I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD UNIT AWARPUR CEMENT WORKS,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negi

section 194C(6) w.e.f. 16-2015 an exemption has been provided to transporters owning up to 10 goods carriages and prior to that date, there was no exemption provided u/s 194C(6) of the Act from TDS

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. BILT GRAPHIC PAPER PROUDUCTS LTD., CHANDRAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

TDS. However, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 194C(1) of the Act and passed impugned order u/s 201(1) r.w.s. 201(1A) of the Act. In assessment order (“different services”) and held that the services were not covered by the provisions of section 194C(6

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. BILT GRAPHIC PAPER PROUDUCTS LTD., CHANDRAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

TDS. However, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 194C(1) of the Act and passed impugned order u/s 201(1) r.w.s. 201(1A) of the Act. In assessment order (“different services”) and held that the services were not covered by the provisions of section 194C(6

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. BILT GRAPHIC PAPER PROUDUCTS LTD.,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

TDS. However, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 194C(1) of the Act and passed impugned order u/s 201(1) r.w.s. 201(1A) of the Act. In assessment order (“different services”) and held that the services were not covered by the provisions of section 194C(6

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. BILT GRAPHIC PAPER PROUDUCTS LTD.,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

TDS. However, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 194C(1) of the Act and passed impugned order u/s 201(1) r.w.s. 201(1A) of the Act. In assessment order (“different services”) and held that the services were not covered by the provisions of section 194C(6

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. BILT GRAPHIC PAPER PROUDUCTS LTD.,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

TDS. However, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 194C(1) of the Act and passed impugned order u/s 201(1) r.w.s. 201(1A) of the Act. In assessment order (“different services”) and held that the services were not covered by the provisions of section 194C(6

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. BILT GRAPHIC PAPER PROUDUCTS LTD., CHANDRAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

TDS. However, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 194C(1) of the Act and passed impugned order u/s 201(1) r.w.s. 201(1A) of the Act. In assessment order (“different services”) and held that the services were not covered by the provisions of section 194C(6

ITO (TDS), WARD-2(3),, NAGPUR vs. ACC LTD.,, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.73 To 76/Nag/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2014-15 Ito (Tds), Ward-2(3), Vs. Acc Ltd., Chandrapur- 442401. Chanda Cement Works, P.O. Cement Nagar, Chandrapur, Dist.- Chandrapur, Chandrapur - 442502. Pan : Aaact1507C Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Maurya Pratap Assessee By : Shri Chaitanya D. Joshi Date Of Hearing : 20.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Nagpur [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 26.12.2016 Quashing The Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer (Tds), Ward-2(3), Chandrapur U/S 201(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) For The Assessment Years 2011-12 To 2014-15 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In The Above Captioned Four Appeals Of The Revenue, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.73/Nag/2017 For The Assessment Year 2011-12 Are Stated Herein.

TDS amount u/s 201(1) of the Act vide order dated 26.03.2015. 5. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the ld. CIT(A), who vide impugned order considering the submissions of the assessee held that under the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 194C

ITO (TDS), WARD-2(3),, CHANDRAPUR vs. ACC LTD.,, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.73 To 76/Nag/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2014-15 Ito (Tds), Ward-2(3), Vs. Acc Ltd., Chandrapur- 442401. Chanda Cement Works, P.O. Cement Nagar, Chandrapur, Dist.- Chandrapur, Chandrapur - 442502. Pan : Aaact1507C Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Maurya Pratap Assessee By : Shri Chaitanya D. Joshi Date Of Hearing : 20.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Nagpur [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 26.12.2016 Quashing The Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer (Tds), Ward-2(3), Chandrapur U/S 201(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) For The Assessment Years 2011-12 To 2014-15 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In The Above Captioned Four Appeals Of The Revenue, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.73/Nag/2017 For The Assessment Year 2011-12 Are Stated Herein.

TDS amount u/s 201(1) of the Act vide order dated 26.03.2015. 5. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the ld. CIT(A), who vide impugned order considering the submissions of the assessee held that under the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 194C

ITO (TDS), WARD-2(3),, CHANDRAPUR vs. ACC LTD.,, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.73 To 76/Nag/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2014-15 Ito (Tds), Ward-2(3), Vs. Acc Ltd., Chandrapur- 442401. Chanda Cement Works, P.O. Cement Nagar, Chandrapur, Dist.- Chandrapur, Chandrapur - 442502. Pan : Aaact1507C Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Maurya Pratap Assessee By : Shri Chaitanya D. Joshi Date Of Hearing : 20.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Nagpur [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 26.12.2016 Quashing The Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer (Tds), Ward-2(3), Chandrapur U/S 201(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) For The Assessment Years 2011-12 To 2014-15 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In The Above Captioned Four Appeals Of The Revenue, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.73/Nag/2017 For The Assessment Year 2011-12 Are Stated Herein.

TDS amount u/s 201(1) of the Act vide order dated 26.03.2015. 5. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the ld. CIT(A), who vide impugned order considering the submissions of the assessee held that under the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 194C

ITO (TDS), WARD-2(3),, CHANDRAPUR vs. ACC LTD.,, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.73 To 76/Nag/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2014-15 Ito (Tds), Ward-2(3), Vs. Acc Ltd., Chandrapur- 442401. Chanda Cement Works, P.O. Cement Nagar, Chandrapur, Dist.- Chandrapur, Chandrapur - 442502. Pan : Aaact1507C Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Maurya Pratap Assessee By : Shri Chaitanya D. Joshi Date Of Hearing : 20.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Nagpur [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 26.12.2016 Quashing The Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer (Tds), Ward-2(3), Chandrapur U/S 201(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) For The Assessment Years 2011-12 To 2014-15 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In The Above Captioned Four Appeals Of The Revenue, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.73/Nag/2017 For The Assessment Year 2011-12 Are Stated Herein.

TDS amount u/s 201(1) of the Act vide order dated 26.03.2015. 5. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the ld. CIT(A), who vide impugned order considering the submissions of the assessee held that under the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 194C

THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA,,NAGPUR vs. I.T.O. T.D.S. WARD 2-(1), NAGPUR

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

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Mahavir Singh

6. That the learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of AO of charging interest u/s 206C(7) of the Income Tax Act. The interest charged is improper.” 4. Similarly in respect to other five appeals, which are in respect to the dispute of TDS u/s 194C of the Act, learned CIT(A) confirmed

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-7(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHIVPRAKASH RAJNARAYAN MISHRA(HUF), NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri G. Manjunatha

TDS since they have made the payment to the assessee as per the provisions of section 194C of the Act which mandates deduction of tax at source on any payment made to any transporter including agent. The assessee has filed all the details including confirmation which clearly shows that he is acting as a commission agent for facilitating movement

ACIT, CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR vs. M/S NANDLAL ENTERPRISES, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

TDS. the section 194C are not applicable to the assessee. The appellant has relied upon the following decisions:-  ACIT V/s. M/s. Nandlal Enterprises ITA No.198/Nagpur/2009.  CIT V/s. Excel Industries Ltd. 358 ITR 295 (SC).  Kanwar Singh Saini V/s. HC Delhi (2012) 4 SCC pg 308. In the case of CIT vs. Excel Industries Ltd (358 ITR 295), the Apex Court

ACIT, CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR vs. M/S NANDLAL ENTERPRISES, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

TDS. the section 194C are not applicable to the assessee. The appellant has relied upon the following decisions:-  ACIT V/s. M/s. Nandlal Enterprises ITA No.198/Nagpur/2009.  CIT V/s. Excel Industries Ltd. 358 ITR 295 (SC).  Kanwar Singh Saini V/s. HC Delhi (2012) 4 SCC pg 308. In the case of CIT vs. Excel Industries Ltd (358 ITR 295), the Apex Court

ACIT, CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR vs. M/S NANDLAL ENTERPRISES, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

TDS. the section 194C are not applicable to the assessee. The appellant has relied upon the following decisions:-  ACIT V/s. M/s. Nandlal Enterprises ITA No.198/Nagpur/2009.  CIT V/s. Excel Industries Ltd. 358 ITR 295 (SC).  Kanwar Singh Saini V/s. HC Delhi (2012) 4 SCC pg 308. In the case of CIT vs. Excel Industries Ltd (358 ITR 295), the Apex Court

SHRI SANJAY KUMAR SINGH ,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 8(1), NAGPUR

Appeal is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S. S. Godaraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.96/Nag/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07 Shri Sanjay Kumar Singh, Vs. Ito, Ward- 8(1), Nagpur. Hanshu Patel Building, Amravati Road, Wadi, Nagpur- 440023. Pan : Axbps9499K Appellant Respondent Assessee By None : Revenue By : Shri G. J. Ninawe Date Of Hearing : 02.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.12.2022 आदेश / Order Per S. S. Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2006-07 Arises Against The Cit(A)-2, Nagpur’S Order Dated 21.08.2019 Passed In Case No. Cit(A)-2/141/2013-14, Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short “The Act”. Case Called Twice. None Appears At Assessee’S Behest. The Very Factual Position Existed On All Previous Hearing As Well. He Is Accordingly Proceeded Ex-Parte.

TDS deduction for the payments in issue u/s 194C of the Act. Faced with this situation, I delete the impugned section 40(a)(ia) disallowance of Rs.9,22,133/- in issue. 3 The assessee succeeds in his sole substantive grievance. Ordered accordingly. 5. This assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms. Order pronounced on this 27th day of December

SANJAY KISAN CHOPDE,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.176/Nag/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Sanjay Kisan Chopde, The Deputy Balaji Associates, Gs 37, Vs Commissioner Of Amar Jyoti Palace, Lomat Income Tax, Circle-1, Square, Wardha Road, Nagpur. Nagpur – 440012. Pan: Abapc6968N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By Shri Abhay Agrawal – Advocate Revenue By Shri Abhay Y. Marathe – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 25/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 30/01/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Dated 30.3.2022 Emanating From Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) Dated 30.06.2016 For A.Y.2014-15. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under : Sanjay Kisan Chopde [A]

194C unlike in this case wherein the said party had deducted TDS at the rate of 10% under section 194J (a section applicable when payee is a professional/ technical service provider). It was also stated that, the entries in the TDS statement hosted by the Department are based on the TDS returns filed by the deductors and as such

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR vs. SHRI NANDLAL B MALOO, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s cross objection is partly allowed

Bench: Shri P.K. Bansal & Shri Amarjit Singh

TDS deducted at Rs.4,19,337/-. AO's action is not tenable. This ground is therefore allowed.” 6. On a perusal of the above said finding, it came into the notice that the Assessing Officer has wrongly understood the amount to the tune of ` 1,90,60,770 as interest received from M/s. Nandlal Enterprises Ltd. In fact, the said