MORADABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MORADABAD vs. DCIT(EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result, ITA No. 1071/Del/2020, ITA No

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.273,199/Lkw/2019 A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Moradabad Development (Exemption), Lucknow Authority, Kanth Road, Moradabad Pan:Aajfm7731M (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS under section 194C of the Act had been deducted. Therefore the nature of the activities being conducted by the assessee was akin to the activities of the builders, developers and contractors. Therefore, the ld. AO held that since the amount of receipts on account of such activities was in excess of Rs.25 Lacs, the assessee

MORADABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MORADABAD vs. DY. CIT(EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result, ITA No. 1071/Del/2020, ITA No

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.273,199/Lkw/2019 A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Moradabad Development (Exemption), Lucknow Authority, Kanth Road, Moradabad Pan:Aajfm7731M (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS under section 194C of the Act had been deducted. Therefore the nature of the activities being conducted by the assessee was akin to the activities of the builders, developers and contractors. Therefore, the ld. AO held that since the amount of receipts on account of such activities was in excess of Rs.25 Lacs, the assessee

MORADABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MORADABAD vs. DCIT(EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result, ITA No. 1071/Del/2020, ITA No

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.273,199/Lkw/2019 A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Moradabad Development (Exemption), Lucknow Authority, Kanth Road, Moradabad Pan:Aajfm7731M (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS under section 194C of the Act had been deducted. Therefore the nature of the activities being conducted by the assessee was akin to the activities of the builders, developers and contractors. Therefore, the ld. AO held that since the amount of receipts on account of such activities was in excess of Rs.25 Lacs, the assessee

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

Section 206C of the Income Tax Act and have misapplied the provisions of the Act. 4. BECAUSE, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred in holding the TCS is applicable on "sand excavation" and brick kilns" since the same are outside of the preview of Mines and Minerals

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

Section 206C of the Income Tax Act and have misapplied the provisions of the Act. 4. BECAUSE, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred in holding the TCS is applicable on "sand excavation" and brick kilns" since the same are outside of the preview of Mines and Minerals

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

Section 206C of the Income Tax Act and have misapplied the provisions of the Act. 4. BECAUSE, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred in holding the TCS is applicable on "sand excavation" and brick kilns" since the same are outside of the preview of Mines and Minerals

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

Section 206C of the Income Tax Act and have misapplied the provisions of the Act. 4. BECAUSE, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred in holding the TCS is applicable on "sand excavation" and brick kilns" since the same are outside of the preview of Mines and Minerals

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

Section 206C of the Income Tax Act and have misapplied the provisions of the Act. 4. BECAUSE, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred in holding the TCS is applicable on "sand excavation" and brick kilns" since the same are outside of the preview of Mines and Minerals

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

Section 206C of the Income Tax Act and have misapplied the provisions of the Act. 4. BECAUSE, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred in holding the TCS is applicable on "sand excavation" and brick kilns" since the same are outside of the preview of Mines and Minerals

ASTT. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW vs. M/S APCO INFRATECH PVT. LTD., LUCKNOW

In the result, appeal of the Revenue and Cross Objection of the assessee are dismissed, as indicated above

Bench: Shri G. D. Padamahshali & Shri Subhash Malguriaassessment Year: 2014-15 The Asstt. Commissioner V. M/S Apco Infratech Pvt. Ltd Of Income Tax B-9, Vibhuti Khand Central Circle Ii Gomti Nagar Lucnow Lucknow Pan:Aadca5639H (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.19/Lkw/2017 [In Ita No.66/Lkw/2017] Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Apco Infratech Pvt. Ltd V. The Asstt. Commissioner Of B-9, Vibhuti Khand Income Tax Gomti Nagar Central Circle Ii Lucknow Lucnow Pan:Aadca5639H (Cross Objector) (Respondent)

46A of LT. Rules without giving opportunity to Assessing Officer in this regard. 7. That the appellant craves to add or amend any one or more of the grounds of the appeal as stated above as and when needs for doing so may arise. 2. The grounds raised by the assessee in the Cross Objection are as under: 1. Because

THE DISTRICT MINING OFFICER,BAREILLY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BAREILLY

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

Section 206C of the Income Tax Act. 3. BECAUSE, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT (A), sustaining the order of ITO (TDS) u/s 206C (6A) of the Income Tax Act is unsustainable and bad in law since being voilative of principles of natural justice as no Notice have

THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE/DISTRICT MINING OFFICER,PILIBHIT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BAREILY

In the result, the appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

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

Section 206C of the income Tax Act and have misapplied the provisions of the Act. 4. BECAUSE, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) has further erred in holding the TCS is applicable on 'sand excavation" and brick kilns" since the same are outside of the preview of Mines and Minerals

THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE/DISTRICT MINING OFFICER,PILIBHIT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BAREILY

In the result, the appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

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

Section 206C of the income Tax Act and have misapplied the provisions of the Act. 4. BECAUSE, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) has further erred in holding the TCS is applicable on 'sand excavation" and brick kilns" since the same are outside of the preview of Mines and Minerals

THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE/DISTRICT MINING OFFICER,PILIBHIT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BAREILY

In the result, the appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

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

Section 206C of the income Tax Act and have misapplied the provisions of the Act. 4. BECAUSE, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) has further erred in holding the TCS is applicable on 'sand excavation" and brick kilns" since the same are outside of the preview of Mines and Minerals

THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE/DISTRICT MINING OFFICER,PILIBHIT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BAREILY

In the result, the appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

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

Section 206C of the income Tax Act and have misapplied the provisions of the Act. 4. BECAUSE, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) has further erred in holding the TCS is applicable on 'sand excavation" and brick kilns" since the same are outside of the preview of Mines and Minerals

THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE/DISTRICT MINING OFFICER,PILIBHIT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BAREILY

In the result, the appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

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

Section 206C of the income Tax Act and have misapplied the provisions of the Act. 4. BECAUSE, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) has further erred in holding the TCS is applicable on 'sand excavation" and brick kilns" since the same are outside of the preview of Mines and Minerals

THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE/DISTRICT MINING OFFICER,PILIBHIT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BAREILY

In the result, the appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

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

Section 206C of the income Tax Act and have misapplied the provisions of the Act. 4. BECAUSE, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) has further erred in holding the TCS is applicable on 'sand excavation" and brick kilns" since the same are outside of the preview of Mines and Minerals

THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE/DISTRICT MINING OFFICER,PILIBHIT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BAREILY

In the result, the appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

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

Section 206C of the income Tax Act and have misapplied the provisions of the Act. 4. BECAUSE, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) has further erred in holding the TCS is applicable on 'sand excavation" and brick kilns" since the same are outside of the preview of Mines and Minerals

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, RANGE-, LUCKNOW., LUCKNOW vs. SH. SHARAD DEORA, LUCKNOW.

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

Bench: Shri Subhash Malguria & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

section 68 of the Act by accepting Credit Worthiness of SAPPHIRESAMBHAV INFRAESTATES PVT LTD who had NIL income and turnover, NIL advance tax, NIL TDS during the year.” 2. Revenue has also raised revised grounds of appeal, which are reproduced as under: “1. That the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and facts by deleting addition made