ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, PATNA, PATNA vs. YASHI FILMS PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowance of expenditure amounting to Rs. 8,30,23,893/- made under professional and technical services without verify the facts that large payment made under section 194J

RAVI LOCHAN SINGH,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, PATNA

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

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

section 40(a)(ia) is attracted here also. Hence, 5 Ravi Lochan Singh It is my opinion that the assessee has claimed Rs. 2,93,160/- under the head of consultancy fee but he has not deducted TDS on the payments u/s 194J. Therefore, the AO proceeded to make disallowance

ANIL KUMAR,NALANDA vs. ITO, WARD- 2 (3), BIHARSHARIF

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 361/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Anil Kumar National Faceless Assessment Centre M/S Raj Trading Company, Nfac, Delhi Harnaut, Nalanda, Patna-803110 Vs Bihar [Pan : Azopc268H] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्‍यर्थी/ (Respondent)

194J, the disallowance of Rs. 1,44,000/-by the AO is justified in view of Section 40(a)(ia). 10. For that

BIJAY KUMAR SARAF,DALDALI BAZAR, MUZAFFARPUR vs. DC/AC CIRCLE 1,MUZFFARPUR, IT-OFFICE, POLICE LINE, SIKANDERPUR MUZZAFFARPUR

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 194C(6). All the compliance had been complied ITA No.: 205/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Bijay Kumar Saraf. by the appellant during the year under consideration as per the prevailing law during the said period. 11. For that the learned commissioner of income tax (Appeals) had failed to appreciate the fact that the payment made in respect

SHARAD SINHA,LACKNOW vs. AO,NFAC, DELHI

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

disallowed. The assessee contended that evidence found during the survey was not provided for rebuttal.", "held": "The Tribunal noted that while a show cause notice was issued, the assessee did not furnish information. To ensure justice, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication with opportunities for the assessee to be heard and to comment