MUNICIPAL BOARD,PHALODI vs. JCIT,TDS, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

5. Facts of the case in brief are that the Assessing Officer passed the orders under section 154 r.w.s 200A of the Act, and created demand for different quarters under section 234E of the Act for default in furnishing the TDS

MUNICIPAL BOARD,PHALODI vs. JCIT,TDS, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

5. Facts of the case in brief are that the Assessing Officer passed the orders under section 154 r.w.s 200A of the Act, and created demand for different quarters under section 234E of the Act for default in furnishing the TDS

MUNICIPAL BOARD,PHALODI vs. JCIT,TDS, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

5. Facts of the case in brief are that the Assessing Officer passed the orders under section 154 r.w.s 200A of the Act, and created demand for different quarters under section 234E of the Act for default in furnishing the TDS

MUNICIPAL BOARD,PHALODI vs. JCIT-TDS, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

5. Facts of the case in brief are that the Assessing Officer passed the orders under section 154 r.w.s 200A of the Act, and created demand for different quarters under section 234E of the Act for default in furnishing the TDS

MUNICIPAL BOARD,PHALODI vs. JCIT,TDS, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

5. Facts of the case in brief are that the Assessing Officer passed the orders under section 154 r.w.s 200A of the Act, and created demand for different quarters under section 234E of the Act for default in furnishing the TDS

DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL STATION HEADQUARTER BSF,BIKANER vs. JCIT (TDS), RANGE, JODHPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

TDS statement under section 234E of the Act were furnished after the amendment by the Finance Bill 2015 w.e.f 01/06/2015 the relevant findings on the same issue has been given in para 5

AJAYAB SINGH MUKHTYAR SINGH,PADAMPUR vs. ITO WARD 1, SRI GANGANAGAR

Appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble & Narinder Kumar, Hon'Ble

section 194Q on the purchase value of crop of the farmer purchased through kacha arhtiya, and it is not the sale or turnover of the kacha arthia, and actually it was sale of the farmer. The Ld. AR pleaded that considering the legal and factual position, the assessee is entitled for credit of whole amount of TDS as claimed

ANU SETIYA,SADULSHAHAR vs. ITO WARD - 1, SRI GANGANAGAR

Appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble & Narinder Kumar, Hon'Ble

Section 194Q cannot be claimed or allowed. 6.2.3 CBDT vide Instruction No. 5/2013 has laid down the procedure to verify the TDS claim of the assessee and allow the same if it is found to be in order. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and respectfully following the instructions issued by the CBDT in this regard

BOHAR SINGH,SRI KARANPUR vs. ITO WARD 1, SRI GANGANAGAR

Appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble & Narinder Kumar, Hon'Ble

Section 194Q cannot be claimed or allowed. 6.2.3 CBDT vide Instruction No. 5/2013 has laid down the procedure to verify the TDS claim of the assessee and allow the same if it is found to be in order. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and respectfully following the instructions issued by the CBDT in this regard

ABDUL HAKIM,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - TDS, UDAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of these assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi

section 1941A of the Income Tax Act need be made either." M/s Abdul Rashid & Ors vs. DCIT TDS Thus the ratio laid down by the honorable Kerala High Court is fully applicable in the appellant's case. Hence the order passed by the CIT Appeals is liable to be quashed being against the law and facts. 4. That the appellant

ABDUL RASHID,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE TDS, UDAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of these assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi

section 1941A of the Income Tax Act need be made either." M/s Abdul Rashid & Ors vs. DCIT TDS Thus the ratio laid down by the honorable Kerala High Court is fully applicable in the appellant's case. Hence the order passed by the CIT Appeals is liable to be quashed being against the law and facts. 4. That the appellant

ABDUL KADIR,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-TDS, UDAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of these assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi

section 1941A of the Income Tax Act need be made either." M/s Abdul Rashid & Ors vs. DCIT TDS Thus the ratio laid down by the honorable Kerala High Court is fully applicable in the appellant's case. Hence the order passed by the CIT Appeals is liable to be quashed being against the law and facts. 4. That the appellant

ABDUL AJEEJ,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-TDS, UDAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of these assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi

section 1941A of the Income Tax Act need be made either." M/s Abdul Rashid & Ors vs. DCIT TDS Thus the ratio laid down by the honorable Kerala High Court is fully applicable in the appellant's case. Hence the order passed by the CIT Appeals is liable to be quashed being against the law and facts. 4. That the appellant

MADHUSUDAN MARBLES PRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

TDS amount. Accordingly, fee under section 234E of the Act was charged. The assessee contested the levy of fee under section 234E of the Act by filing appeals before the first appellate authority. However, the appeals were dismissed. 5

MADHUSUDAN MARBLES PRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

TDS amount. Accordingly, fee under section 234E of the Act was charged. The assessee contested the levy of fee under section 234E of the Act by filing appeals before the first appellate authority. However, the appeals were dismissed. 5

INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, UDAIPUR vs. DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST SOUTH, UDAIPUR

In the result, both the above appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

TDS under Section 194C. 5. Against the order of the Ld. AO the assessee went in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who has deleted

INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, UDAIPUR vs. DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST (SOUTH), UDAIPUR

In the result, both the above appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) who has deleted the said demand by stating that the VFPMCs are not contractors under Section 194C, as they are formed under the Rajasthan Forest Act, 1953, and function as self-help groups for forest conservation and development. The payments made to VFPMCs are not contract payments but are reimbursements for work done under the joint forest management policy of the State Government.

TDS under Section 194C. 5. Against the order of the Ld. AO the assessee went in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who has deleted

RAJESH KUMAR NAHAR,BHILWARA vs. ITO, TDS, BHILWARA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

TDS) CIT(A) hence, the same should be confirmed and the appeal of the assessee be dismissed. 5. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. In case of Smt. Sandhya Gugalia, Jaipur Vs DCIT, Ghaziabad (supra), speaking through one of us, we have dealt with the provisions of section

DALPAT SINGH NANECHA,BHILWARA vs. ITO, TDS, BHILWARA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

TDS) CIT(A) hence, the same should be confirmed and the appeal of the assessee be dismissed. 5. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. In case of Smt. Sandhya Gugalia, Jaipur Vs DCIT, Ghaziabad (supra), speaking through one of us, we have dealt with the provisions of section