CIT (TDS) v. Anagram Wellington Assets Management Co. Ltd.

389 ITR 654High Court2016#24786 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 127 Section 131 Section 131(1A)Section 132 Section 132A Section 133A Section 139(1)Section 143(3)

Judgments citing CIT (TDS) v. Anagram Wellington Assets Management Co. Ltd.

DCIT, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. Kamlaprabha L/H of Late Shri Gopal Lal Ji Goswami, Kota

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross objection of the assessee is disposed off in terms of the observation made herein above

ITA 94/JPR/2025[2014]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Aug 2025

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-Sr.DR a

Section 144Section 153C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 94/JPR/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2014-15 cuke DY. Commissioner of Income Tax, Smt. Kamla Prabha Vs. Central Circle-2, L/H of Late Sh. Gopal Lal Ji Jaipur. Goswami, Main Road, Ladpura, Kota City S.O., Kota-324006. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AEVPG7177D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent CO. No. 22/JPR/2…

The ACIT (Int. Taxa), Vadodara vs. M/S. Allscripts (India) Pvt.Ltd., Baroda

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 41/AHD/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Nikhil Mutha, A.R

Section 194ISection 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)

…the Ld CIT(A) erred in holding that the notice U/s 201 of the Act issued beyond the period of four years deserves to be quashed, relying on the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT(TDS) Vs Anagram Wellington Assets Management Company Ltd. 389 ITR 654 (2016) (Guj) without appreciating the fact that the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court pertains to the resident assessee and for the default committed u/s 194I of the Act rendering the judgment obiter dictum in the case of the assessee under consideration. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the statute defines period of limita…

The Tata Power Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO (It) (TDS) (2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1695/MUM/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri N.K. Pradhanthe Tata Power Co. Ltd. Income Tax Officer Corporate Center, (International Taxation)-Tds (2) Block „B‟, 5Th Floor, 34, Air India Building, Sant Tukaram Road, Vs. Mumbai - 21 Carnac Bunder, Mumbai-400 009

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Nishant Samaiya, D.R

Section 143(2)Section 195Section 201(1)Section 201(3)

…3 ITR 230 (Del); and (iii) Vodafone Essar Mobiles Services Ltd. Vs. Union of India. Also, support was drawn by the ld. A.R from the judgment of the Hon‟ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT (TDS) Vs. Anagram Wellington Assets Management Co. Ltd. (2016) 389 ITR 654 (Guj). In the backdrop of the aforesaid settled position of law so laid down by the Hon‟ble High Courts, it was submitted by the ld. A.R that the ITO(IT)-TDS-2, Mumbai had issued a „Show cause‟ notice, dated 18.10.2013 to the assessee, therein calling upon it to explain as to why it should not be deemed to be an assessee in default under Sec. 201…