Asst. CIT v. Om Prakash Gattani

242 ITR 638High Court2000#6320 most cited

What is Asst. CIT v. Om Prakash Gattani authority for?

An assessee cannot be denied the credit of tax deducted at source (TDS) if they produce Form 16A, and any demand notice issued under Section 221(1) for non-payment of tax, when TDS credit is due, cannot be sustained.

18

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Asst. CIT v. Om Prakash Gattani · Section 205 · Section 221(1) · credit for TDS · Form 16A · assessee-deductee · tax deducted at source

Sections most often in play

Section 205Section 221(1)Section 195Section 250Section 37BASection 143(1)Section 200

Issues it is cited on

section 205section 221(1)section 221section 203section 276section 199section 22credit for tdsassessee in defaulttax deducted at sourcesection 195section 201

Judgments citing Asst. CIT v. Om Prakash Gattani

KARTHIK LAKSHMAN,CHENNAI vs. IYO, INTL TAXATIONWARD-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2182/CHNY/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jan 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri George George Kand Ms. Padmavathy.Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2182/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2024-25

For Respondent: Ms. R.Kavitha, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 205Section 250

…that the Department has speculated from denying the benefit of tax deducted at source by the employer during the relevant financial years to the petitioner by relying on the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of ACIT & Ors vs Om Prakash Gattani [2000] 242 ITR 638, this Court allowed the same. Vital would be to reproduce the relevant findings and observations. "4. The issue is no longer res integra. The Division Bench of this Court in case of Sumit Devendra Rajani (Supra) examined the statutory provisions and in particular Section 205 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Court concurred with the view of the Bo…

MANI MADHUKAR BANSAL,TELANGANA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- INT. TAX 1(1)(2), DELHI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2637/DEL/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Nov 2025AY 2024-25
For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Sarogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vikram Singh Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 192Section 234B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES ‘D’: NEW DELHI. BEFORE SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER Mani Madhukar Bansal, vs. ACIT/DCIT, Sy No.83/1, F 2902, International Tax 1(1)(2), My Home Bhooja, Knowledge City, Delhi. Near Biodiversity Park, Gachibowli, K.V. Rangareddy – 500 032 (Telangana). (PAN : AMPPB2795J) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Pankaj Sarogi, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Vikram Singh Sharma, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 21.08.2025 Date of Order : 12.11.2025 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : 1. The assessee has fil…

VINOD KUMAR MOURYA,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 653/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 195Section 205Section 250

…vendra Rajani (Supra) examined the statutory provisions and in ITA No.4097/Del./2016 particular Section 205 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Court concurred with the view of the Bombay High Court in case of Asst. CIT VS. Om Prakash Gattani, reported in (2000) 242 ITR 638 and observed as under : "10. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the Bombay High Court and Gauhati High Court. Applying the aforesaid two decisions of the Bombay High Court as well as Gauhati High Court, the facts of the case on hand and even considering Section 205 of the Act action of the respondent in not giving the credit of t…

VINOD KUMAR MOURYA,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, CIRECLE

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 652/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 195Section 205Section 250

…vendra Rajani (Supra) examined the statutory provisions and in ITA No.4097/Del./2016 particular Section 205 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Court concurred with the view of the Bombay High Court in case of Asst. CIT VS. Om Prakash Gattani, reported in (2000) 242 ITR 638 and observed as under : "10. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the Bombay High Court and Gauhati High Court. Applying the aforesaid two decisions of the Bombay High Court as well as Gauhati High Court, the facts of the case on hand and even considering Section 205 of the Act action of the respondent in not giving the credit of t…

XANDER FINANCE PVT. LTD., MUMBAI,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 549/RPR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 549/Rpr/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2019-20)

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Taranuum Verma, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 205Section 234Section 234BSection 250

…d Bench of ITAT) - at page- 131 & 132 of PB f. Office Memorandum issued by CBDT on 11/03/2016 - page - 133 of PB. Further reliance is placed on following decisions: a. Ashok Kumar Chowatia Vs. JCIT (TDS) [435 ITR 499 (Mad) ] b. ACIT Vs. Om Prakash Gattami [242 ITR 638 (Gau)] c. Ahluwalia & Associates Vs. ITO [33 SOT 1 (Ahm)] d. Chandrashekhar Sadashiv Potphode Vs. DCIT [ 147 taxmann.com 260 (Pune ITAT)] 7. Ld. AR drew our attention to the office memorandum F. No. 275/29/2014-IT(B) dt. 11.03.2016, the same is culled out for the sake of reference: 7 Xander Finance Private Limited vs ACIT, Central-1(1), Raipur…

SHRI. S. SATHYARAJ,CHENNAI vs. ACIT,NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 10(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1529/CHNY/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1529/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Shri. S. Sathyaraj, Assistant Commissioner Of No. 13A, Brahadambal Road, V. Income Tax, Nungambakkam, Non Corporate Circle 10(1), Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aafps-6100-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. J. Chandrasekaran, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16.04.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30.04.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. J. Chandrasekaran, CAFor Respondent: Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 201(1)Section 205

…that the Department has speculated from denying the benefit of tax deducted at source by the employer during the relevant financial years to the petitioner by relying on the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of ACIT & Ors vs Om Prakash Gattani [2000] 242 ITR 638, this Court allowed the same. Vital would be to reproduce the relevant findings and observations. "4. The issue is no longer res integra. The Division Bench of this Court in case of Sumit Devendra Rajani (Supra) examined the statutory provisions and in particular Section 205 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Court concurred with the view of the Bo…

SHRI. AMIT PRAKASH MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT- CPC , BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2144/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant PathakFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Sinha
Section 143(1)Section 192Section 200Section 201Section 205Section 221Section 234A

…urt in case of Sumit Devendra Rajani (Supra) examined the statutory provisions and in particular Section 205 of the Income tax Act, 1961. The Court concurred with the view of the Bombay High Court in case of Asst. CIT v. Om Prakash Gattani, reported in (2000) 242 ITR 638 and observed as under: 5. Facts in both case are very similar. Under the circumstances, by allowing these petitions we hold that the Department cannot deny the benefit of tax deducted at source by the employer of the petitioner during the relevant financial years. Credit of such tax would be given to the petitioner for the respective years. If t…

WALVEKAR BROTHERS & CO,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(2),, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 770/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Aug 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Smt. J.R. ChandekarFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 143(2)Section 192Section 194ASection 194BSection 194CSection 194DSection 194ESection 195Section 196ASection 205

…e has been paid to Central Government or not because provisions are made under the Act for recovery of tax deducted at source from the person who has deducted such tax. Similarly, the Hon‟ble Gauhati High Court in the case of Omprakash Gattani Vs. ACIT (2000) 242 ITR 638 has held that “Thus complete machinery is provided under the Act for recovery of tax deducted at source the person who has deducted such a at source and the revenue is barred from recovering the TDS amount from from whose income, tad has been deducted at source Therefore the fact that the revenue is unable to recover the tax deducted at source fr…

LILADEVI DOKANIA,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD.1(2)(3), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 126/SRT/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Jun 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.126/Srt/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2019-20) (Virtual Court Hearing) Liladevi Dokania Income Tax Officer Ward- 1(2)(3), Aayakar Bhawan, Plot No.1/2,Mayur House, Beside Vs. Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Milleniumm Market, Ring Road, Surat-395002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abipd 2171 Q (Appellant ) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Suresh K Kabra, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Deependra Kumar, SR-DR
Section 205

…en the department raised the tax demand with interest and initiated the actions of the recovery that this Court was approached. Relying on the decision of the Gauhati High Court rendered in case of Asstt. CIT v. Om Prakash Gattani [2001] 117 Taxman 549/[2000] 242 ITR 638 this Court allowed the same. Vital would be to reproduce the relevant findings and observations. "4. The issue is no longer res integra. The Division Bench of this Court in case of Sumit Devendra Rajani (supra) examined the statutory provisions and in particular Section 205 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Court concurred with the view of the Bom…

PURUSOTTAM LENKA,SURAT vs. DY CIT, CC-1(2), MUMBAI

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

ITA 499/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2017-18 Purusottam Lenka, Dy. Commissioner Of Income C-603, Sanskrut Apartment, Tax, Central Circle 1(2), Raj Hans Cinema, Dumas Road, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Surat - 395007 Vs. Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aampl1047J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Suresh Kabra (Ar) Revenue By : Bhumika Patel (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 29/11/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 02/12/2021

For Appellant: Suresh Kabra (AR)For Respondent: Bhumika Patel (DR)
Section 143(1)

…t raised the tax demand with interest and initiated the actions of the recovery that this Court was approached. Relying on the decision of the Bombay High Court rendered in case of Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Others vs. Om Prakash Gattani [(2000) 242 ITR 638], this Court allowed the same. Vital would be to reproduce the relevant findings and observations. “4. The issue is no longer res integra. The Division Bench of this Court in case of Sumit Devendra Rajani (Supra) examined the statutory provisions and in particular Section 205 of the Income- tax Act, 1961. The Court concurred with the view of the…

BHIDE EDUCATIO PVT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO 9(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 662/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singhaayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 662/Mum/2020 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2015-16) Bhide Education Pvt. Ltd. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 9(2)(1), B-43, Swapnashilp, Mahant Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Vile Parle (East), Mumbai-400 057 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थामी रेखा िं./Pan No. Aadcb1401E अऩीराथी की ओय े / Appellant By : Shri Saurabh Bhat, Ar प्रत्मथी की ओय े / Respondent By : Shri V.K. Chaturvedi, Dr स नवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07.10.2021 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 07.10.2021 Aadosa / O R D E R भहावीय स िंह, उऩाध्मक्ष के द्वाया / Per Mahavir Singh, Vp: This Appeal Of The Assessee Is Arising Out Of Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)]-16, Mumbai [In Short Cit(A)], In Appeal No. Cit(A)-16/It-10138/Ito-19(2)(1)/2017- 18 Vide Dated 29.11.2019. The Assessment Was Framed By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(2)(1) Mumbai (In Short Ito/ Ao) For The A.Y. 2015-16 Vide Order Dated 31.10.2017 Under Section 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’). 2. The Assessee Has Raised Two Inter-Connected Issues In This Appeal & The Issue Is Regarding The Order Of Cit(A) Upholding The Order Of The Assessing Officer In Taxing The Amount Of ₹42,63,641/- Being Interest Income Not Realized Or Has Not Accrued During The Year & Hence Not Taxable. Alternatively, The Assessee Requested That In Case The Interest Is Assessed As 2 Bhide Education Pvt. Ltd.; Ay 15 -16 Income, The Tds Credit Claimed By The Assessee In The Original Returned Of Income Be Allowed. For This, Assessee Has Raised The Following Five Grounds:-

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Bhat, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Chaturvedi, DR
Section 143(3)Section 205

…rt in case of Sumit Devendra Rajani (Supra) examined the statutory provisions and in particular Section 205 of the Income tax Act, 1961. The Court concurred with the view of the Bombay High Court in case of Asst. CIT VS. Om Prakash Gattani, reported in (2000) 242 ITR 638 and observed as under : “10. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the Bombay High Court and Gauhati High Court. Applying the aforesaid two decisions of the Bombay 6 Bhide Education Pvt. Ltd.; AY 15 -16 High Court as well as Gauhati High Court, the facts of the case on hand and even considering Section 205 of the Act action of the…

M/S. RAO & VENKATESULU,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 2(3)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 305/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Sri.Ningoji Rao, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 199

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE “SMC-A” BENCH, BANGALORE Before Shri George George K, Judicial Member ITA No.305/Bang/2021 : Asst.Year 2016-2017 M/s.Rao & Venkatesulu The Income Tax Officer Chartered Accountants Ward 2(3)(2) v. Bengaluru. No.200, 3rd D Cross II Block III Stage, Basaveshwaranagar Bengaluru – 560 079. PAN : AABFR0269F. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sri.Ningoji Rao, CA Respondent by : Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel Date of Pronouncement : 22.09.2021 Date of Hearing : 21.09.2021 O R D E R This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the CIT(A)’s or…

JASJIT SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

ITA 4097/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conference)

For Appellant: Shri Sachin Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Senior DR
Section 131Section 143Section 154

…amined the statutory provisions and in 9 ITA No.4096/Del./2016 ITA No.4097/Del./2016 particular Section 205 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Court concurred with the view of the Bombay High Court in case of Asst. CIT VS. Om Prakash Gattani, reported in (2000) 242 ITR 638 and observed as under : “10. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the Bombay High Court and Gauhati High Court. Applying the aforesaid two decisions of the Bombay High Court as well as Gauhati High Court, the facts of the case on hand and even considering Section 205 of the Act action of the respondent in not giving the credit of…

JASJIT SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

ITA 4096/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conference)

For Appellant: Shri Sachin Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Senior DR
Section 131Section 143Section 154

…amined the statutory provisions and in 9 ITA No.4096/Del./2016 ITA No.4097/Del./2016 particular Section 205 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Court concurred with the view of the Bombay High Court in case of Asst. CIT VS. Om Prakash Gattani, reported in (2000) 242 ITR 638 and observed as under : “10. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the Bombay High Court and Gauhati High Court. Applying the aforesaid two decisions of the Bombay High Court as well as Gauhati High Court, the facts of the case on hand and even considering Section 205 of the Act action of the respondent in not giving the credit of…

HITT HOLLAND INSTITUTE OF TRAFFIC TECHNOLOGY B. V. vs. DDIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 574/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A No. 574/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Hitt Holland Institute Of Traffic -Vs.- D.D.I.T. (Intl.T)-1, Technology B.V., Kolkata Kolkata. [Pan : Aabch 5694 R] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri S.K.Agarwal, Ar For The Respondent : Shri.G.Mallikarjuna, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 02.02.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 08.02.2017. Order Per N.V.Vasudevan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri.G.Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

…hnology B.V. A.Yr..2010-11 Rakesh Kumar Gupta Vs Union of India (2014) 365 ITR 143 (Allahabad HC) Court On Its Own Motion Vs. CIT (2013) 352 ITR 273 (Delhi HC) Sum it Devendra Rajani vs. ACIT (2014) 369 ITR 673 (Gujarat HC) ACIT vs. Orn Prakash Gattani (2000) 242 ITR 638 (Guwahati HC) Yashpal Sahwney (2007) 293 ITR 539 (Bombay HC) 55. After considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the Assessee, we are of the view that it would be just and appropriate to direct the AO to consider the TDS certificate produced by the Assessee and after verification allow credit for prepaid taxes without insisting on t…

MAHENDRA MOTILAL BANTHIA,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC 39,

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

ITA 7151/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.1168, 7151 & 1169/Mum/2013 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10) Mr. Mahendra Motilal Vs. Acit/Dcit, Cc-39, Mumbai Banthia, 169/A, Moti Mahal, M.G.Road, Panvel, Navi Mumbai-410206 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aiyb 7531 M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vijay Kothari याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Pooja Swaroop सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 22/04/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 08/07/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2007-2008 & 2009-2010, In The Matter Of Imposition Of Penalty U/S.271(1)(C) Of The I.T.Act.

For Appellant: Shri Vijay KothariFor Respondent: Smt. Pooja Swaroop
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…f the Act, credit for tax deducted at source has to be given, irrespective of the fact that there was delayed payment of TDS by the deductor. For this purpose, reliance was placed on the decision of Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in the case of Omprakash Gattani, 242 ITR 638. In view of these facts, it was contended that assessee has paid entire tax amount and that the appeal was wrongly not been admitted by the CIT(A) u/s.249A. 14. Considering the fact that there is tax deducted at source out of assessee’s income which has to be taken into account while computing the tax paid by the assessee and also considering the…

MAHINDRA MOTILAL BANTHIA,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CNE CIR 39, MUMBAI

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

ITA 1169/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.1168, 7151 & 1169/Mum/2013 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10) Mr. Mahendra Motilal Vs. Acit/Dcit, Cc-39, Mumbai Banthia, 169/A, Moti Mahal, M.G.Road, Panvel, Navi Mumbai-410206 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aiyb 7531 M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vijay Kothari याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Pooja Swaroop सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 22/04/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 08/07/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2007-2008 & 2009-2010, In The Matter Of Imposition Of Penalty U/S.271(1)(C) Of The I.T.Act.

For Appellant: Shri Vijay KothariFor Respondent: Smt. Pooja Swaroop
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…f the Act, credit for tax deducted at source has to be given, irrespective of the fact that there was delayed payment of TDS by the deductor. For this purpose, reliance was placed on the decision of Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in the case of Omprakash Gattani, 242 ITR 638. In view of these facts, it was contended that assessee has paid entire tax amount and that the appeal was wrongly not been admitted by the CIT(A) u/s.249A. 14. Considering the fact that there is tax deducted at source out of assessee’s income which has to be taken into account while computing the tax paid by the assessee and also considering the…

MAHINDRA MOTILAL BANTHIA,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CNE CIR 39, MUMBAI

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

ITA 1168/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.1168, 7151 & 1169/Mum/2013 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10) Mr. Mahendra Motilal Vs. Acit/Dcit, Cc-39, Mumbai Banthia, 169/A, Moti Mahal, M.G.Road, Panvel, Navi Mumbai-410206 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aiyb 7531 M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vijay Kothari याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Pooja Swaroop सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 22/04/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 08/07/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2007-2008 & 2009-2010, In The Matter Of Imposition Of Penalty U/S.271(1)(C) Of The I.T.Act.

For Appellant: Shri Vijay KothariFor Respondent: Smt. Pooja Swaroop
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…f the Act, credit for tax deducted at source has to be given, irrespective of the fact that there was delayed payment of TDS by the deductor. For this purpose, reliance was placed on the decision of Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in the case of Omprakash Gattani, 242 ITR 638. In view of these facts, it was contended that assessee has paid entire tax amount and that the appeal was wrongly not been admitted by the CIT(A) u/s.249A. 14. Considering the fact that there is tax deducted at source out of assessee’s income which has to be taken into account while computing the tax paid by the assessee and also considering the…

Asst. CIT v. Om Prakash Gattani (242 ITR 638) — Cited in 18 Judgments | BharatTax