SMT. WARSHA BAGARIA,RANCHI vs. ITO,WARD-3(3), RANCHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal ground

reopened U/s 147 stating that assessee received Rs. 4,08,205/- from M/s Escort Finance Ltd. on which TDS was deducted and same escaped assessment

M/S P.K.UPADHYAY vs. ITO WARD-3(5), PALAMAU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Manish Borad

reopened assessment, the ld. Assessing Officer perused the record and recorded a finding that the assessee has debited a sum of Rs.5,11,164/- in the assets side of the balance-sheet on account of time extension, whereas the total amount of time extension comes to Rs.10,66,443/-. He noticed a discrepancy of Rs.5,55,280/- and accordingly

DCIT CIRCLE-1, RANCHI vs. M/S HEC LTD, RANCHI

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

TDS) on sales promotion expenses & (v) Liquidated damages, Misc. Provision and Provision for LTA vi) in ITA No.222/Ran/16 for the A.Y 2009-10, ground no. 2 raised by the revenue relates to expenditure on horticulture, not related to business expenditure. 3. i) In the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos 231/Ran/2016 & 232/Ran/2016 for the A.Ys

HEC LTD,FINANCE &ACCOUNTS,RANCHI vs. ACIT,CIR-1, RANCHI

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

TDS) on sales promotion expenses & (v) Liquidated damages, Misc. Provision and Provision for LTA vi) in ITA No.222/Ran/16 for the A.Y 2009-10, ground no. 2 raised by the revenue relates to expenditure on horticulture, not related to business expenditure. 3. i) In the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos 231/Ran/2016 & 232/Ran/2016 for the A.Ys

HEC LTD,FINANCE &ACCOUNTS,RANCHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

TDS) on sales promotion expenses & (v) Liquidated damages, Misc. Provision and Provision for LTA vi) in ITA No.222/Ran/16 for the A.Y 2009-10, ground no. 2 raised by the revenue relates to expenditure on horticulture, not related to business expenditure. 3. i) In the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos 231/Ran/2016 & 232/Ran/2016 for the A.Ys

M/S BHARAT COKING COAL LTD ,DHANBAD vs. ACIT CIRCLE-1 , DHANBAD

In the result, all the captioned appeals are hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.299/Ran/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Acit,Central-1, Dhanbad............................................................……Appellant Vs. M/S Bharat Coking Coal Ltd........................................……...…..…..Respondent Koyla Bhawan, Koyla Nagara, Dhanbad—826005 [Pan: Aaacb7934M] I.T.A No.123/Ran/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Bharat Coking Coal Ltd........................................................…… Respondent Koyla Bhawan, Koyla Nagara, Dhanbad—826005 [Pan: Aaacb7934M] Vs. Acit,Central-1, Dhanbad..............................................……...…..….. Appellant C.O No.08/Ran/2018 (In Ita No.299/Ran/2017) Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Bharat Coking Coal Ltd..................................................... …Cross-Objector Koyla Bhawan, Koyla Nagara, Dhanbad—826005 [Pan: Aaacb7934M] Vs. Acit,Central-1, Dhanbad..............................................……...…..….. Appellant Appearances By: Shri Rinku Singh, Cit- Dr., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri M. K. Choudhary With Devesh Poddar, Adv Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 23, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 07, 2023

reopening of assessment u/s 147 of the Act and consequential additions made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the CIT(A) relating to contractual expenses of Rs.23,22,00,000/-, provision for contractual expenses of Rs.29,00,00,000/- and addition of Rs.70,25,00,000/- on account of disallowance of interest for non-deduction of TDS

ACIT CIR-1 , DHANBAD vs. M/S BHARAT COOKING COAL LTD , DHANBAD

In the result, all the captioned appeals are hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.299/Ran/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Acit,Central-1, Dhanbad............................................................……Appellant Vs. M/S Bharat Coking Coal Ltd........................................……...…..…..Respondent Koyla Bhawan, Koyla Nagara, Dhanbad—826005 [Pan: Aaacb7934M] I.T.A No.123/Ran/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Bharat Coking Coal Ltd........................................................…… Respondent Koyla Bhawan, Koyla Nagara, Dhanbad—826005 [Pan: Aaacb7934M] Vs. Acit,Central-1, Dhanbad..............................................……...…..….. Appellant C.O No.08/Ran/2018 (In Ita No.299/Ran/2017) Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Bharat Coking Coal Ltd..................................................... …Cross-Objector Koyla Bhawan, Koyla Nagara, Dhanbad—826005 [Pan: Aaacb7934M] Vs. Acit,Central-1, Dhanbad..............................................……...…..….. Appellant Appearances By: Shri Rinku Singh, Cit- Dr., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri M. K. Choudhary With Devesh Poddar, Adv Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 23, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 07, 2023

reopening of assessment u/s 147 of the Act and consequential additions made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the CIT(A) relating to contractual expenses of Rs.23,22,00,000/-, provision for contractual expenses of Rs.29,00,00,000/- and addition of Rs.70,25,00,000/- on account of disallowance of interest for non-deduction of TDS

PADAM KUMAE JAIN,RANCHI vs. CIT, CENTRAL, PATNA

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

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.289/Ran/2019 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Padam Kumar Jain Vs. Cit, Central, Cr Building, Beer Chand Patel Marg, Patna – 800001. Ratanlalsurajmal Compound, Main Road, Ranchi – 834001, Jharkhand "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abrpj 0001 E (Assessee) .. (Revenue)

TDS deducted,fixed assets details, short/long term capital gain. (xvii) Balance sheet, profit and loss account, bank statement etc. The assessee submitted the documents and details, as mentioned above, during the original assessment proceedings u/s 153A/143(3) of the Act in response to notice under section 142(1) of the Act. During the original assessment proceedings(before first 263 order

HARDEEP SINGH,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ITO(TDS)J, JAMSHEDPUR

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

assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. However, we make it clear that, if any deductor has already paid the fee after intimation received under Section 200A, the aforesaid view will not permit the Group of SBI and Ors. Deductor to reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest." 6. In view of the above, respectfully following 'Shri Fatehraj

HARDEEP SINGH,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ITO(TDS)J, JAMSHEDPUR

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

assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. However, we make it clear that, if any deductor has already paid the fee after intimation received under Section 200A, the aforesaid view will not permit the Group of SBI and Ors. Deductor to reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest." 6. In view of the above, respectfully following 'Shri Fatehraj

NIRMAL MODI,RANCHI vs. ACIT CPC TDS , GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Gargआयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.82 To 84/Ran/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 To 2015-2016) Nirmal Modi, Vs. Acit, Cpc-Tds, Aayakar Prop: Bina Bastralaya Saree Bhawan, Sector-3, Kendra, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, Randhir Pd. Street, Upper (U.P.)-201010 Bazar, Ranchi-834001 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Adxpm 9244 Q (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By :Shri Ajay Poddar, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.K.Mondal, Acit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20/05/2019 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 20/05/2019 आदेश / O R D E R These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Consolidated Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Ranchi, All Dated 09.01.2018 For The Assessment Year 2013-2014 To 2015-2016. 2. The Common Ground Raised By The Assessee In All The Three Appeals Is As Under :- “1. For That The Impugned Assessment Order Is Contrary To Law & Against The Facts On Record. 2. For That The Levy Of Penalty/Fee U/S.234E Of The I.Tax Act 1961 Prior To 01.06.2015 Is Unsustainable In Law As The Enabling Provision To Levy The Fee Has Been Inserted W.E.F.01.06.2015. 3. For That Under The Similar Facts & Circumstances The Ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar In The Case Of “Sibia Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit(Tds), Ghaziabad” Has Held That The Impugned Levy Of Fees U/S.234E Is Unsustainable In Law. 4. For That Any Other Ground Or Grounds Relief Or Reliefs Shall Be Urged At The Time Of Hearing.

reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest." 6. In view of the above, respectfully following 'Shri Fatehraj Singhvi and Others' (supra), 'Sibia Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (TDS)', order dated 09.06.2015 passed in ITA No.90/ASR/2015, for A.Y.2013-14, by the Amritsar Bench of the Tribunal, and 'Shri Kaur Chand Jain vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS) Ghaziabad', order dated

NIRMAL MODI,RANCHI vs. ACIT CPC TDS , GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Gargआयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.82 To 84/Ran/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 To 2015-2016) Nirmal Modi, Vs. Acit, Cpc-Tds, Aayakar Prop: Bina Bastralaya Saree Bhawan, Sector-3, Kendra, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, Randhir Pd. Street, Upper (U.P.)-201010 Bazar, Ranchi-834001 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Adxpm 9244 Q (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By :Shri Ajay Poddar, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.K.Mondal, Acit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20/05/2019 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 20/05/2019 आदेश / O R D E R These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Consolidated Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Ranchi, All Dated 09.01.2018 For The Assessment Year 2013-2014 To 2015-2016. 2. The Common Ground Raised By The Assessee In All The Three Appeals Is As Under :- “1. For That The Impugned Assessment Order Is Contrary To Law & Against The Facts On Record. 2. For That The Levy Of Penalty/Fee U/S.234E Of The I.Tax Act 1961 Prior To 01.06.2015 Is Unsustainable In Law As The Enabling Provision To Levy The Fee Has Been Inserted W.E.F.01.06.2015. 3. For That Under The Similar Facts & Circumstances The Ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar In The Case Of “Sibia Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit(Tds), Ghaziabad” Has Held That The Impugned Levy Of Fees U/S.234E Is Unsustainable In Law. 4. For That Any Other Ground Or Grounds Relief Or Reliefs Shall Be Urged At The Time Of Hearing.

reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest." 6. In view of the above, respectfully following 'Shri Fatehraj Singhvi and Others' (supra), 'Sibia Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (TDS)', order dated 09.06.2015 passed in ITA No.90/ASR/2015, for A.Y.2013-14, by the Amritsar Bench of the Tribunal, and 'Shri Kaur Chand Jain vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS) Ghaziabad', order dated

NIRMAL MODI ,RANCHI vs. ACIT CPC TDS , GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Gargआयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.82 To 84/Ran/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 To 2015-2016) Nirmal Modi, Vs. Acit, Cpc-Tds, Aayakar Prop: Bina Bastralaya Saree Bhawan, Sector-3, Kendra, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, Randhir Pd. Street, Upper (U.P.)-201010 Bazar, Ranchi-834001 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Adxpm 9244 Q (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By :Shri Ajay Poddar, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.K.Mondal, Acit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20/05/2019 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 20/05/2019 आदेश / O R D E R These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Consolidated Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Ranchi, All Dated 09.01.2018 For The Assessment Year 2013-2014 To 2015-2016. 2. The Common Ground Raised By The Assessee In All The Three Appeals Is As Under :- “1. For That The Impugned Assessment Order Is Contrary To Law & Against The Facts On Record. 2. For That The Levy Of Penalty/Fee U/S.234E Of The I.Tax Act 1961 Prior To 01.06.2015 Is Unsustainable In Law As The Enabling Provision To Levy The Fee Has Been Inserted W.E.F.01.06.2015. 3. For That Under The Similar Facts & Circumstances The Ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar In The Case Of “Sibia Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit(Tds), Ghaziabad” Has Held That The Impugned Levy Of Fees U/S.234E Is Unsustainable In Law. 4. For That Any Other Ground Or Grounds Relief Or Reliefs Shall Be Urged At The Time Of Hearing.

reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest." 6. In view of the above, respectfully following 'Shri Fatehraj Singhvi and Others' (supra), 'Sibia Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (TDS)', order dated 09.06.2015 passed in ITA No.90/ASR/2015, for A.Y.2013-14, by the Amritsar Bench of the Tribunal, and 'Shri Kaur Chand Jain vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS) Ghaziabad', order dated

M/S VIKAS SAMITIES,JAMSHEDPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, RANCHI

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

assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. However, we make it clear that, if any deductor has already paid the fee after intimation received under Section 200A, the aforesaid view will not permit the Group of SBI and Ors. Deductor to reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest." 6. In view of the above, respectfully following 'Shri Fatehraj

M/S VIKAS SAMITIES,JAMSHEDPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, RANCHI

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

assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. However, we make it clear that, if any deductor has already paid the fee after intimation received under Section 200A, the aforesaid view will not permit the Group of SBI and Ors. Deductor to reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest." 6. In view of the above, respectfully following 'Shri Fatehraj

KUNAL KAMALIA ,RANCHI vs. ACIT CPC TDS , GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Gargआयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.85 To 87/Ran/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Quarter-4 Quarter-3 & Quarter-1 Kunal Kamalia, Vs. Acit, Cpc-Tds, Aayakar Prop: Kamalia Sales, Bhawan, Sector-3, Gel Church Complex, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, Main Road, Ranchi-834001 (U.P.)-201010 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aptpk 7754 H (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By :Shri Ajay Poddar, Adv. राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.K.Mondal, Acit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20/05/2019 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 20/05/2019 आदेश / O R D E R These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Ranchi, Dated 16.01.2018 & 19.01.2018 For The Quarter-4, Quarter-3 & Quarter-1 In The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2. The Common Ground Raised By The Assessee In All The Three Appeals Is As Under :- “1. For That The Impugned Appellate Order As Well As Assessment Order Are Contrary To Law & Against The Facts On Record. 2. For That The Levy Of Penalty/Fee U/S.234E Of The I.Tax Act 1961 Prior To 01.06.2015 Is Unsustainable In Law As The Enabling Provision To Levy The Fee Has Been Inserted W.E.F.01.06.2015. 3. For That Under The Similar Facts & Circumstances The Ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar In The Case Of 2

assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. However, we make it clear that, if any deductor has already paid the fee after intimation received under Section 200A, the aforesaid view will not permit the Group of SBI and Ors. Deductor to reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest." 6. In view of the above, respectfully following 'Shri Fatehraj

KUNAL KAMALIA ,RANCHI vs. ACIT CPC TDS , GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Gargआयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.85 To 87/Ran/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Quarter-4 Quarter-3 & Quarter-1 Kunal Kamalia, Vs. Acit, Cpc-Tds, Aayakar Prop: Kamalia Sales, Bhawan, Sector-3, Gel Church Complex, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, Main Road, Ranchi-834001 (U.P.)-201010 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aptpk 7754 H (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By :Shri Ajay Poddar, Adv. राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.K.Mondal, Acit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20/05/2019 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 20/05/2019 आदेश / O R D E R These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Ranchi, Dated 16.01.2018 & 19.01.2018 For The Quarter-4, Quarter-3 & Quarter-1 In The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2. The Common Ground Raised By The Assessee In All The Three Appeals Is As Under :- “1. For That The Impugned Appellate Order As Well As Assessment Order Are Contrary To Law & Against The Facts On Record. 2. For That The Levy Of Penalty/Fee U/S.234E Of The I.Tax Act 1961 Prior To 01.06.2015 Is Unsustainable In Law As The Enabling Provision To Levy The Fee Has Been Inserted W.E.F.01.06.2015. 3. For That Under The Similar Facts & Circumstances The Ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar In The Case Of 2

assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. However, we make it clear that, if any deductor has already paid the fee after intimation received under Section 200A, the aforesaid view will not permit the Group of SBI and Ors. Deductor to reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest." 6. In view of the above, respectfully following 'Shri Fatehraj

KUNAL KAMALIA,RANCHI vs. ACIT CPC TDS , GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Gargआयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.85 To 87/Ran/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Quarter-4 Quarter-3 & Quarter-1 Kunal Kamalia, Vs. Acit, Cpc-Tds, Aayakar Prop: Kamalia Sales, Bhawan, Sector-3, Gel Church Complex, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, Main Road, Ranchi-834001 (U.P.)-201010 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aptpk 7754 H (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By :Shri Ajay Poddar, Adv. राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.K.Mondal, Acit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20/05/2019 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 20/05/2019 आदेश / O R D E R These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Ranchi, Dated 16.01.2018 & 19.01.2018 For The Quarter-4, Quarter-3 & Quarter-1 In The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2. The Common Ground Raised By The Assessee In All The Three Appeals Is As Under :- “1. For That The Impugned Appellate Order As Well As Assessment Order Are Contrary To Law & Against The Facts On Record. 2. For That The Levy Of Penalty/Fee U/S.234E Of The I.Tax Act 1961 Prior To 01.06.2015 Is Unsustainable In Law As The Enabling Provision To Levy The Fee Has Been Inserted W.E.F.01.06.2015. 3. For That Under The Similar Facts & Circumstances The Ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar In The Case Of 2

assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. However, we make it clear that, if any deductor has already paid the fee after intimation received under Section 200A, the aforesaid view will not permit the Group of SBI and Ors. Deductor to reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest." 6. In view of the above, respectfully following 'Shri Fatehraj

SHRIRAM MARKETING SERVICES,GIRIDIH vs. PCIT, DHANBAD

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

TDS was made u/s 1941. Since the assessee did not file the return for the A.Y. 2013-14, the entire amount of payment received by it during such F.Y., which was Rs.2,68,72,976/-, may be treated as income escaped assessment." From the perusal of Para 2 of the Assessment order, it can be seen based on the information