THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE COLLECTORATE,SHAHJAHANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BAREILLY

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee for Assessment Years 2010-11 to 2015-16 are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

TDS), Bareilly passed the orders under section 206C of the I.T. Act, due to default on the part of the assessee in collecting the tax at source (TCS) in respect of Royalty amount received for these six years. The assessee challenged the orders of the Assessing Officer by filing appeals before the ld. CIT(A) and there was a delay

THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE COLLECTORATE,SHAHJAHANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BAREILLY

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee for Assessment Years 2010-11 to 2015-16 are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

TDS), Bareilly passed the orders under section 206C of the I.T. Act, due to default on the part of the assessee in collecting the tax at source (TCS) in respect of Royalty amount received for these six years. The assessee challenged the orders of the Assessing Officer by filing appeals before the ld. CIT(A) and there was a delay

THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE COLLECTORATE,SHAHJAHANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BAREILLY

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee for Assessment Years 2010-11 to 2015-16 are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

TDS), Bareilly passed the orders under section 206C of the I.T. Act, due to default on the part of the assessee in collecting the tax at source (TCS) in respect of Royalty amount received for these six years. The assessee challenged the orders of the Assessing Officer by filing appeals before the ld. CIT(A) and there was a delay

THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE COLLECTORATE,SHAHJAHANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BAREILLY

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee for Assessment Years 2010-11 to 2015-16 are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

TDS), Bareilly passed the orders under section 206C of the I.T. Act, due to default on the part of the assessee in collecting the tax at source (TCS) in respect of Royalty amount received for these six years. The assessee challenged the orders of the Assessing Officer by filing appeals before the ld. CIT(A) and there was a delay

THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE COLLECTORATE,SHAHJAHANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BAREILLY

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee for Assessment Years 2010-11 to 2015-16 are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

TDS), Bareilly passed the orders under section 206C of the I.T. Act, due to default on the part of the assessee in collecting the tax at source (TCS) in respect of Royalty amount received for these six years. The assessee challenged the orders of the Assessing Officer by filing appeals before the ld. CIT(A) and there was a delay

AMITA SINGH,LUCKNOW vs. ITO RANGE-6(1), LUCKNOW

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

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

TDS of Rs.1,30,000/- deducted on Sale of Immoveable Property which is duly reflected in Form 26AS. 6. The present additions made are highly excessive, contrary to the facts, law and principle of natural justice and without providing sufficient time and opportunity to have its say on the reasons relied upon by authorities below.” (c) At the time

S.B.I H.R SECTION (ADMIN OFFICE),KANPUR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), KANPUR

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

TDS), HR Section, Admin Office, Kanpur. Main Branch, Kanpur. PAN:KNPSO2318B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Pradeep Mehrotra, Advocate Respondent by Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Date of hearing 07/04/2022 Date of pronouncement 27/04/2022 O R D E R PER BENCH: These are appeals filed by two different assessees against separate orders of learned CIT(A) dated 09/11/2016. I.T.A. No.75 & 75/Lkw/2017

S.B.I ACCOUNTS & ADMIN OFFICE,KANPUR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), KANPUR

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

TDS), HR Section, Admin Office, Kanpur. Main Branch, Kanpur. PAN:KNPSO2318B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Pradeep Mehrotra, Advocate Respondent by Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Date of hearing 07/04/2022 Date of pronouncement 27/04/2022 O R D E R PER BENCH: These are appeals filed by two different assessees against separate orders of learned CIT(A) dated 09/11/2016. I.T.A. No.75 & 75/Lkw/2017

BRANCH MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE, ADMINISTRETIVE OFFICE,KANPUR vs. ACIT (TDS), KANPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

TDS verification, the Assessing Officer found that the employees of the bank had undertaken foreign travel as part of the Leave Travel Concession. The provisions of section 10(5) of the Act allows exemption in respect of the value of travel concession granted by the employer in connection with his proceeding on leave to any place in India. Since

STATE BANK OF INDIA, OVERSEAS BRANCH,KANPUR vs. ACIT(TDS), KANPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

TDS verification was conducted at the branch of the\nbank during which, it was found that the bank had defaulted in deducting taxes at\nsource on the leave travel reimbursements granted to its employees as part of their\nsalary. The employees were granted tax exemption u/s 10(5) of the Act in respect of\nthis Leave Travel Concession/ reimbursements. However

STATE BANK OF INDIA, OVERSEAS BRANCH,KANPUR vs. ACIT(TDS), KANPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

TDS verification was conducted at the branch of the\nbank during which, it was found that the bank had defaulted in deducting taxes at\nsource on the leave travel reimbursements granted to its employees as part of their\nsalary. The employees were granted tax exemption u/s 10(5) of the Act in respect of\nthis Leave Travel Concession/ reimbursements. However

BRANCH MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE, ADMINISTRETIVE OFFICE,KANPUR vs. ACIT (TDS), KANPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

TDS verification was conducted at the branch of the\nbank during which, it was found that the bank had defaulted in deducting taxes at\nsource on the leave travel reimbursements granted to its employees as part of their\nsalary. The employees were granted tax exemption u/s 10(5) of the Act in respect of\nthis Leave Travel Concession/ reimbursements. However

USHA YADAV,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER RANGE 6(2), LUCKNOW

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

section 144 of the Act dated 27-03- 2022; ii. Penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act dated 21-09-2022; ITA. Nos. 249 & 251/LKW/2024 Page 7 of 13 iii. Penalty order u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act dated 02-09-2022; and iv. Penalty order u/s 271F of the Act dated

USHA YADAV,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER RANGE 6(2), LUCKNOW

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

section 144 of the Act dated 27-03- 2022; ii. Penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act dated 21-09-2022; ITA. Nos. 249 & 251/LKW/2024 Page 7 of 13 iii. Penalty order u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act dated 02-09-2022; and iv. Penalty order u/s 271F of the Act dated

VIL LIMITED,LUCKNOW vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6, LUCKNOW.

In the result, these three appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

TDS deducted as well as the interest there upon is highly excessive, contrary to facts, laws and principles of natural justice and fair play and thus may kindly be ordered to be quashed. 4. Because, the Ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in rejecting the appeal of the assessee the assessee company underwent CIRP Proceeding and the Hon'ble NCLT

VIL LIMITED,LUCKNOW. vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6, LUCKNOW.

In the result, these three appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

TDS deducted as well as the interest there upon is highly excessive, contrary to facts, laws and principles of natural justice and fair play and thus may kindly be ordered to be quashed. 4. Because, the Ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in rejecting the appeal of the assessee the assessee company underwent CIRP Proceeding and the Hon'ble NCLT

VIL LIMITED,LUCKNOW. vs. DY. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX-6, LUCKNOW., LUCKNOW

In the result, these three appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

TDS deducted as well as the interest there upon is highly excessive, contrary to facts, laws and principles of natural justice and fair play and thus may kindly be ordered to be quashed. 4. Because, the Ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in rejecting the appeal of the assessee the assessee company underwent CIRP Proceeding and the Hon'ble NCLT

UP GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES WELFARE,LUCKNOW vs. ACIT, NFAC, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

TDS data at the income tax site during the assessment proceeding. The entire amount of expenses u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act had been done on estimate basis @ 15%. Penalty u/s 270A of the Act was not leviable on this. It was also pointed out that 15% of business expenditure had been disallowed out of advertising expenses, loss