Bennet Coleman & Co. Ltd. v. V.P. Damle, Third ITO

157 ITR 812High Court1986#5332 most cited

What is Bennet Coleman & Co. Ltd. v. V.P. Damle, Third ITO authority for?

Interest chargeable under section 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act is not penal in nature and therefore cannot be waived on the basis of intentional default or other grounds.

22

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Bennet Coleman & Co. Ltd. v. V.P. Damle · Third ITO · section 201(1A) · interest u/s 201(1A) · not penal · waiver of interest · mandatory interest · TDS interest

Also reported as

120 Taxmann 584

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 201(1A)Section 35(1)(ii)Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 46A

Issues it is cited on

section 221intra group servicesinterest under section 201(1a)far analysissection 273benchmarking analysistransactional net margin methodsection 201(1a)section 273bcup methodrule of consistencymost appropriate method

Judgments citing Bennet Coleman & Co. Ltd. v. V.P. Damle, Third ITO

Eastern Cargo Carriers (India) Private Limited, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India vs. The Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department

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

ITA 4610/MUM/2023[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2024AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2021-22 M/S Eastern Cargo Carriers (India) The Assessment Unit, Income Tax Pvt. Ltd., Department, Vs. Unit No. 26, Adarsh Ind. Estates, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Sahar Road, Andheri East, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400099. Pan No. Aaace 1520 E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Niraj Sheth a/wFor Respondent: Mr. Hemanshu Joshi, Sr. DR
Section 40A(2)(a)

…Ltd 315 ITR 102 (Karnataka) wherein also it has been stated that it is not a penalty. Another decision stated also it has been stated that it is not a penalty. Another decision stated is Bennett Coleman & Co Ltd versus ITO Bennett Coleman & Co Ltd versus ITO 157 ITR 812 which also 157 ITR 812 which also speaks that the interest chargeable u/s 201 (1A) is not penal in speaks that the interest chargeable is not penal in nature. All other decision also cited in the statement of facts are also nature. All other decision also cited in the stat ement of facts are also on the same line. However, here after considering…

M/S. Infineon Technologies India Pvt Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Bengaluru

In the result the appeal filed by assessee stands allowed partly

ITA 2870/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No.2870/Bang/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Infineon Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. Deputy Commissioner 9Th Floor Prestige Of Income-Tax Thirulakshmi Vs. Circle-3(1)(1) No.11 M.G. Road Bengaluru Bengaluru 560 001 Pan No : Aabcs6967N Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri K.R. Vasudevan, A.R. Shri Sumer Singh Meena, Respondent By : D.R. Date Of Hearing : 13.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.03.2022 O R D E R Per Beena Pillai: Present Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 16/10/2017 Passed By The Ld.Dcit Under Section 143(3) R.W. Section 144C(13) For Assessment Year 2013-14 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “The Grounds Mentioned Hereinafter Are Without Prejudice To One Another.

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, A.R
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 40Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No.2870/Bang/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Infineon Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. Deputy Commissioner 9th Floor Prestige of Income-tax Thirulakshmi Vs. Circle-3(1)(1) No.11 M.G. Road Bengaluru Bengaluru 560 001 PAN NO : AABCS6967N APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri K.R. Vasudevan, A.R. Shri Sumer Singh Meena, Respondent by : D.R. Date of Hearing : 13.01.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 31.03.2022 O R D E R PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: Present appeal…

ACIT, Circle-7(1), New Delhi vs. Danisco (India) Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is also dismissed

ITA 6025/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Harpreet Singh Ajmani, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Jain, Sr.D.R

…ry. The payment of interest under that provision is not penal. There is, therefore, no question of waiver of such interest on the basis that the default was not intentional or on any other basis. (See Bennet Coleman & Co. Ltd. v. V.P. Damle, Third ITO, [1986] 157 ITR 812 (Bom.) and CIT v. Prem Nath Motors (P.). Ltd., [2002] 120 Taxman 584 (Delhi)." 27. In this case, the issue is entirely different. Here the assessee has claimed deduction of interest on delayed payment of TDS as business expenditure, which otherwise was the statutory duty of the assessee to deduct and deposit the same within time., It was claimed…

Danisco India Pvt. Ltd., Gurugram vs. DCIT, Circle-7(1), New Delhi

Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is also dismissed

ITA 5203/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Harpreet Singh Ajmani, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Jain, Sr.D.R

…ry. The payment of interest under that provision is not penal. There is, therefore, no question of waiver of such interest on the basis that the default was not intentional or on any other basis. (See Bennet Coleman & Co. Ltd. v. V.P. Damle, Third ITO, [1986] 157 ITR 812 (Bom.) and CIT v. Prem Nath Motors (P.). Ltd., [2002] 120 Taxman 584 (Delhi)." 27. In this case, the issue is entirely different. Here the assessee has claimed deduction of interest on delayed payment of TDS as business expenditure, which otherwise was the statutory duty of the assessee to deduct and deposit the same within time., It was claimed…

ACIT, Circle-7(1), New Delhi vs. Danisco India Pvt. Ltd., Gurugram

Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is also dismissed

ITA 7899/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Harpreet Singh Ajmani, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Jain, Sr.D.R

…ry. The payment of interest under that provision is not penal. There is, therefore, no question of waiver of such interest on the basis that the default was not intentional or on any other basis. (See Bennet Coleman & Co. Ltd. v. V.P. Damle, Third ITO, [1986] 157 ITR 812 (Bom.) and CIT v. Prem Nath Motors (P.). Ltd., [2002] 120 Taxman 584 (Delhi)." 27. In this case, the issue is entirely different. Here the assessee has claimed deduction of interest on delayed payment of TDS as business expenditure, which otherwise was the statutory duty of the assessee to deduct and deposit the same within time., It was claimed…

DCIT, Circle-7(1), New Delhi vs. Danisco India Pvt. Ltd., Gurugram

Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is also dismissed

ITA 7898/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Harpreet Singh Ajmani, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Jain, Sr.D.R

…ry. The payment of interest under that provision is not penal. There is, therefore, no question of waiver of such interest on the basis that the default was not intentional or on any other basis. (See Bennet Coleman & Co. Ltd. v. V.P. Damle, Third ITO, [1986] 157 ITR 812 (Bom.) and CIT v. Prem Nath Motors (P.). Ltd., [2002] 120 Taxman 584 (Delhi)." 27. In this case, the issue is entirely different. Here the assessee has claimed deduction of interest on delayed payment of TDS as business expenditure, which otherwise was the statutory duty of the assessee to deduct and deposit the same within time., It was claimed…

Danisco India Pvt. Ltd., Gurugram vs. DCIT, Circle-10(1), New Delhi

Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is also dismissed

ITA 7897/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Harpreet Singh Ajmani, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Jain, Sr.D.R

…ry. The payment of interest under that provision is not penal. There is, therefore, no question of waiver of such interest on the basis that the default was not intentional or on any other basis. (See Bennet Coleman & Co. Ltd. v. V.P. Damle, Third ITO, [1986] 157 ITR 812 (Bom.) and CIT v. Prem Nath Motors (P.). Ltd., [2002] 120 Taxman 584 (Delhi)." 27. In this case, the issue is entirely different. Here the assessee has claimed deduction of interest on delayed payment of TDS as business expenditure, which otherwise was the statutory duty of the assessee to deduct and deposit the same within time., It was claimed…

Danisco India Pvt. Ltd., Gurugram vs. DCIT, Circle-10(1), New Delhi

Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is also dismissed

ITA 7896/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Harpreet Singh Ajmani, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Jain, Sr.D.R

…ry. The payment of interest under that provision is not penal. There is, therefore, no question of waiver of such interest on the basis that the default was not intentional or on any other basis. (See Bennet Coleman & Co. Ltd. v. V.P. Damle, Third ITO, [1986] 157 ITR 812 (Bom.) and CIT v. Prem Nath Motors (P.). Ltd., [2002] 120 Taxman 584 (Delhi)." 27. In this case, the issue is entirely different. Here the assessee has claimed deduction of interest on delayed payment of TDS as business expenditure, which otherwise was the statutory duty of the assessee to deduct and deposit the same within time., It was claimed…

Danisco India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is also dismissed

ITA 3518/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Harpreet Singh Ajmani, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Jain, Sr.D.R

…ry. The payment of interest under that provision is not penal. There is, therefore, no question of waiver of such interest on the basis that the default was not intentional or on any other basis. (See Bennet Coleman & Co. Ltd. v. V.P. Damle, Third ITO, [1986] 157 ITR 812 (Bom.) and CIT v. Prem Nath Motors (P.). Ltd., [2002] 120 Taxman 584 (Delhi)." 27. In this case, the issue is entirely different. Here the assessee has claimed deduction of interest on delayed payment of TDS as business expenditure, which otherwise was the statutory duty of the assessee to deduct and deposit the same within time., It was claimed…

New Modern Bazaar Departmental Store Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 31(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 590/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shuklaa N D Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: N O N EFor Respondent: Shri S. S. Negi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 201Section 37Section 37(1)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “E”: NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER A N D SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) ITA. No. 590/Del/2018 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/s. New Modern Bazaar ITO, Departmental Store Pvt. Ltd., Vs. 18–B, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, Ward : 31 (1) New Delhi – 110 057. PAN: AAECM3446L New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : N O N E; Department by: Shri S. S. Negi, Sr. DR; Date of Hearing : 05/04/2021 Date of pronouncement : 08/04/2021 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee…

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) Ward 2(3), Chandrapur vs. Ultratech Cement Ltd Unit Awarpur Cement Works

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 345/NAG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negi

Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 201

…interest under section 201(1A) is concerned, this interest is admittedly a compensatory interest in nature and it seeks to compensate the revenue for delay in realization of taxes. Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in the case of Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd. vs. ITO (157 ITR 812) has held so. Therefore, levy of interest under section 201(1A) is applicable whether or not the assessee was at fault. However, since it is only compensatory in nature it is applicable for the period of the date on which tax was required to be deducted till the date when tax was eventually paid. However, in a case in which the recipient of inco…

Pidilite Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO TDS 2(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed, for

ITA 2174/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh() & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 191Section 194CSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)

…default for the purpose of section 201 of the Act. However, interest u/s 201(1A) will remain payable till the date of payment of taxes by the deductee. Therefore, by following the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Bennet Coleman Ltd vs ITO 157 ITR 812 (Bom) and in the case of CIT vs Premnath Motors 120 Taxman 584 held that the assessee is liable to pay interest u/s 201(1A) of the Act, therefore, directed the AO to verify the evidence filed by the assessee and grant relief accordingly. 7. The Ld.AR for the assessee submitted that the Ld.AO was erred in treating software expenses and purchase…

Usha Sharma, New Delhi vs. ITO (International Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal and stay application of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 6564/DEL/2016[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2017AY 2015-16

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 194Section 195Section 195(1)Section 201Section 201(1)

…In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘G (Friday)’, New Delhi Before : Shri Bhavnesh Saini, Judicial Member And Shri L.P. Sahu, Accountant Member ITA No. 6564 & S.A. No. 588/Del./2016 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Mrs. Usha Sharma, E-180, vs. ITO(International Taxation, 1st Floor, Greater Kailash-I, Circle 3(1)(2), New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN – AWWPS5419D (Appellant) (Respondent) Applicant by Sh. Ankur Sharma, Advocate Respondent by Sh. S.S. Rana, CIT/DR Date of Hearing 21.06.2017 Date of Pronouncement 31.07.2017 ORDER Per L.P. Sahu, A.M.: The present appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of l…

Cea Soma Cici Jv, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is treated as allowed for

ITA 777/BANG/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Apr 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Vijay Pal Rao & Shri. S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. Ramakrishna R. Lingsur, CAFor Respondent: Shri. M. K. Biju, JCIT
Section 133ASection 197Section 197(1)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 40

…of interest under sect ion 201(1A) is concerned, this interest is admittedly a compensatory interest in nature and it seeks to compensate the revenue for delay in realization of taxes. Hon’ble Bombay High Court, in the case of Bennett Coleman & Co Ltd Vs ITO (157 ITR 812) has held so. Therefore, levy of interest under section 201(1A) is applicable whether or not the assessee was at fault. IT(IT)A.777/Bang/2016 Page - 7 9. However, since it is only compensatory in nature it is applicable for the period of the date on which tax was required to be deducted till the date when tax was eventually paid. However, in a…

Nadiadwala Entertainment & Technologies Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT 14, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6293/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)& Shri Ravish Sood (Jm)

Section 201

…deducted at source. The assessee challenged the same before the learned CIT(A) and the first appellate authority confirmed the order passed by the Assessing Officer by following the decision rendered by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Benett Coleman (157 ITR 812), wherein it was held that levy of interest is 2 Nadiadwala Entertainment & Technologies Limited compensatory in nature. Accordingly, he dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order passed by the learned CIT(A), the assessee has filed this appeal before us. 4. We noticed that the learned CIT(A) has passed the order by following…

The Swasti Produce Co. P Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) 14, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 6793/MUM/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Nov 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 6793/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05) The Swasti Produce Co. Pvt. The Ito Tds Ward -3(4), बनाम/ Limited, Churney Road, V. 207/208, Bhaveshwar Mumbai. Arcade, Opp Shreyas Cinema, Lbs Marg, Ghatkopar (W), Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaact1886E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop,DR
Section 133ASection 194Section 201Section 201(1)

…ffect. The learned CIT(A) also upheld levy of interest u/s 201(1A) of the Act being compensatory in nature and also mandatory.The learned CIT(A) relied upon decisions of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Benett Coleman and Company Limited v. ITO (1986) 157 ITR 812(Bom.) and decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court decision in the case of CIT v. Prem Nath Motors (2002) 120 Taxman 584(Delh) wherein the courts held that levy of interest is compensatory . 6. Aggreived by the appellate orders dated 01-08-2014 passed by learned CIT(A), the assessee filed second appeal with the tribunal. 7. The ld. Counsel for the…

CIT vs. M/S Babcock Power

ITA - 178 / 2002HC Delhi05 Sept 2014
Section 10(6)Section 192Section 201Section 260A

…yment of interest under that provision is not penal. There is, therefore, no question of waiver of such interest on the basis that the default was not intentional or on any other basis. (See Bennet Coleman and Co. Ltd. v. V.P.Damle, Third ITO, [1986] 157 ITR 812 (Bom.) and CIT v. Prem Nath Motors (P). Ltd., [2002] 120 Taxman 584 (Delhi). Therefore, the second question is also answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee “6. It has been further observed in American Express Bank Ltd. (supra) that if the employees (i.e. payee) had paid taxes as per the individual return/asses…

Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) vs. M/S American Express Bank Ltd

The appeals are allowed to the extent indicated above

ITA/75/2003HC Delhi21 Dec 2011
Section 201

…ITA Nos 74/2003, 75/2003 & 653/2005 Page 1 of 9 THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 21.12.2011 + ITA 74/2003 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) ... Appellant -versus- M/S AMERICAN EXPRESS BANK LTD ... Respondent + ITA 75/2003 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) ... Appellant -versus- M/S AMERICAN EXPRESS BANK LTD ... Respondent + ITA 653/2005 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX TDS ... Appellant -versus-…

Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) vs. M/S American Express Bank Ltd

The appeals are allowed to the extent indicated above

ITA/74/2003HC Delhi21 Dec 2011
Section 201

…ITA Nos 74/2003, 75/2003 & 653/2005 Page 1 of 9 THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 21.12.2011 + ITA 74/2003 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) ... Appellant -versus- M/S AMERICAN EXPRESS BANK LTD ... Respondent + ITA 75/2003 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) ... Appellant -versus- M/S AMERICAN EXPRESS BANK LTD ... Respondent + ITA 653/2005 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX TDS ... Appellant -versus-…

Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) vs. M/S American Express Bank Ltd

The appeals are allowed to the extent indicated above

ITA/653/2005HC Delhi21 Dec 2011
Section 201

…ITA Nos 74/2003, 75/2003 & 653/2005 Page 1 of 9 THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 21.12.2011 + ITA 74/2003 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) ... Appellant -versus- M/S AMERICAN EXPRESS BANK LTD ... Respondent + ITA 75/2003 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) ... Appellant -versus- M/S AMERICAN EXPRESS BANK LTD ... Respondent + ITA 653/2005 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX TDS ... Appellant -versus-…