SODEXO SVC INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS)-2(2), MUMBAI
In the result, the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes
ITA 933/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Oct 2019AY 2014-15
Bench: Shri Pawan Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2015-16 & Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sodexo Svc India Pvt. Ltd., Assistant/Deputy 503 & 504, 5Th Floor, B Wing, Vs. Commissioner Of Income Hiranandani Fulcrum, Sahar Tax (Tds)-2(2), 717, Smt. Road, Andheri East, Mumbai. K.G. Mittal Ayurvedic Hospital Bldg., Charni Road (W), Mumbai. Pan No. Aalcs9822Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. F.B. Andhyarujina, Mr. Gautam Thacker, Mr. Yazdi P. Jijina & Ms. K.R. Daviervala, Ars Revenue By : Mr. B.B. Rajendra Prasad, Cit-Dr Last Date Of Hearing : 12/07/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 07/10/2019
For Appellant: Mr. F.B. AndhyarujinaFor Respondent: Mr. B.B. Rajendra Prasad, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 194CSection 201Section 201(1)Section 7
…v. Wizcraft International Entertainment P. Ltd. [2011] 8 ITR (Trib) 334 (Mum) . Further reliance is placed by the Ld. counsels on the decision in East India Hotels Ltd. v. CBDT (2010) 320 ITR 526 (Bom), All Gujarat Federation of Tax Consultants v. CBDT (1995) 214 ITR 276 (Guj), Associated Cement Co. Ltd. v. CIT (1993) 201 ITR 435 (SC) and Birla Cement Works v. CBDT (2001) 248 ITR 216 (SC). 8. On the other hand the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) submits that in the instant case, the presentation of coupons to Sodexo and encashment thereon, by no means represent reimbursement of expenses; only those establish…