How many judgments cite CIT v. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd.?

369 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd. (377 ITR 635), spanning 2015 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 40(a)(ia), Section 194A, Section 201(1), Section 142(1), Section 143(1).

CIT v. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd.

377 ITR 635High Court2015#202 most cited

What is CIT v. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd. authority for?

The second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia), introduced by the Finance Act, 2012, is curative and applies retrospectively from April 1, 2005. Consequently, if the recipient of a payment has filed their return and paid taxes on the amount from which tax was not deducted at source, the payer's expenditure cannot be disallowed under Section 40(a)(ia).

369

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd. · Section 40(a)(ia) second proviso · retrospective application · curative amendment · disallowance for TDS default · recipient files return · tax paid · Finance Act 2012 · Delhi High Court

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 40(a)(ia)Section 194A Section 201(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 234B

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 211 full value of consideration domestic company section 21 section 48 date of transfer section 40(a)(ia)put to use section 50 section 194c section 40(a)section 40

Judgments citing CIT v. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd.

Tarun Chakraborty, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 33, Kolkata

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

ITA 244/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Nov 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 244/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Tarun Chakraborty -Vs- Acit, Circle-33, Kolkata [Pan: Aeapc 7947 J] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Sarangi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 40a

…on’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Tirupati Construction in GA No. 2146 of 2016 with ITAT No. 287 of 2016 dated 23.08.2016. We also find that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ansal Land Mark Township Pvt. Ltd. reported in 377 ITR 635 (Del) had held the same. In view of the 2nd proviso to Section 40a(ia) of the Act read with Section 201 of the Act, we deem it fit and appropriate to remand this appeal to the file of the Ld. AO with the following directions: (i) The assessee has to produce the evidences to the effect that the recipients of the payments made by the assessee had i…

ITO Ward 3, Vellore vs. Aziz Leather Exports, Ambur

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for

ITA 2102/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Mrs.Meera Suresh, CAFor Respondent: 13.11.2017

Section 139Section 148Section 201Section 201(1)Section 40

…S as disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. Aggrieved by this, the assessee carried the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). On appeal, the Ld.CIT(A) placing reliance in the 3 judgement of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd in 377 ITR 635(Del.), wherein observed that when the recipient filed its return of income disclosing the payment received from the assessee and in which the income earned by it was embedded and had also paid on such income, the assessee would not be treated as a person in default. Since in the present case the payee had filed its return and offered the sum re…

P.K.Power Appliances Private Limited, Chennai vs. ITO Corporate Ward 5(3), Chennai

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

ITA 1582/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Respondent: Mr.B.Sagadevan, JCIT, D.R

Section 143(2)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, C/‘SMC’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C/“SMC” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी. चं" पूजार" लेखा सद"य , के सम" । BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.No.1582/Mds./2017 (Assessment Year : 2012-13 ) M/s.P.K.Power Appliances Pvt The Income Tax officer, Vs. Ltd., Corporte ward-5(2), 99/10,Sneha Sadan, Chennai. Nungambakkam High Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-34. PAN AAACP 3616 N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Ms.Sushma Hirani अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : Mr.B.Sagadevan, JCIT, D.R : 09.11.2017 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date of hearing : 0…

Shyam Apparels P.Ltd., Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

ITA 549/JPR/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma, (Addl.CIT)

Section 201Section 40Section 40A(3)

…s object, then the presumption would be that such a legislation, giving it a purposive construction, would warrant it to be given retrospective effect. Recently, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd. reported in 377 ITR 635 (APB 193-197) has held that the Second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) is declaratory and curative and it has retrospective effect from 01.04.2005. ITA 497 & 549/JP/2016_ 11 ITO Vs. Shyam Apparels Further the Hon’ble Agra bench of ITAT in the case of Rajeev Kumar Agarwal Vs. addl. CIT reported in 149 ITD 363 held as under [APB 198- 205]: Second pro…

ITO, Jaipur vs. Shyam Apparels Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

ITA 497/JPR/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma, (Addl.CIT)

Section 201Section 40Section 40A(3)

Anamika Conductors Ltd., Jaipur vs. Add. CIT, Jaipur

In the result, the ground taken by the assessee is allowed

ITA 266/JPR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri G.M. Mehta (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. R. A. Verma (Addl.CIT)

Section 40Section 80I

…s collected the prescribed certificates in respect of all the cash creditors to whom interest was paid without deduction of tax u/s 194A of the Act and relying on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Ansal Land Mark Township P. Ltd. reported in 377 ITR 635 wherein the second proviso has been held to 8 M/s Anamika Conductors Ltd. Vs ACIT, jaipur be declaratory and curative in nature and effective from 01.04.2005 and where the payee in their income tax return offered the sum for taxation and paid tax thereon, disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) was not justified. The ld. CIT(A) however referred to the decis…

Sneh Gupta, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

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

ITA 698/JPR/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Oct 2017AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A)For Respondent: Shri P.P. Meena (JCIT)

Section 133ASection 40

…n its income and paid tax thereon (PB 54-56). It is a settled law that second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) inserted w.e.f. 01.04.2013 has retrospective effect as held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. Ansal Land Mark Township Pvt. Ltd. (2015) 377 ITR 635 as the amendment was made to remove the undue hardship. The Ld. CIT(A) has relied on the Hon’ble Kerela High Court decision in case of Thomas George Muthoot Vs. CIT 63 taxman.com 99 in holding that the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act, 1961 introduced w.e.f. 01.04.2013 is prospective. In this connection, it is to be noted that re…

Magus Customer Dialog Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Pr. CIT - 4, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly

ITA 809/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri R.B. Krishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT(DR)-I, ITAT, Bengaluru

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 2Section 263Section 40Section 5

…sallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) could be made. The assessee pointed out that though amendment was only w.e.f. 1.4.2013, the same was applicable retrospectively as held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Ansal Landmark Township Pvt. Ltd. (2015) 377 ITR 635 (Del). The Pr. CIT, however, was of the view that the AO while 7. completing the assessment did not examine the question whether the provisions of section 194A of the Act are applicable to factoring charges. In this regard, the Pr. CIT also held that the note filed by the assessee dated 16.07.2014 was after the conclusion of the assessment and…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Shivaai Industries Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6578/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Oct 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT(DR)

Section 10(20)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 194ISection 197Section 2Section 201(1)Section 40

…on this score. In any case, now it is a settled law that second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) has been held to be retrospective from 1.4.2005 in view of the judgement of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ansal Land Mark Township (P.) Ltd. (2015) 377 ITR 635 (Delhi). 6 ITO vs. M/s. Shivaai Industries Pvt. Ltd. 8. We have heard rival contentions and also perused the relevant finding given in the impugned order qua the issue raised before us. So far as the admissibility of additional evidence by the Ld. CIT(A) is concerned, we find that the very basis for making the payment is originating from the c…

Mukesh Rustogi, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur

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

ITA 662/JPR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: The End Of Year & Tax Has Been Paid By The Recipient. Hence The Disallowance Addition So Made & Confirmed By The Cit (A) Is Being Totally Contrary To The Provisions Of Law & Facts. Hence The Same May Kindly Be Deleted In Full.

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Gupta (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri P.P. Meena (JCIT)

Section 143(3)Section 197(1)Section 234BSection 40

…rd rival contentions, perused the material on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. After considering the totality of facts and the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Ansal Landmark Township (P) Ltd. 377 ITR 635 (Delhi), we restore the issue to the file of 4 Shri Mukesh Rustogi the Assessing Officer for verification with regard to the Certificate as furnished by the assessee. The AO after verifying the same from the respective parties i.e. NBFCs would delete the disallowance in case the Certificate is found in order. The appeal of the assessee is allow…

ITO, Jaipur vs. Om Prakash Dangayach, Jaipur

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

ITA 279/JPR/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Oct 2017AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Madhukar Garg (CA)For Respondent: Shri P.P. Meena (JCIT)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 40

…rd rival contentions, perused the material on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. After considering the totality of facts and the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Ansal Landmark Township (P) Ltd. 377 ITR 635 (Delhi), we restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for verification with regard to the Certificate as furnished by the assessee. The AO after verifying the same from M/s. Reliance Capital Ltd. would delete the disallowance in case the Certificate is found in order. The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.…

ITO, Gulbarga vs. M/S Basaveshwara Drug and Surgicals, Gulbarga

In the result, C. O. filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1023/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Oct 2017AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri G. Venkatesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Chandrashekar, Addl. CIT (DR)

Section 40Section 68

…in several judicial pronouncements that this proviso is retrospective and in support of his contention, reliance has been placed by him on judgement of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Ansal Land Mark Township (P.) Ltd. as reported in 377 ITR 635 (Delhi). At this juncture, a query was raised by the bench that what is the evidence that the payee has paid tax on the income declared by him in the return of income filed by him including the amount of rent paid by the assessee as required under the first proviso to section 201(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961. In reply, it was submitted by ld. AR of a…

ACIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Mother Mira Industries Ltd., Chennai

ITA 3194/CHNY/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Oct 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Adv

Section 148Section 154Section 40

…ents made to M/s. MBDL, had come up before the Co-ordinate Bench. As per the ld. Authorised Representative, the Co-ordinate Bench had, after considering the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd (2015) 377 ITR 635 remitted the matter back to the ld. Assessing Officer for finding out whether the lease rentals were considered by M/s. MBDL, while computing their income for the impugned assessment year and whether taxes were actually paid by the concerned party. According to him, if assessee was able to show that M/s. MBDL had paid taxes on lease rentals an…

ACIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Mother Mira Industries Ltd., Chennai

ITA 3193/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Adv

Section 148Section 154Section 40

Sanghvi Forging & Engg.Ltd., Baroda vs. The ACIT, Circle-4, Baroda

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

ITA 2275/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri PrasoonKabra, Sr DR

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40

…use (a) of Section 40 of the Act, by the Finance Act, 2012 with effect from 01.04.2013. Learned Counsel for the assessee made reference to the decision of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd, reported in [2015] 377 ITR 635 (Delhi), wherein the Hon ble High Court has taken into consideration the order of ITAT in the case of Rajeev Kumar Agarwal Vs. ACIT, reported in [2014] 34 ITR (Trib) 479 (Agra), and held that this proviso is to be construed as applicable with retrospective effect. According to this proviso, if the recipient has accounted the income in its taxable…

The ACIT, Circle-4, Baroda vs. M/S. Welspun Projects Ltd., (Formerly Known As Msk Projects (India) Ltd., Baroda

ITA 2940/AHD/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Vartik R. Choksi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudan, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 40A(7)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH AHMEDABAD BEFORE, SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 2940 /Ahd/2013 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 4, Baroda Appellant Vs. M/s. Welspun Projects Ltd. (Formerly known as MSK Projects (India) Ltd., 707/708, Sterling Centre, R.C. Dutt Road, Baroda 390007 Respondent & M/s. Welspun Projects Ltd. (Formerly known as MSK Projects (India) Ltd., 707/708, Sterling Centre, R.C. Dutt Road, Baroda 390007 Appellant Vs. Addl. C.I.T. Range-4, Baroda Respondent PAN: AABCM…

Vimal Microns Ltd., Mehsana vs. The ACIT, Mehsana Circle, Mehsana

ITA 469/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Gulab Thakor, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Jiwade, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 201(1)Section 40Section 40A(3)

…- 3 - and not with retrospective effect. We find that a co-ordinate bench in case of Rajeev Kumar Agarwal vs. Addl.CIT, ITA No. 337/Agra/2013 has upheld in extempore and hon’ble Delhi high court’s decision in CIT v. Ansal Landmark Townships Pvt. Ltd. [2015] 377 ITR 635 (Del) has already settled the law that the above second proviso carries retrospective effect since curative in nature. We therefore accept assessee’s arguments in principle and remitting the issue back to the Assessing Officer for carrying out necessary verification as per law after affording adequate opportunity to the assessee for producing nec…

The ITO, Ward- 5(2), Vadodara vs. M/S. Spandan Pharmacy, Vadodara

ITA 2758/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Aug 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Pramod Kumar]

Section 210Section 40

…file of the Assessing Officer. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the assessee contended that the issue in dispute is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd, reported in [2015] 377 ITR 635 (Delhi). He further contended that even if it is construed that the CIT(A) has set aside the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer and learned First Appellate Authority has no power to set aside an issue, then same directions can be given by the Tribunal on the cross-objection filed by the assessee. 6. I have duly considered the rival conte…

Howrah Mills Limited, Howrah vs. DCIT, CC-Xxii, Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1994/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Aug 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shr Rakesh Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden , Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 40

…on the decision of the ITAT Kolkata in the case of Vas Electronics Vs. ACIT, ITAT Kolkata in I.T.A No. 662/Kol/2013 dated 24-11-2015 wherein following the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ansal Land Mark Township P. Ltd. (2015) 377 ITR 635 (Del), the AO is directed to verify whether the recipients have included the receipts paid by the assessee in their respective returns of income and also paid taxes on the same. 10. It was therefore submitted that the disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act to the extent sustained by the CIT(A) should be set aside and remanded to the AO to verify…

D.C.I.T., Circle-1, Kolkata vs. M/S. Howrah Mills Company Limited, Howrah

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1894/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Aug 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shr Rakesh Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden , Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 40