PUDHARI PUBLICATIONS PVT.LTD.,MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), KOLHAPUR

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1394 To 1396/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Pudhari Publications Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito (Tds), Kolhapur. 2318 C-Ward, Bhausingji Road, Pudhari Bhawan Karveer, Kolhapur- 416002. Pan : Aadcp2453Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None (Written Submission) Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai Date Of Hearing : 10.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: The Above Captioned Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-4, Kolkata Dated 02.05.2024 For The Assessment Years 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Three Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1394/Pun/2024 For A.Y. 2015-16 For Adjudication.

TDS was made by the Appellant. It is seen that the Appellant has explained the same before the Ld A O and the Ld A O has explained with Section 194C. 2.1 The relevant part of Section 194C is as under: “(5) No deduction shall be made from the amount of any sum credited or paid or likely

PUDHARI PUBLICATIONS PVT.LTD.,MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), KOLHAPUR

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1394 To 1396/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Pudhari Publications Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito (Tds), Kolhapur. 2318 C-Ward, Bhausingji Road, Pudhari Bhawan Karveer, Kolhapur- 416002. Pan : Aadcp2453Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None (Written Submission) Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai Date Of Hearing : 10.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: The Above Captioned Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-4, Kolkata Dated 02.05.2024 For The Assessment Years 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Three Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1394/Pun/2024 For A.Y. 2015-16 For Adjudication.

TDS was made by the Appellant. It is seen that the Appellant has explained the same before the Ld A O and the Ld A O has explained with Section 194C. 2.1 The relevant part of Section 194C is as under: “(5) No deduction shall be made from the amount of any sum credited or paid or likely

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(1),, PUNE vs. SHRADDHA & PRASAD JOINT VENTURE,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 2665/Pun/2017 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Income Tax Officer Ward-3(1), Pune. .......अपीलाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

194C were not applicable for the purpose of TDS. The two corporate entities forming joint venture were already being assessed since A.Y. 2000-01 onwards on their respective shares and TDS apportionment certificates were also issued by the Assessing Officer every year for these eight years including the current assessment year to enable them to claim the same in their

WALVEKAR BROTHERS & CO,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(2),, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

194C, section 194D, section 194E, section 195 and section 196A, the assessee shall not be called upon to pay the tax himself to the extent to which tax has been deducted from that income” 20. From the language of section 205, it is clear that once the tax is deducted at source, the same cannot be levied once again

AJAY ENGINEERING & AGRI EQUIPMENT COMPANY,AURANGABAD vs. PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, NASHIK

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi"नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16

1), requiring no deduction of tax at source on professional fees or technical fees in terms of section 194J. The ld. Pr.CIT, without controverting the factual position stated before him, failed to consider that the assessee was, in fact, not required to deduct tax at source in view of the first proviso to section 194J. When the AO impliedly accepted

PRASAD RAMCHANDRA PATIL,URAN, PANVEL vs. ITO WARD 3, PANVEL, PANVEL

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

section 69A has no application. 17. It is submitted that out of the total deposits of Rs. 1,24,69,339/-, the CIT(A) in para 50 of his order dated 18/9/2024 has directed the AO to estimate turnover @8% on receipt of Rs. 39,36,240/- out of the total turnover of Rs. 1,24,69,339/-. However

PRASAD RAMCHANDRA PATIL,URAN, PANVEL vs. ITO WARD 3, PANVEL, PANVEL

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

section 69A has no application. 17. It is submitted that out of the total deposits of Rs. 1,24,69,339/-, the CIT(A) in para 50 of his order dated 18/9/2024 has directed the AO to estimate turnover @8% on receipt of Rs. 39,36,240/- out of the total turnover of Rs. 1,24,69,339/-. However

PRASAD RAMCHANDRA PATIL,URAN, PANVEL vs. ITO - WARD 3, PANVEL, PANVEL

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

section 69A has no application. 17. It is submitted that out of the total deposits of Rs. 1,24,69,339/-, the CIT(A) in para 50 of his order dated 18/9/2024 has directed the AO to estimate turnover @8% on receipt of Rs. 39,36,240/- out of the total turnover of Rs. 1,24,69,339/-. However

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 6(3),, PUNE vs. SUBHASH & B.T. PATIL & SONS & N.V.KHAROTE CONSTRUCTIONS PVT.LTD,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

194C of the Act. (e) The assessee had failed to deduct tax from the payments made to its members the provision of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act would apply. 6. the A.O further held that the assessee had claimed TDS of Rs. 59,58,556/- in its return of income on total contract receipts, however no income

RAVI YANTRIKI UDYOG PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. ITO WARD (5)(4), PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

194C reflected in\nForm No. 26AS and ITS Data are not offered by the assessee company in\nthe Profit and Loss Account and therefore he called for the information\nfrom Vanishka Sugar and Power Industries Ltd. u/s 133(6) vide his letter\ndated 15.11.2017. Accordingly, the Ld. AO asked the assessee to show\ncause as to why Rs.1

M/S. ORGANICA,NASHIK vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NASHIK -1, NASHIK

In the result, Assessee’s appeal

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmashali

TDS on the balance amount of payments and nothing is on record to show that Ld. AO had made verification as per the provisions of section 194C of the Act. Accordingly the assessment order dated 11.09.2017 framed u/s 143(3) of the Act was held as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue and the same was set aside

MRS. PUSHPA G. BANSAL,,NASHIK vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX : 1,,

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

194C r.w.s. 40(a)(ia) disallowance qua the payment(s) of transport charges without deducting TDS thereupon. 3. The assessee at this stage invited our attention to her identical additional substantive ground(s) raised in as many three petitions that once the Assessing Officer reopening reasons recorded in these three assessment years are not sustainable, these reassessments deserve

MRS. PUSHPA G. BANSAL,,NASHIK vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX : 1,,

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

194C r.w.s. 40(a)(ia) disallowance qua the payment(s) of transport charges without deducting TDS thereupon. 3. The assessee at this stage invited our attention to her identical additional substantive ground(s) raised in as many three petitions that once the Assessing Officer reopening reasons recorded in these three assessment years are not sustainable, these reassessments deserve

MRS. PUSHPA G. BANSAL,,NASHIK vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX : 1,,

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

194C r.w.s. 40(a)(ia) disallowance qua the payment(s) of transport charges without deducting TDS thereupon. 3. The assessee at this stage invited our attention to her identical additional substantive ground(s) raised in as many three petitions that once the Assessing Officer reopening reasons recorded in these three assessment years are not sustainable, these reassessments deserve

DHIRAJ GIRIDHAR MASKE,LATUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1, LATUR

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

TDS statement payment to contractors (section 194C) transaction with Shri Sharda amounting to Rs.1,15,71,228/-. (ii) TCS statement sale of motor vehicle exceeding Rs.10 lakhs (section 206C) transaction with Sagar motors amounting to Rs.1,23,05,000/- 3. Since the assessee has not filed his original return of income u/s 139(1

DHIRAJ GIRIDHAR MASKE,LATUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, LATUR

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

TDS statement payment to contractors (section 194C) transaction with Shri Sharda amounting to Rs.1,15,71,228/-. (ii) TCS statement sale of motor vehicle exceeding Rs.10 lakhs (section 206C) transaction with Sagar motors amounting to Rs.1,23,05,000/- 3. Since the assessee has not filed his original return of income u/s 139(1

DHIRAJ GIRIDHAR MHASKE,LATUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

TDS statement payment to contractors (section 194C) transaction with Shri Sharda amounting to Rs.1,15,71,228/-. (ii) TCS statement sale of motor vehicle exceeding Rs.10 lakhs (section 206C) transaction with Sagar motors amounting to Rs.1,23,05,000/- 3. Since the assessee has not filed his original return of income u/s 139(1

DHIRAJ GIRIDHAR MASKE,LATUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1, LATUR

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

TDS statement payment to contractors (section 194C) transaction with Shri Sharda amounting to Rs.1,15,71,228/-. (ii) TCS statement sale of motor vehicle exceeding Rs.10 lakhs (section 206C) transaction with Sagar motors amounting to Rs.1,23,05,000/- 3. Since the assessee has not filed his original return of income u/s 139(1