chand Jain Indore 99, Thandla Road, Vs. Meghnagar,Jhabua (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent/ Assessee) Pan:Aezpj 2697F Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Respondent By None Date Of Hearing 09.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 12 .09.2023

6 of 18 ITA No.791/Ind/2017 & ITANo.431/Ind/2018 Shri Suresh Chan Jain Page 7 of 18 6.1. On appeal the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition in para 5.3 as under: “5.3 Ground No.3 & 10:- Through these grounds of appeal the appellant has challenged the addition of Rs.95,99,872/- on account Page 7 of 18 ITA No.791/Ind/2017 & ITANo.431/Ind/2018 Shri Suresh Chan