DURGAPUR RAYATWARI COLLIERY KAMGAR SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,CHANDRAPUR vs. ITO WARD 2, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

194A(3)(v), co-operative banks have been excluded from the definition of 'co-operative society by the Finance Act, 2015. The High Court of Karnataka has held that the effect of the aforesaid amendment explicitly makes clear intention of legislation that co-operative banks are not specie of genus co-operative society, which would be entitled to exemption

VIVEKANAND NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,PULGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, WARDHA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

3. In the present appeal, the only issue that we need to adjudicate is, whether or not the learned CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition of ` 5,84,367, made by the Assessing Officer for non–deduction of TDS under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). 4. Facts in Brief:– The assessee

VIVEKANAND NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,PULGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, WARDHA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

3. In the present appeal, the only issue that we need to adjudicate is, whether or not the learned CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition of ` 5,84,367, made by the Assessing Officer for non–deduction of TDS under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). 4. Facts in Brief:– The assessee

VIVEKANAND NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,PULGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, WARDHA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

3. In the present appeal, the only issue that we need to adjudicate is, whether or not the learned CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition of ` 5,84,367, made by the Assessing Officer for non–deduction of TDS under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). 4. Facts in Brief:– The assessee

M/S B.HIMMATLAL AGRAWAL ,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 4(4), NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee sands dismissed

Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY (Judicial Member)

disallowances, an appeal was filed before the ld. CIT(A), who vide impugned order held that the in respect of the parties i.e. Tata Motors Limited and Shriram Equipment Finance Company Limited, the appellant had filed Form 26AS received from the said parties, therefore, directed the Assessing Officer to allow the same and addition in respect of balance parties

VINIT VISHWASRAO HINGANKAR,AKOLA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE AKOLA

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalevinit Vishwasrao Hingankar, Laxmi Nagar, Gorakshan Road Akola -444 004, ……………. Appellant Maharashtra. Pan – Aaeph6982N V/S Acit, Aayakar Bhavan,Murtizapur Road, ……………. Respondent Akola,-444001, Maharashtra. Assessee By:Smt.Veena Agrawal, A.R. Revenue By :Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr.Dr

section 194A of the Act are applicable. The Ld.AR submitted that the Assessing Officer has made 100% disallowance of interest payments u/sec40(a)(ai) of the Act, whereas as per the amended provisions applicable from 1-4-2015 i.e A.Y.2015-16 the disallowance should be restricted to the 30% of the claim of interest. On the second disputed issue, the contentions

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NAGPUR vs. AVANTHA HOLDINGS LIMITED, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

194A of I.T. Act 1961. In the absence of\nobligation to deduct tax at source provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of I.T. Act\n1961 cannot be invoked. The reasons for disallowance given by A.O. is\nunjustified and has correctly being held by CIT(A) to be not a valid reason for\nnot allowing the claim of deduction

AVANTHA HOLDINGS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. A.C.I.T. CIR-5,, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

194A of I.T. Act 1961. In the absence of obligation to deduct tax at source provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of I.T. Act 1961 cannot be invoked. The reasons for disallowance given by A.O. is unjustified and has correctly being held by CIT(A) to be not a valid reason for not allowing the claim of deduction

DY. C.I.T. CIR-.5, NAGPUR vs. M/S AVANTHA HOLDINGS LTD.,, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

194A of I.T. Act 1961. In the absence of obligation to deduct tax at source provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of I.T. Act 1961 cannot be invoked. The reasons for disallowance given by A.O. is unjustified and has correctly being held by CIT(A) to be not a valid reason for not allowing the claim of deduction