SRI SITA RAM RAI,DHANBAD vs. ITO TDS WARD, DHANBAD

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. Nos.13&14/Ran/2022 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Sri Sita Ram Rai……..….…..…………..…...…......................……...…..….. Appellant 1, New Karmik Nagar, Ism Saraidhella, Dhanbad, Jharkhand - 826004. [Pan: Afipr2324B] Vs. Ito, Tds Ward-Dhanbad………………………….……….…………….. Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pranob Kumar Koley, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 01, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 28, 2023 Order Per Sanjay Garg: Both The Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Dated 15.03.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In Both The Appeals Has Agitated The Levy Of Late Filing Fees U/S 234E Of The Act Along With Interest Thereupon Levied U/S 220(2) Of The Act. Since, Common Issues Are Involved In All The Appeals, Hence These Have Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. The Appeal In Ita No.13/Ran/2022 For Assessment Year 2013-14 Is Taken As Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Deducted Tax At Source (Tds) In Respect Of Certain Payments. As Per The Provisions Of 1

TDS) in respect of certain payments. As per the provisions of 1 I.T.A. Nos.13&14/Ran/2022 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Sri Sita Ram Rai section 200

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAMSHEDPUR, JAMSHEDPUR vs. BENKO TRADERS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.436/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Acit, Cc, Jamshedpur…………….…….…............................……….……Appellant Vs. Benko Traders Pvt. Ltd....………...….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent 119, 4Th Floor, Block D, White House, Park Stree, Wb – 700016. [Pan: Aabcb1888R] Appearances By: Shri Akshay Ringasia, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 07, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 17, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna For The Assessment Year 2015–16 Dated 25.09.2024 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Under Section 139 Of The Act Declaring A Total Income As Nil. The Return Was Processed Under Section 143(1). Subsequently, The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & An Assessment Under Section 143(3) Was Completed On 28.11.2017 Determining The Total Income At ₹9,88,28,406. Based On Information Received From The Investigation Wing, Mumbai, Relating To Alleged Use Of Stock Exchange Platform (Bse/Nse) For Generating Fictitious Long-Term/Short-Term Capital Gains Through Certain Scripts & Alleged Accommodation Entries, The Assessing Officer Recorded Reasons Under Section 147 Of The Act. A Notice Under Section 148 Was Issued The Assessee Filed Its Return Declaring The Same Income

200 on a mere presumption that the assessee must have paid commission at 2% on the trading profit of ₹1,64,60,100. It was argued that the assessee had already paid STT and I.T.A. No.436/Ran/2024 Benko Traders Pvt. Ltd other her statutory charges to the broker, as duly reflected in the ledger account and contract notes issued

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

200,703.00\nCash at Bank\nB.O.J., SB A/c 9189\n2,652.00\nB.O.I.,C/A A/c 05\n10,150.00\nU.C.O. Bank A/c 20190\n12,695.00\nU.C.O. Bank A/c 20189\n35,889.00\nSundry Cr. ditor\nU.C.C. Bank A/c 20188\n3,149,118.00\nAs per Lis Attached\n14,220,508.00\nB.O.I. A/c 00001\n6,702.00\nB.O.I. A/c 204\n10,150.00\nB.C.I

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

200,703.00\nB.O.I.,C/A A/c 05\n10,150.00\nU.C.O. Bank A/c 20190\n12,695.00\nU.C.O. Bank A/c 20189\n35,889.00\nSundry Cr. ditor\nU.C.C. Bank A/c 20188\n3,149,118.00\nAs per Lis Attached\n14,220,508.00\nB.O.I. A/c 00001\n6,702.00\nB.O.I. A/c 204\n10,150.00\nB.C.I. A/c 209\n10,150.00\nB.O.I. A/c 207\n10,150.00\nB.O.I

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

200,703.00 B.O.I.,C/A A/c 05\n10,150.00\nU.C.O. Bank A/c 20190\n12,695.00\nSundry Cr. ditor\nU.C.O. Bank A/c 20189\n35,889.00\nAs per Lis Attached\n14,220,508.00\nU.C.C. Bank A/c 20188\n3,149,118.00\nB.O.I. A/c 00001\n6,702.00\nOutstandi: Liabilities\nB.O.I. A/c 204\n10,150.00\nB.C.I. A/c 209\n10,150.00\nLiabilities 'or Exp.\n61,000.00\nB.O.I

CCL,RANCHI vs. DCIT CIR-1, RANCHI

TDS is liable to be\ndeducted on the said payment. Thus, this issue is in held in favour of the\nassessee.\n20. Next issue is in regard to provisions towards NCWA VIII. It was the\nsubmission that this is an interim relief on account of the pay revision.\nIt was the submission that in April 2008 the holding company being

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

TDS is liable to be\ndeducted on the said payment. Thus, this issue is in held in favour of the\nassessee.\n20. Next issue is in regard to provisions towards NCWA VIII. It was the\nsubmission that this is an interim relief on account of the pay revision.\nIt was the submission that in April 2008 the holding company being

DCIT CIR-1, RANCHI vs. CCL, RANCHI

TDS is liable to be\ndeducted on the said payment. Thus, this issue is in held in favour of the\nassessee.\n20. Next issue is in regard to provisions towards NCWA VIII. It was the\nsubmission that this is an interim relief on account of the pay revision.\nIt was the submission that in April 2008 the holding company being

DCIT CIR-1,, RANCHI vs. CCL, RANCHI

TDS is liable to be\ndeducted on the said payment. Thus, this issue is in held in favour of the\nassessee.\n20. Next issue is in regard to provisions towards NCWA VIII. It was the\nsubmission that this is an interim relief on account of the pay revision.\nIt was the submission that in April 2008 the holding company being

DCIT CIRCLE-1 , RANCHI vs. CCL LTD , RANCHI

Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Business expenditure\nAllowability of (Welfare expenses of employees) - Assessee-\ncompany was engaged in business of coal mining It claimed\nexpenses incurred towards welfare of of its employees like canteen,\nhostels, etc. business expenditure Commissioner disallowed same\non ground that said expenditures had not been properly explained\nand that assessee

CCL,RANCHI vs. ACIT CIR-1, RANCHI

TDS is liable to be\ndeducted on the said payment. Thus, this issue is in held in favour of the\nassessee.\n20. Next issue is in regard to provisions towards NCWA VIII. It was the\nsubmission that this is an interim relief on account of the pay revision.\nIt was the submission that in April 2008 the holding company being

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

TDS is liable to be\ndeducted on the said payment. Thus, this issue is in held in favour of the\nassessee.\n20. Next issue is in regard to provisions towards NCWA VIII. It was the\nsubmission that this is an interim relief on account of the pay revision.\nIt was the submission that in April 2008 the holding company being

DCIT CIR-1, RANCHI vs. CCL, RANCHI

TDS is liable to be\ndeducted on the said payment. Thus, this issue is in held in favour of the\nassessee.\n20. Next issue is in regard to provisions towards NCWA VIII. It was the\nsubmission that this is an interim relief on account of the pay revision.\nIt was the submission that in April 2008 the holding company being

CCL LTD ,RANCHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

TDS is liable to be\nducted on the said payment. Thus, this issue is in held in favour of the\nassessee.\n20. Next issue is in regard to provisions towards NCWA VIII. It was the\nsubmission that this is an interim relief on account of the pay revision. It\nwas the submission that in April 2008 the holding company being

CCL,RNCHI vs. ACIT CIR-1 , RANCHI

TDS is liable to be\ndeducted on the said payment. Thus, this issue is in held in favour of the\nassessee.\n20. Next issue is in regard to provisions towards NCWA VIII. It was the\nsubmission that this is an interim relief on account of the pay revision.\nIt was the submission that in April 2008 the holding company being

CCL ,RANCHI vs. DCIT CIR-1 , RANCHI

Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Business expenditure\nAllowability of (Welfare expenses of employees) Assessee-\ncompany was engaged in business of coal mining It claimed\nexpenses incurred towards welfare of of its employees like canteen,\nhostels, etc. business expenditure Commissioner disallowed same\non ground that said expenditures had not been properly explained\nand that assessee

CCL,RANCHI vs. DCIT CIR01 , RANCHI

Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Business expenditure\nAllowability of (Welfare expenses of employees) - Assessee-\ncompany was engaged in business of coal mining It claimed\nexpenses incurred towards welfare of of its employees like canteen,\nhostels, etc. business expenditure Commissioner disallowed same\non ground that said expenditures had not been properly explained\nand that assessee

ACIT, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, RANCHI vs. M/S. R.V.S. EDUCATIONAL TRUST, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Am (Through : Hybrid Mode) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.24/Ran/2020 (Ǔ""ȡ[""""[/ A.Y. :2016-2017) Acit, Exemption Circle, Ranchi Vs. M/S Rvs Educational Trust, C/O Binda Apartments (India) Private Limited, Siroman Nagar, Dimna Road, Mango, Jamshedpur-831012 ̾Ĉĭēıĕĸù Ĭĝń/Pan No. : Aaatr4456M (\ "Ȣ"ȡ"ȸ/Appellant) (Ĥ×""ȸ/ Respondent) ..

section 2(15) of the LT. Act. Assesse Trust has been granted registered u/s 12AA of the income tax Act as per order of CIT (Jamshedpur) by verifying its objects and activities of educational institutions. The trust runs school and college purely on educational purpose. The Ld. A.O. was not justified in holding that the assesse trust is a business