PADMAKAR VISHWAS DATE,BHOSARI vs. INCOME TAX E ASSESSMENT , PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.929, 930 & 931/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Padmakar Vishwas Date, The Income Tax Officer S.No.218, Near Shri Krishn V –Tds(2), Pune. Mandir, Alandi Road, S Bhosari, Pune – 411038. Pan: Anhpd3804B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16/02/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 All Dated 26.06.2023. Since Issue Involved Is Same, All These Appeals Were Heard Together & Decided By This Consolidated Order. We Treat Appeal In Ita No.929/Pun/2023 For A.Y.2013-14

221; or (B) section 271, section 271A, section 271AAA, section 271AAB, section 271F, section 271FB, section 272AA or section 272BB; (C) section 272, section 272B or section 273, as they stood immediately before the 1st day of April, 1989, in respect of an assessment for the assessment year commencing on the 1st day of April, 1988, or any earlier assessment

PADMAKAR VISHWAS DATE,,BHOSARI vs. INCOME TAX E ASSESSMENT, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.929, 930 & 931/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Padmakar Vishwas Date, The Income Tax Officer S.No.218, Near Shri Krishn V –Tds(2), Pune. Mandir, Alandi Road, S Bhosari, Pune – 411038. Pan: Anhpd3804B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16/02/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 All Dated 26.06.2023. Since Issue Involved Is Same, All These Appeals Were Heard Together & Decided By This Consolidated Order. We Treat Appeal In Ita No.929/Pun/2023 For A.Y.2013-14

221; or (B) section 271, section 271A, section 271AAA, section 271AAB, section 271F, section 271FB, section 272AA or section 272BB; (C) section 272, section 272B or section 273, as they stood immediately before the 1st day of April, 1989, in respect of an assessment for the assessment year commencing on the 1st day of April, 1988, or any earlier assessment

HEMANT ENTERPRISES,NASHIK vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1, NASHIK, NASHIK

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda, Vice- & Ms. Astha Chandra

TDS amount with interest is recovered there shall be a charge on all the assets of such person or the company. Penalty under section 221

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

221 from such person, unless the Assessing Officer is satisfied that such person, without good and sufficient reasons, has failed to deduct and pay such tax. [(1A) Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (1), if any such person, principal officer or company as is referred to in that sub-section does not deduct the whole or any part

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

221 from such person, unless the Assessing Officer is satisfied that such person, without good and sufficient reasons, has failed to deduct and pay such tax. [(1A) Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (1), if any such person, principal officer or company as is referred to in that sub-section does not deduct the whole or any part

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

221 from such person, unless the Assessing Officer is satisfied that such person, without good and sufficient reasons, has failed to deduct and pay such tax. [(1A) Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (1), if any such person, principal officer or company as is referred to in that sub-section does not deduct the whole or any part

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

221 from such person, unless the Assessing Officer is satisfied that such person, without good and sufficient reasons, has failed to deduct and pay such tax. [(1A) Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (1), if any such person, principal officer or company as is referred to in that sub-section does not deduct the whole or any part

PANDHARPUR MUNICIPAL COUNCIL,PANDHARPUR vs. DCIT (CPC)-TDS ,GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

221 from such person, unless the Assessing Officer is satisfied that such person, without good and sufficient reasons, has failed to deduct and pay such tax. [(1A) Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (1), if any such person, principal officer or company as is referred to in that sub-section does not deduct the whole or any part

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

221 from such person, unless the Assessing Officer is satisfied that such person, without good and sufficient reasons, has failed to deduct and pay such tax. [(1A) Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (1), if any such person, principal officer or company as is referred to in that sub-section does not deduct the whole or any part

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

221 from such person, unless the Assessing Officer is satisfied that such person, without good and sufficient reasons, has failed to deduct and pay such tax. [(1A) Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (1), if any such person, principal officer or company as is referred to in that sub-section does not deduct the whole or any part

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

221 from such person, unless the Assessing Officer is satisfied that such person, without good and sufficient reasons, has failed to deduct and pay such tax. [(1A) Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (1), if any such person, principal officer or company as is referred to in that sub-section does not deduct the whole or any part

PANDHARPUR MUNICIPAL COUNCIL , SOLAPUR,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CPC)-TDS , GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

221 from such person, unless the Assessing Officer is satisfied that such person, without good and sufficient reasons, has failed to deduct and pay such tax. [(1A) Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (1), if any such person, principal officer or company as is referred to in that sub-section does not deduct the whole or any part

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

221 from such person, unless the Assessing Officer is satisfied that such person, without good and sufficient reasons, has failed to deduct and pay such tax. [(1A) Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (1), if any such person, principal officer or company as is referred to in that sub-section does not deduct the whole or any part

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

221 from such person, unless the Assessing Officer is satisfied that such person, without good and sufficient reasons, has failed to deduct and pay such tax. [(1A) Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (1), if any such person, principal officer or company as is referred to in that sub-section does not deduct the whole or any part

M/S. ANGRE PORT (P) LTD.,,RATNAGIRI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2148/Pun/2013 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Angre Port (P) Ltd., Formerly Jaigad Ports Infrastructure (P) Ltd., Plot No.221, Midc, Mirjole, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Ratnagiri – 415612 …. Pan: Aabcj5401A Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward-3, Ratnagiri

221/- were disallowed, in view of provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and added to the income of assessee. 7. The CIT(A) noted that the plea of assessee first was that payment was fees and not rent and second, it was that the said payment was in the nature of cess

M/S. ANGRE PORT (P) LTD.,,RATNAGIRI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2148/Pun/2013 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Angre Port (P) Ltd., Formerly Jaigad Ports Infrastructure (P) Ltd., Plot No.221, Midc, Mirjole, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Ratnagiri – 415612 …. Pan: Aabcj5401A Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward-3, Ratnagiri

221/- were disallowed, in view of provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and added to the income of assessee. 7. The CIT(A) noted that the plea of assessee first was that payment was fees and not rent and second, it was that the said payment was in the nature of cess

SIDDHARTH CONSTRUCTION,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, TDS,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

221, Matrix Business Centre, Kalda Corner, Aurangabad-431005 PAN : ACEFS1673D .......अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिाम / V/s. ACIT, Centralized Processing Cell-TDS, Ghaziabad ……प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee by : N O N E Revenue by : Shri Suhas Kulkarni सुिवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 20-12-2022 घोर्णा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 21-12-2022 आदेश / ORDER PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM : This appeal

BANK OF INDIA, BHAVANI PETH BRANCH,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, TDS -1,, PUNE

In the result, the impugned orders are set aside and all the appeals are allowed for statistical purpose in the terms aforesaid

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

221-222, Gold Finch Peth, Solapur – 413001 PAN : AAACB0472C 26 1620/PUN/2018 Bank of India, ITO, (TDS), 2010-11 Natepute Branch, Solapur A/p Natepute, Taluka Malshiras, Distt.-Solapur – 413109 PAN : AAACB0472C 27 1621/PUN/2018 Bank of India, ITO, (TDS), 2010-11 Sonke (T) Branch, Solapur A/p Tisangi Sonke, Tal.-Padharpur, Distt.-Solapur – 413304 PAN : AAACB0472C 28 1622/PUN/2018 Bank of India, ITO, (TDS