535 (Del); 6. Tata Teleservices v. UOI

385 ITR 497High Court2016#606 most cited

What is 535 (Del); 6. Tata Teleservices v. UOI authority for?

Orders passed under section 201(1) are barred by limitation if the prescribed period of limitation under section 201(3) had expired before the amendment by the Finance Act, 2014 came into force. The amended section 201(3) does not apply retrospectively.

163

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Tata Teleservices v UOI · section 201(3) · section 201(1) · limitation for TDS orders · Finance Act 2014 amendment · retrospective application · Gujarat High Court

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing 535 (Del); 6. Tata Teleservices v. UOI

Punjab National Bank, Ambala vs. ITO TDS, Karnal

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2117/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Delhi06 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2013-14 Punjab National Bank Vs. Ito Ambala, Haryana -134003 Tds Pan No.Aaacp01656G Karnal (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Lalit Garg, Fca Respondent By Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 06/12/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 06/12/2023 Order Per N. K. Billaiya, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Preferred Against The Order Dated 26.05.2023 By Nfac, Delhi Pertaining To A.Y.2013-14. 2. The Grievance Of The Assessee Read As Under :- 1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds) Under Section 250 Of The Act Is Bad, Both In The Eye Of Law & On Facts As It Is Time Barred As Per Limitation Given Under Section 201(3).

Section 2Section 200Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)Section 250

…which was neither expressly nor impliedly intended by the amendment so made available on the statute. In fact, we find that the issue before us is squarely covered by the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Tata Teleservices vs. UOI, 385 ITR 497 (Guj). As in the case before us, the assessee before the Hon’ble High Court had received notices dated 09.10.2014 u/ss. 201(1)/201(1A) for Financial Years 2007-08 and 2008- 09. It was the claim of the assessee that as it was regularly filing its statements u/s 200 of the Act, therefore, the period of limitation for passing an order under sub-sect…

DCIT, Central Circle-4, New Delhi vs. Anand Persad Jaiswal, New Dehi

In the result the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2742/DEL/2022[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Sept 2023AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2003-04 The Dcit, Central Circle-04, New Delhi Anand Persad Jaiswal, 54, Ring Road, Lajpat Nagar-Iii, New Delhi 110024 Vs. Pan Adrpj 2549 M (Appellant) (Respondent) For Revenue: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr For Assessee: Shri Deepchand Garg, Ca Date Of Hearing : 17.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.09.2023 Order Per Chandra Mohan Garg, J.M. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-23, New Delhi Dated 25.08.2022 For Ay 2003-04. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue Are As Follows: 1. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Quashing The Assessment Order Relying On The Decision Of Hon'Ble Delhi High Court In The Case Of Brahm. Dutt (100 Taxmann.Com 324) Without Appreciating That The Amendment To Sec 149(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 By Finance Act, 2021 Was Retrospective In Nature In View Of Explanation To Sec 149 As Held By Itat (D Bench Mumbai) In The Case Of Dilip J. Thakkar (135 Taxmann.Com 208) After Considering The Decision Of Hon'Ble Delhi High Court In Brahm Dutt (Supra).

For Appellant: Shri Deepchand Garg, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: A: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2003-04 The DCIT, Central Circle-04, New Delhi Anand Persad Jaiswal, 54, Ring Road, Lajpat Nagar-III, New Delhi 110024 vs. PAN ADRPJ 2549 M (Appellant) (Respondent) For Revenue: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR For Assessee: Shri Deepchand Garg, CA Date of Hearing : 17.08.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 06.09.2023 ORDER PER CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, J.M. This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of CIT(A)-23, New Delhi dated 25.08.2022 for AY 2003-…

Dy CIT CC 6(4), Mumbai vs. Shri. Suryakant C Suchak, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 965/MUM/2020[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Apr 2023AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसुं. 965/भ ुं/2020 (यन.ि.1999-2000) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle – 6(4),Mumbai, Room No.1925, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021. ...... अऩीराथी/Appellant फनाभ Vs. Shri Suryakant C. Suchak, 231, Krishna, 32-A Cross, 7Th Block, Jaynagar, Bangalore – 560 070. ..... प्रयििादी/Respondent Pan:Apjps-8359-A अऩीराथी द्िाया/ Appellant By : Smt. Esther Ninghauvung Hanghal प्रयििादी द्िाया/Respondent By : Shri Dilip Thakkar स निाई की यिधथ/ Date Of Hearing : 10/01/2023 घोषणा की यिधथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 06/04/2023 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-54, Mumbai *In Short ‘The Cit(A)’+ Dated 26/11/2019, For Assessment Year 1999-2000. 2 2. The Revenue In Its Appeal Has Assailed The Order Of Cit(A) On Following Grounds:

For Appellant: Smt. Esther Ninghauvung HanghalFor Respondent: Shri Dilip Thakkar
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)Section 149(1)(c)Section 69

…आमकय अऩीरीम अधधकयण भ ुंफई ऩीठ “ई”, भ ुंफई ऩीठ श्री विकास अिस्थी, न्मायमक सदस्म एिुं श्री गगन गोमर, रेखाकाय सदस्म के सभक्ष IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आअसुं. 965/भ ुं/2020 (यन.ि.1999-2000) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle – 6(4),Mumbai, Room No.1925, 19th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021. ...... अऩीराथी/Appellant फनाभ Vs. Shri Suryakant C. Suchak, 231, Krishna, 32-A Cross, 7th Block, Jaynagar, Bangalore – 560 070. ..... प्रयििादी/Respondent PAN:APJPS-8359-A अऩीर…