Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. DCIT

163 ITD 177Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2017#15078 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2022.

Judgments citing Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. DCIT

SKV INDUSTRIAL PLANT & WASTE TREATMENT PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD -3(3)(3), , MUMBAI

ITA 7375/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Aug 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Prakash PanditFor Respondent: Shri Hoshang B. Irani
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 254Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "G" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s SKV Industrial Plant & Waste Treatment Pvt. Ltd., Suit No. C-2, Enviro Commerce Bldg., 34, Deonar Ancillary Industrial Complex, Govandi (W), Mumbai - 400043 [PAN: AAICS2199F] …………… Appellant Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward – 3(3)(3), Mumbai, Aayakar Bhavan, Maharishi, Karve Road, Mumbai - 400020 ……………… Respondent Appearances For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri Prakash Pandit For the Respondent/Department : Shri Hoshang B. Irani Date of conclusion of hearing : 04.05.2022 Date of pron…

INTERGLOBE AVIATION LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 4449/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Paramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 194CSection 194JSection 196Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250

…stated that subsequently when the bills are received of the same parties, the tax is deducted thereon. Thus, the facts of this case relied upon by the assessee is not applicable. 22. The assessee has further relied upon the decision of the coordinate bench in 163 ITD 177 in case of Apollo Tyres Ltd wherein the facts shows that the assessee made an year-round provision which was never subsequently and the deduction was claimed on the basis of the actual expenditure incurred on when such expenditure were actually incurred the TDS was made as per the provisions of the law. Here in the present case the assessee says…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. INTERGLOBE AVIATION LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 223/DEL/2013[2010-11 (F.Y.- 2009-10)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2020

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Paramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 194CSection 194JSection 196Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250

…stated that subsequently when the bills are received of the same parties, the tax is deducted thereon. Thus, the facts of this case relied upon by the assessee is not applicable. 22. The assessee has further relied upon the decision of the coordinate bench in 163 ITD 177 in case of Apollo Tyres Ltd wherein the facts shows that the assessee made an year-round provision which was never subsequently and the deduction was claimed on the basis of the actual expenditure incurred on when such expenditure were actually incurred the TDS was made as per the provisions of the law. Here in the present case the assessee says…

INTERGLOBE AVIATION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 5347/DEL/2012[2010-11 (F.Y. 2009-10)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2020

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Paramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 194CSection 194JSection 196Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250

…stated that subsequently when the bills are received of the same parties, the tax is deducted thereon. Thus, the facts of this case relied upon by the assessee is not applicable. 22. The assessee has further relied upon the decision of the coordinate bench in 163 ITD 177 in case of Apollo Tyres Ltd wherein the facts shows that the assessee made an year-round provision which was never subsequently and the deduction was claimed on the basis of the actual expenditure incurred on when such expenditure were actually incurred the TDS was made as per the provisions of the law. Here in the present case the assessee says…

ACIT 26(1), MUMBAI vs. DEVESH JANI, MUMBAI

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

ITA 7071/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Devesh N Jani Vs. Acit 21(2) 372/8 Vasant Chs Ltd., Bhaudaji Mumbai Road, Matunga Mumbai – 400019 Pan No. Aepj2009J Assessment Year: 2011-12 Acit 21(2) Vs. Shri Devesh N Jani R. No. 508, C-10, 5Th Floor, 372/8, Vasant Chs Ltd., Bkc ,Bandra (E), Bhaudaji Road, Matunga, Mumbai – 400051 Mumbai – 400019 Pan No. Aeipj2009J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Malav P. Sheth, ARFor Respondent: Shri Love Kumar, DR
Section 43B

…llowance of Rs. 43,63,515/- made by the A.O. u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. ITA No. 6391 & 7071/MUM/2014 8 13. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. A similar issue arose in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. vs. DCIT (2017) 163 ITD 177 (Delhi – Trib.). In the above case, an order was passed by the AO u/s 201 and 201(1A) holding that the assessee failed to deduct TDS in respect of provisions made under several heads of income amounting to Rs. 15,07,25,637/-. Accordingly, the demand u/s 201(1) was raised at Rs. 1,04,02,197/- and also interest u/s 201(1A) at Rs. 38,48,924/-. After…

DEVESH N JANI,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 21(2), MUMBAI

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

ITA 6391/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Devesh N Jani Vs. Acit 21(2) 372/8 Vasant Chs Ltd., Bhaudaji Mumbai Road, Matunga Mumbai – 400019 Pan No. Aepj2009J Assessment Year: 2011-12 Acit 21(2) Vs. Shri Devesh N Jani R. No. 508, C-10, 5Th Floor, 372/8, Vasant Chs Ltd., Bkc ,Bandra (E), Bhaudaji Road, Matunga, Mumbai – 400051 Mumbai – 400019 Pan No. Aeipj2009J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Malav P. Sheth, ARFor Respondent: Shri Love Kumar, DR
Section 43B

…llowance of Rs. 43,63,515/- made by the A.O. u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. ITA No. 6391 & 7071/MUM/2014 8 13. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. A similar issue arose in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. vs. DCIT (2017) 163 ITD 177 (Delhi – Trib.). In the above case, an order was passed by the AO u/s 201 and 201(1A) holding that the assessee failed to deduct TDS in respect of provisions made under several heads of income amounting to Rs. 15,07,25,637/-. Accordingly, the demand u/s 201(1) was raised at Rs. 1,04,02,197/- and also interest u/s 201(1A) at Rs. 38,48,924/-. After…

Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. DCIT (163 ITD 177) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax