OM PRAAKSH SINGH,RANCHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Om Prakash Singh Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Ranchi Sankalp, East Jail Road, Ranchi- 834001. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Agkps0300D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""थ" / Respondent)

section 148 of the Act was issued to assessee on 31.12.2016. In the assessee`s case the relevant assessment year is 2009-10, therefore the assessee`s case was reopened after the expiry of 4 Years from the end of the relevant assessment year. The settled position of law is that if an assessment for any year has been completed

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

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Manish Boradi.T.A. No.130/Ran/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Bharat Coking Coal Ltd…………..…...…......................……...…..….. Appellant Finance Directorate, Ground Floor, Koyla Bhawan, Koyla Nagar, Dhanbad-826005. [Pan: Aaacb7934M] Vs. Acit, Circle-1, Dhanbad…..……………………….……….…………….. Respondent Appearances By: Shri M. K. Choudhary, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Saumyajit Das Gupta, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 26, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 20, 2022 Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 20.09.2017 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Dhanbad [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’).

TDS default under section 201. 4. That in view of the aforesaid circular of the CBDT, the consequential relief of aforesaid addition of Rs.132,20,00,000/- be given. 3

DEVPRABHA CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LTD.,,DHANBAD vs. PCIT, DHANBAD

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay(Virtual Hearing) Devprabha Construction Private Ltd., P.C.I.T., Dev Villa, Behind Radha Swamy Arcade, Dhanbad, Vs. Saraidhela, Dhanbad-828127. Aayakar Bhawan, Luby Pan No. Aaecb 2652 A Circular Road, Dhanbad-826001 (Jharkhand) Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

20-28. CIT V. Max India Ltd. (2007) 295 1TR 282/213 CTR 266 / (2008) 166 Taxman 188 /204 Taxman 1 SC - Hon'ble Apex Court observed that "The phrase "Prejudicial to the interest of revenue" section 263 has to be read in conjunction with the expression "erroneous". When the Assessing Officer takes one of the two views permissible

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

Section 263 of the Act dated 26/12/2022, set aside the order of Assessing Officer dated 24/09/2021 on the ground that the Assessing Officer did not make any enquiry or investigation to ascertain the nature, source and genuineness of ₹ 2,68,72,976/- and directed the Assessing Officer to make a fresh assessment on the issues discussed above because

ITO, TDS, RANCHI, RANCHI vs. M/S. CHHINAMASTIKA CEMENT & ISPAT PVT. LTD.,, RAMGARH

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

TDS under this Section, since the payment made to the truck owners in each case is below ₹ 20,000/-, the charging of interest under Section 201(1)/(1A) of the Act has no basis. Accordingly, we uphold the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are dismissed

ITO, TDS,, RANCHI vs. M/S. CHINNAMASTIKA CEMENT & ISPAT LTD.,, RAMGARH

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

TDS under this Section, since the payment made to the truck owners in each case is below ₹ 20,000/-, the charging of interest under Section 201(1)/(1A) of the Act has no basis. Accordingly, we uphold the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are dismissed

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

TDS, but no such provision is applicable when labours were hired by the assessee directly on the sites. Therefore, we allow this ground of appeal and delete the disallowance. 12. Ground No. 5: In this ground of appeal, the grievance of the assessee is that the ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs.8,20,511/-, which

INDIAN PROGRESSIVE CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,,DEOGHAR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-3,, DEOGHAR

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

20,470/-, subsequently, the ld. Pr.CIT, Dhanbad vide its order dated 31/03/2017 set aside the assessment order dated 26/03/2015 under Section 263 of the Act with a direction to Assessing Officer to pass the assessment order afresh after making proper enquiries and necessary investigations on the issues raised therein. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer passed assessment order under Section 143(3

M/S NEW PUNJAB MOTOR TRANSPORT ,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(2), JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, appeal of the assesse is partly allowed for

Bench: Shri N.S Sainiassessment Year : 2012-13

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 10. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer disallowed interest payment of Rs.4,36,006/- to M/s. SREI Equipments Finance Pvt Ltd., and M/s. Tata Capital Ltd., on the ground that the assesse failed to deduct TDS u/s.194C of the Act. P a g e 3

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

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. 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

SHRI KIRTIMAN SINGH,RANCHI vs. DCIT, RANCHI

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay(Hybrid Hearing) Shri Kirtiman Singh, D.C.I.T., 357/A, Professor Colony, Karam Toli, Circle-2, Vs. Behind Abhilasha Building, Morabadi, Ranchi. Ranchi-834001. Pan No. Awmps 5592 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

TDS was deducted on the deposits made in the bank account. The estimate of profit as belonging to the appellant is, therefore, unjustified, arbitrary and illegal. 7. For that in any view of the case, without prejudice to our contention mentioned above, the estimate of profit at 10% is unjustified, excessive, arbitrary and uncalled for. 8. For that ld. Assessing

M/S BHARAT COOKING COAL LIMITED ,DHANBAD vs. ACIT CIRCLE-1 , DHANBAD

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and appeal by the assessee is partly allowed as well as cross-objection by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

20(1) of the Constitution of India. Notes on clauses on the amendment specifically mentioned that the amendment would take effect from 01.04.2013. In view of the matter, the Hon’ble Supreme Court overruled the Bombay High Court view. Therefore, the ld. CIT(A), Dhanbad erred in allowing the prior period depreciation, which was rightly disallowed by then Assessing Officer

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and appeal by the assessee is partly allowed as well as cross-objection by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

20(1) of the Constitution of India. Notes on clauses on the amendment specifically mentioned that the amendment would take effect from 01.04.2013. In view of the matter, the Hon’ble Supreme Court overruled the Bombay High Court view. Therefore, the ld. CIT(A), Dhanbad erred in allowing the prior period depreciation, which was rightly disallowed by then Assessing Officer

ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY,DHANBAD vs. PR. CIT, DHANBAD

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 263 of the Act on the ground that the Assessing Officer failed to enquire into the expenses claimed by the assessee regarding major expenses claimed in the books to arrive at the correct assessment of the income of the assessee with 3 Ashok Kr. Pandey Vs PCIT regard to (i) real estate business with high closing stock, (ii) enquiries

M/S STROKES ADVERTISING PVT. LTD.,,RANCHI vs. DCIT,C-2, RANCHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Gargआयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.81/Ran/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) M/S Strokes Advertising Pvt Ltd Vs. Dcit, Circle-2, Ranchi C/O Sri Vinay Kumar Jalan, M/S O.P.Jalan & Associates Consultants Llp, 48 Cart Sarai Road, Upper Bazaar, Ranchi, Jharkhand, Pin-834001 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aancs 6471 M (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vinay Kumar Jalan, Fca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.K.Mondal, Acit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/05/2019 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 26/07/2019 आदेश / O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Ranchi, Jharkhand, Dated 31.10.2018 Passed In First Appeal No.Cit(A), Ranchi/10077/2017-18 For The Assessment Year 2013-2014. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The 50% Of Total Disallowance Made By The Ld. Assessing Officer Amounting To Rs.2,53,884/- With Respect To The Amounts Debited In The P&L Account Relating To Fuel Expenses, Fabrications Works, Mounting Of Flex & Site Expenses 2. Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Made By The Ld. Assessing Officer Amounting To Rs.6,47,400/ Considering It To Be Commission Paid Without Deduction Of Tds.”

3 submissions, I find that the AO in the assessment order while making the above additions has mentioned that the assessee could not produce the required bills and vouchers. The CIT(A) considering the facts and circumstances of the case, allowed 50% of the total disallowance made by the AO after observing as under :- “4. Ground No.(i):- Books

CCL,RANCHI vs. DCIT CIR-1, RANCHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 164,165,166,167,168,169,170&266/Ran/2017 (Α.Υ:2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.32/Ran/2018 (Ay: 2014-2015) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.190 & 191/Ran/2019 (Ay:2015-16 & 2016-17) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.119, 120, 74/Ran/2024 (Ay: 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) M/S Central Coalfields Limited, Vs. Addl.Cit, Range-1, Ranchi Darbhanga House, Office Of Gm Finance-A, Opp. Governor House Ranchi-834001 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aaacc 7476 R & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 172, 173, 174, 175, 176,177,178 & 235/Ran/2017 (Α.Υ:2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.37/Ran/2018 (Ay: 2014-2015) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.174 & 175/Ran/2019 (Ay:2015-16 & 2016-17) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.47, 203, 204, 128/Ran/2024 (Ay: 2017-2018, 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) Addl.Cit, Range-1, Ranchi Vs. M/S Central Coalfields Limited, Darbhanga House, Office Of Gm Finance-A, Opp. Governor House Ranchi-834001 (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aaacc 7476 R (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri M.Κ.Chowdhary & Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocates राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Rajib Jain, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 05/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05/01/2026 आदेश / Order Per Bench : These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Id.Cit(A), Ranchi/Nfac, Delhi, Dated 12.04.2017, 26.04.2017, 25.04.2027, 28.04.2017, 08.11.2017, 30.01.2019, 21.12.2023, 19.02.2024, 20.02.2024 & 30.01.2024 For The

20,000 Grand total Disputes Rs. 13,13,47,37,752 3. The first issue is with regard to disallowance of Lease Rent/Depreciation Forest Land expenses. It was submitted that the assessee in some years has paid and some years been treated as the amortisation over the period of lease and in some years the depreciation has been claimed treating

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 164,165,166,167,168,169,170&266/Ran/2017 (Α.Υ:2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.32/Ran/2018 (Ay: 2014-2015) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.190 & 191/Ran/2019 (Ay:2015-16 & 2016-17) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.119, 120, 74/Ran/2024 (Ay: 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) M/S Central Coalfields Limited, Vs. Addl.Cit, Range-1, Ranchi Darbhanga House, Office Of Gm Finance-A, Opp. Governor House Ranchi-834001 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aaacc 7476 R & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 172, 173, 174, 175, 176,177,178 & 235/Ran/2017 (Α.Υ:2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.37/Ran/2018 (Ay: 2014-2015) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.174 & 175/Ran/2019 (Ay:2015-16 & 2016-17) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.47, 203, 204, 128/Ran/2024 (Ay: 2017-2018, 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) Addl.Cit, Range-1, Ranchi Vs. M/S Central Coalfields Limited, Darbhanga House, Office Of Gm Finance-A, Opp. Governor House Ranchi-834001 (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aaacc 7476 R (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri M.Κ.Chowdhary & Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocates राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Rajib Jain, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 05/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05/01/2026 Per Bench : आदेश / Order These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Id.Cit(A), Ranchi/Nfac, Delhi, Dated 12.04.2017, 26.04.2017, 25.04.2027, 28.04.2017, 08.11.2017, 30.01.2019, 21.12.2023, 19.02.2024, 20.02.2024 & 30.01.2024 For The

20,000 Grand total Disputes Rs. 13,13,47,37,752 3. The first issue is with regard to disallowance of Lease Rent/Depreciation Forest Land expenses. It was submitted that the assessee in some years has paid and some years been treated as the amortisation over the period of lease and in some years the depreciation has been claimed treating