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 194ASection 201(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 234B
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 211full value of considerationdomestic companysection 21section 48date of transfersection 40(a)(ia)put to usesection 50section 194csection 40(a)section 40

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

Ramesh Govindbhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward-6(1)(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 64/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jul 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Dilip Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 50C

…s effective from the date on which the law, containing such an undue hardship or incongruity, was introduced. In support of this proposition, I find support from Hon’ble Delhi High Court’s judgment in the case of CIT Vs Ansal Landmark Township Pvt Ltd [(2015) 377 ITR 635 (Del)], wherein approving the reasoning adopted an order authored by me during my tenure at Agra bench [i..e Rajeev Kumar Agarwal Vs ACIT (2014) 149 ITD 363 (Agra)] which centred on the principle that when legislature is reasonable and compassionate enough to undo the undue hardship caused by the statute “such an amendment in law, in view of the…

Meghmani Organics Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT., Cent.Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2204/AHD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jul 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah ARFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr. D.R
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 92C

…h effect from a particular date specified by the legislature, the judicial forums, including this Tribunal, at times read it as being effect from a date much earlier than that too. One such case, for example, is CIT v. Ansal Landmark Township (P.) Ltd. [2015] 377 ITR 635/234 Taxman 825/61 taxmann.com 45 (Delhi) = 2015-TIOL-2026-HC-DEL-IT, wherein Hon'ble Delhi High Court confirmed the action of the Tribunal in holding that the provision, though stated to be effective from 1st April 2013 must be held to be effective from 1st April 2005. Whether such an exercise can be done in the present case is, of course, someth…

Mehra Eyetech Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Add. CIT Circle6(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 1760/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am M/S. Mehra Eyetech Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Add.Cit, Circle 6 (3) 801/B, Lotus Corporation Park, 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Graham Firth Steel Compound Mumbai – 400 020 Goregaon (E), Mumbai-400063 Pan/Gir No.Aaacu2684H (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 40

…hra Eyetech Pvt. Ltd., the light of the second proviso of Section 40(a) (ia) r.w.s. 201(1) of the Act. We have already held that second proviso has already been held to be retrospective in operation by the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court reported in 377 ITR 635 supra. We hold that if the payees have included the subject mentioned transaction in their income tax returns, then the assessee payer should not be treated as assessee in default and disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act should be deleted in its hands. IF the subject mentioned transaction is not reflected in the income tax returns of the payees,…

SMC Investments Advisors Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-24(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 2905/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jun 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini & Sh. Anil Chaturvediassessment Year: 2015-16 (Through Video Conferencing) Smc Investments Advisors Vs. Acit Ltd., 11/5-B, 3Rd Floor, Circle- 24 (1) Pusa Road, New Delhi New Delhi – 110 005 Pan No. Aabcs 8068 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Ms. Rano Jain, Advocate Respondent By Sh. R. K. Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 17/06/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 22/06/2020 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 06.02.2019 Of The Commission Of Income Tax (A)- Xxv, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under:

Section 143(3)Section 194ISection 40

…at has been paid by the assessee to SMC Comtrade has been included by SMC Comtrade in its return of income and taxes thereon has been paid by it. We find that Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd. reported in (2015) 377 ITR 635 has held that insertion of the second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act is declaratory and curative in nature and to be retrospective with effect from 1st April 2005. It has further held that as the payee/resident has filed its return of income disclosing the payment received by and in which the income earned by it is embedded and has also…

Sankalpan Infrastructure Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-15(3)(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, and appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 6010/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 6010/Mum/2017 & 2400/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13 &2013-14)

For Appellant: ShriSubodhFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 41

…g of Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, ground no. 3 raised by the assessee is dismissed. 20. With regard ground no. 4, by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Rajinder Kumar 362 ITR 241, CIT vrs. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd, 377 ITR 635 and various case law in this respect and also as per the confirmation received from the company that bank has already declared the income in the return of income, we are of the considered view that section 40(a)(ia) of the Act cannot be invoked 18 I.T.A. No. 6010/Mum/2017 & 2400/Mum/2018 Sankalpan Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. in this regard. Accordi…

Brig. Narayan Nayak, Bhubaneswar vs. ACIT-5(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, ITA No.30/CTK/2017 is partly allowed for

ITA 230/CTK/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack05 Jun 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.30/Ctk/2017 & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.230/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Brig. Narayan Nayak, Vs. Dcit, Circle-5(1), Prop: M/S Industrial Security & Bhubaneswar Allied Services, F3-F5, Id Market, Irc Village, Nayapalli, Bhubanesar-751015 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Abapn 3373 Q (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Sahoo, Ca िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Dutta, Dr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/02/2020 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05/06/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am: The Assessee Has Filed The Above Two Appeals, One Is Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A)-2, Dated 27.10.2016 Arising Out Of The Order Passed By The Ao U/S.143(3) Of The Act & Another Is Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 14.04.2019 Arising Out Of The Order Passed By The Ao U/S.271(1)(C) Of The Act. 2. First We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.30/Ctk/2017, Wherein The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds :-

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Sahoo, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 43BSection 44A

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JM & SHRI L.P. SAHU, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं./ITA No.30/CTK/2017 AND आयकर अपीऱ सं./ITA No.230/CTK/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Brig. Narayan Nayak, Vs. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Prop: M/s Industrial Security & Bhubaneswar Allied Services, F3-F5, ID Market, IRC Village, Nayapalli, Bhubanesar-751015 स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN No. : ABAPN 3373 Q (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri P.K.Sahoo, CA िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR सुन…

Brig.Narayan Nayak, Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, ITA No.30/CTK/2017 is partly allowed for

ITA 30/CTK/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack05 Jun 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.30/Ctk/2017 & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.230/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Brig. Narayan Nayak, Vs. Dcit, Circle-5(1), Prop: M/S Industrial Security & Bhubaneswar Allied Services, F3-F5, Id Market, Irc Village, Nayapalli, Bhubanesar-751015 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Abapn 3373 Q (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Sahoo, Ca िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Dutta, Dr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/02/2020 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05/06/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am: The Assessee Has Filed The Above Two Appeals, One Is Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A)-2, Dated 27.10.2016 Arising Out Of The Order Passed By The Ao U/S.143(3) Of The Act & Another Is Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 14.04.2019 Arising Out Of The Order Passed By The Ao U/S.271(1)(C) Of The Act. 2. First We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.30/Ctk/2017, Wherein The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds :-

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Sahoo, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 43BSection 44A

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JM & SHRI L.P. SAHU, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं./ITA No.30/CTK/2017 AND आयकर अपीऱ सं./ITA No.230/CTK/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Brig. Narayan Nayak, Vs. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Prop: M/s Industrial Security & Bhubaneswar Allied Services, F3-F5, ID Market, IRC Village, Nayapalli, Bhubanesar-751015 स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN No. : ABAPN 3373 Q (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri P.K.Sahoo, CA िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR सुन…

The DCIT, Circle-2, Ahmedabad vs. M/S. A One Chemicals, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 521/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Mar 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri T. S. Kapoorआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 521/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.D.R
Section 145ASection 194JSection 40

…ate before the AO to that effect, but the AO rejected the contentions. The appellant contended that the amended provisions related to TDS have retrospective effect as per Hon’ble Delhi High Court judgment in the case of M/s. Ansal Landmark Township Pvt. Ltd. (377 ITR 635) and ACIT Vs. Anagram Capital Ltd. (ITA No. 4531/AHD/2011 dt. 6.11.2015) decided by the Hon’ble ITAT Ahmedabad. Looking to these judgments, the additions made by the AO are not found justified, hence deleted. This ground of appeal is allowed.” 8. The learned CIT(A) has made a finding of fact that as per the amended provisions related to TDS whic…

ITO, Ghaziabad vs. M/S. Rgb Tghcl Jv, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1340/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Dr.B.R.R.Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Dr.Anjula Jain, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Sh.Akul Agarwal, CA
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 43B

…making the disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 5. The Ld.AR for the assessee pointed out that the 2nd proviso inserted u/s 43B of the Act was directory in nature as held by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd reported in 377 ITR 635 (Del.). He also pointed out where the deductee had paid the taxes and filed return of income, there was no merit in making any disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 6. The Ld.DR for the Revenue on the other hand relied on the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in Shri Thomas George Muthoot vs CIT in ITA No.278/2014 order dated 03.07.20…

Patturasu Nagapushanam, Pondicherry vs. ITO Ward 5, Pondicherry

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

ITA 3032/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3032/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Smt. Patturasu Nagapushanam, The Income Tax Officer, No. 17, Pudhu Nagar, Suthukeni, Vs. Ward 5, Pondicherry 605 502. Pondicherry. [Pan:Aespn5193F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 04.02.2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19.02.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Puducherry, Puducherry, Dated 31.08.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2012-13. The Only Effective Ground Raised In The Appeal Of The Assessee Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Made Under Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 197Section 40

…produce necessary certificate on payment of taxes by the recipient on the above payments before the Assessing Officer and after verification of the same, he may allow the deduction in view of the decision in the case of CIT v. Ansal Land Mark Township P. Ltd. 377 ITR 635 (Del) and if the assessee fails to produce the same, the disallowance made under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act stands 4 I.T.A. No. 3032/Chny/18 confirmed. Thus, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on…

Manoj Mittal, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 4596/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Sh. C.S.Anand, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 2(22)(e)Section 50Section 50CSection 69

…the case of Dharamhibhai Sonani Vs. ACIT I.T.A No. 1237/Ahd/2013 ITAT Ahmedabad 20. Copy of Judgement in the case of Jitendra R. Patel Vs. DCIT ITA no. 1932/Ahd/2013 ITAT Ahmedabad 21. Copy of judgement in the case of CIT Vs. Ansal land Mark Township P. Ltd. 377 ITR 635 (Del) Delhi High Court 22. Copy of judgement in the case of CIT Vs. Calcutta Export Company 404 ITR 654 (SC) Supreme Court of India (D.1) In addition, copy of order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, dated 09.08.2019, in the case of Chandra Prakash Jhunjhunwala vs. DCIT for A.Y. 2014-15 ITA No. 2351/Kol/2017 was also filed from the assessee’s sid…

The ITO, Ward-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Bajaj Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed, and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2350/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकरअपीलसं.Ita Nos. 2277/Ahd/2015 "नधा"रणवष"/Asstt. Year: 2010-11 M/S. Bajaj Herbals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito A-401, Samundra Complex, Ward-1(2), 3Rd Floor, Pratyakash- Nr. Hotel Classic Gold, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad Kar-Bhavan, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad- 380015 Pan No. Aaa Cb6 654 J अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "त् यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, & Shri PFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Sharma CIT DR& L.P
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…arges etc. as income and pay tax thereon disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) is not called for. In this regard the assessee relied upon the judgement passed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ansal Land Mark Township Pvt. Ltd. reported in 377 ITR 635(Del). In that view of the matter the order passed by the Learned CIT(A), in our considered opinion, just and proper and without any ambiguity so as to warrant interference. Thus, the order is passed in the affirmative i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. Hence, Revenue’s appeal on this ground is dismissed. Ground Nos.3 and 4:…

M/S. Bajaj Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed, and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2277/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकरअपीलसं.Ita Nos. 2277/Ahd/2015 "नधा"रणवष"/Asstt. Year: 2010-11 M/S. Bajaj Herbals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito A-401, Samundra Complex, Ward-1(2), 3Rd Floor, Pratyakash- Nr. Hotel Classic Gold, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad Kar-Bhavan, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad- 380015 Pan No. Aaa Cb6 654 J अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "त् यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, & Shri PFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Sharma CIT DR& L.P
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…arges etc. as income and pay tax thereon disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) is not called for. In this regard the assessee relied upon the judgement passed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ansal Land Mark Township Pvt. Ltd. reported in 377 ITR 635(Del). In that view of the matter the order passed by the Learned CIT(A), in our considered opinion, just and proper and without any ambiguity so as to warrant interference. Thus, the order is passed in the affirmative i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. Hence, Revenue’s appeal on this ground is dismissed. Ground Nos.3 and 4:…

ACIT, Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai vs. Trans Energy Pvt Ltd, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 149/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jan 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar"नधा(रण वष( /Assessment Year: 2014-15 V. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income M/S.Transenergy Ltd., Tax, No.77/2, Corporate Circle-3(1), Maduravoyal By Pass, New Block, 4Th Floor, Ayanambakkam, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Ambattur Taluk, Nungambakkam Chennai-600095 Chennai-600034 [Pan: Aaact 1150 D] (अपीलाथ+/Appellant) (,-यथ+/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.C.Naresh, CAFor Respondent: Ms.R.Anitha, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 194CSection 194JSection 2

…shall be admitted by AO in the interest of justice. During denovo assessment proceedings, the AO shall also consider the applicability of decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Ansal Land Mark Township Private Limited reported in (2015) 377 ITR 635(Del), against which SLP has been admitted by Hon’ble Supreme Court in (2016) 242 Taxman 5(SC). This ground filed by Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. We order accordingly. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No.149/Chny/2018 for ay: 2014-15 is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on the 22nd…

Avaya India Private Limited, Maharashtra vs. ACIT, Circle-3(2), New Delhi

In the result, to sum up, ITA No

ITA 9131/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[Assessment Year: 2012-13] & [Assessment Year: 2015-16]

For Appellant: A.Y 2012-13For Respondent: Shri Surendra Pal, CIT - DR
Section 143(3)

…owever, the second proviso inserted to section 40a(ia) of the Act has been held to be declaratory and curative and have been given a retrospective effect from 1.4.2005 as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Ansal Land Mark Township [P] Ltd 377 ITR 635. However, it is incumbent upon the assessee to furnish necessary evidences to demonstrate that the payees have shown receipts as their income. 33. We, therefore, restore this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer/TPO. The assessee is directed to furnish necessary evidences and the Assessing Officer/TPO is directed to examine the same and…

M/S. Avaya India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, to sum up, ITA No

ITA 1958/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: FixedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[Assessment Year: 2012-13] & [Assessment Year: 2015-16]

For Appellant: A.Y 2012-13For Respondent: Shri Surendra Pal, CIT - DR
Section 143(3)

…owever, the second proviso inserted to section 40a(ia) of the Act has been held to be declaratory and curative and have been given a retrospective effect from 1.4.2005 as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Ansal Land Mark Township [P] Ltd 377 ITR 635. However, it is incumbent upon the assessee to furnish necessary evidences to demonstrate that the payees have shown receipts as their income. 33. We, therefore, restore this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer/TPO. The assessee is directed to furnish necessary evidences and the Assessing Officer/TPO is directed to examine the same and…

T.E.Abinesh, Chennai vs. ACIT Non Corporate Ward 8(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2561/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2560 & 2561/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anita, JCITFor Respondent: 02.12.2019
Section 194ASection 40

…Coca Cola Beverages P. Ltd., reported in 293 ITR 226 (SC) and also to the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the ITA No.2560 & 2561/Chny/2018 :- 3 -: case of the Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Limited reported in [2015] 377 ITR 635 (Delhi). 4. In reply, the learned Departmental Representative supported the order of the learned Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A). 5. We have considered the rival submission and perused the materials available on record. 6. In view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages P. Ltd., refe…

T.E.Abinesh, Chennai vs. ACIT Non Corporate Ward 8(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2560/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2560 & 2561/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anita, JCITFor Respondent: 02.12.2019
Section 194ASection 40

…Coca Cola Beverages P. Ltd., reported in 293 ITR 226 (SC) and also to the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the ITA No.2560 & 2561/Chny/2018 :- 3 -: case of the Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Limited reported in [2015] 377 ITR 635 (Delhi). 4. In reply, the learned Departmental Representative supported the order of the learned Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A). 5. We have considered the rival submission and perused the materials available on record. 6. In view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages P. Ltd., refe…

M/S. Lal Exports Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part for statistical purpose

ITA 5859/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri Shafiq Khan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Aparna Karan, CITDR
Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 40Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘D’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.5859/Del of 2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s Lal Exports Ltd. vs ACIT, Circle 15(1), Khasra No.150, Chandan Hulla, New Delhi. Delhi. PAN: AAACL9688G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Shafiq Khan, Advocate Department by: Smt. Aparna Karan, CITDR Date of Hearing: 29.08.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 13.11.2019 ORDER PER NARASIMHA K. CHARY, JM The present appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 2.8.2016 passed by the lea…

Dy.C.I.T. 1, Bhilai(Cg) vs. Shri Sandeep Surendran Nair, Bhilai(Cg)

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

ITA 318/BIL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur08 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury,Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.222& 318/Rpr/2014 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11& 2011-12

For Appellant: ShriMakarand Joshi and ShriAniruddhaKavimandanFor Respondent: Smt. AnubhaTahGoel
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 43B

…yees in their returns of income and has paid the taxes on such receipts. The aforesaid contention of the Revenue has not been controverted by Ld. AR. 22. We find that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ansal Land Mark Township P. Ltd. (2015) 377 ITR 635 (Del) has held that disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act is not justified when the payee has filed the return of income and offered the sum received to tax. The relevant observations of Hon’ble High Court reads as under:- “8. It is seen that the issue in these AYs arises in the context of the disallowance by the Assessing Officer of the payment…