CIT v. Eli Lily & Co.

312 ITR 225Supreme Court of India2009#403 most cited

What is CIT v. Eli Lily & Co. authority for?

Section 195 of the Income Tax Act, which mandates tax withholding on payments to non-residents, applies only to sums that are otherwise chargeable to tax under the Act. Tax withholding provisions are not charging provisions.

221

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 371,507 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Eli Lily & Co. · section 195 · TDS · tax withholding · chargeable to tax · non-resident payments · not a charging provision · GE India Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 269SSSection 271DSection 275(1)(c)Section 273BSection 194CSection 132

Issues it is cited on

section 271csection 192section 156assessee in defaultsection 273bsection 271dsection 201(1)section 201(1a)section 195section 19section 201section 194

Judgments citing CIT v. Eli Lily & Co.

M/S Jeevan Telecasting Corpn Ltd, Cochin vs. ACIT, Cochin

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

ITA 610/COCH/2010[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Iype John, CAFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 271C

…ate on which such tax was deductible to the date on which such tax is actually paid. The ld.Counsel for the assessee while advancing his arguments relied on the decision o the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Eli Lilly and Co. (India) P Ltd. (2009) 312 ITR 225 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the last page of its order at page 253 held as under:- We are directing the Assessing Officer to examine each case to ascertain whether the employee-assessee (recipient) has paid the tax due on the home salary/ special allowance(s) received from the foreign company. In case taxes due on home salary/special al…

M/S Jeevan Telecasting Corpn Ltd, Cochin vs. ACIT, Cochin

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

ITA 609/COCH/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Iype John, CAFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 271C

…ate on which such tax was deductible to the date on which such tax is actually paid. The ld.Counsel for the assessee while advancing his arguments relied on the decision o the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Eli Lilly and Co. (India) P Ltd. (2009) 312 ITR 225 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the last page of its order at page 253 held as under:- We are directing the Assessing Officer to examine each case to ascertain whether the employee-assessee (recipient) has paid the tax due on the home salary/ special allowance(s) received from the foreign company. In case taxes due on home salary/special al…

M/S Jeevan Telecasting Corpn Ltd, Cochin vs. ACIT, Cochin

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

ITA 608/COCH/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Iype John, CAFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 271C

…ate on which such tax was deductible to the date on which such tax is actually paid. The ld.Counsel for the assessee while advancing his arguments relied on the decision o the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Eli Lilly and Co. (India) P Ltd. (2009) 312 ITR 225 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the last page of its order at page 253 held as under:- We are directing the Assessing Officer to examine each case to ascertain whether the employee-assessee (recipient) has paid the tax due on the home salary/ special allowance(s) received from the foreign company. In case taxes due on home salary/special al…

M/S Jeevan Telecasting Corpn Ltd, Cochin vs. ACIT, Cochin

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

ITA 607/COCH/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Iype John, CAFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 271C

…ate on which such tax was deductible to the date on which such tax is actually paid. The ld.Counsel for the assessee while advancing his arguments relied on the decision o the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Eli Lilly and Co. (India) P Ltd. (2009) 312 ITR 225 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the last page of its order at page 253 held as under:- We are directing the Assessing Officer to examine each case to ascertain whether the employee-assessee (recipient) has paid the tax due on the home salary/ special allowance(s) received from the foreign company. In case taxes due on home salary/special al…

M/S Jeevan Telecasting Corpn Ltd, Cochin vs. ACIT, Cochin

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

ITA 606/COCH/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Iype John, CAFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 271C

…ate on which such tax was deductible to the date on which such tax is actually paid. The ld.Counsel for the assessee while advancing his arguments relied on the decision o the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Eli Lilly and Co. (India) P Ltd. (2009) 312 ITR 225 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the last page of its order at page 253 held as under:- We are directing the Assessing Officer to examine each case to ascertain whether the employee-assessee (recipient) has paid the tax due on the home salary/ special allowance(s) received from the foreign company. In case taxes due on home salary/special al…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, (It) -Circle -1, Pune vs. Koso India Pvt.Ltd, Nashik

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1650/PUN/2017[2016-17 (27Q-Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Sept 2019

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1650/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Shashank DeogadkarFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Shah
Section 200ASection 201Section 206ASection 90(2)

…ich casts a duty on the assessee to deduct tax at source on payments to a non-resident cannot be looked upon as a charging provision. In-fact, in the context of section 195 of the Act also, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Eli Lily & Co. [2009] 312 ITR 225/ 178 Taxman 505 observed that the provisions of tax withholding i.e. section 195 of the Act would apply only to sums which are otherwise chargeable to tax under the Act. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GE India Technology Center (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2010] 327 ITR 456/ 193 Taxman 234/7 taxmann.com 18 held that the provisions of DTAAs along w…

Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT, Circle- 2(2)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

ITA 3327/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G. K. Dhall, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

…company on the basis of the agreement between the foreign company and the Indian company and were under the latter's control were employees of the Indian company. d) The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Eli Lilly and Co. (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2009] 312 ITR 225 held that part of the salaries received in Netherlands by the expatriate employees seconded to India were for services rendered in India and, therefore liable, to tax in India. The Appellant is seeking to draw support from the above judgment, notwithstanding that the employees seconded by the Appellant to LGEIL had lien on the employment with the…

M/S. Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT (International Taxation), Noida

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

ITA 1946/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G. K. Dhall, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

…company on the basis of the agreement between the foreign company and the Indian company and were under the latter's control were employees of the Indian company. d) The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Eli Lilly and Co. (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2009] 312 ITR 225 held that part of the salaries received in Netherlands by the expatriate employees seconded to India were for services rendered in India and, therefore liable, to tax in India. The Appellant is seeking to draw support from the above judgment, notwithstanding that the employees seconded by the Appellant to LGEIL had lien on the employment with the…

Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT, Circle- Noida, International Taxation, Noida

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

ITA 6916/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: HeardITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G. K. Dhall, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

…company on the basis of the agreement between the foreign company and the Indian company and were under the latter's control were employees of the Indian company. d) The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Eli Lilly and Co. (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2009] 312 ITR 225 held that part of the salaries received in Netherlands by the expatriate employees seconded to India were for services rendered in India and, therefore liable, to tax in India. The Appellant is seeking to draw support from the above judgment, notwithstanding that the employees seconded by the Appellant to LGEIL had lien on the employment with the…

ACIT 11(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Total Oil India P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 4300/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri S. Usmani (DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)

…e charging Sections of that Act de hors the machinery Sections. The Act is to be read as an integrated Code. 17. Section 195 appears in Chapter XVII which deals with collection and recovery. As held in the case of C.I.T. Vs. Eli Lilly & Co. (India) (P.) Ltd. [312 ITR 225] the provisions for deduction of TAS which is in Chapter XVII dealing with collection of taxes and the charging provisions of the I.T. Act form one single integral, inseparable Code and, therefore, the provisions relating to TDS applies only to those sums which are "chargeable to tax" under the I.T. Act. It is true that the judgment in Eli Lilly…

Total Oil India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 8(3), Mumbai

ITA 4135/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri S. Usmani (DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)

…e charging Sections of that Act de hors the machinery Sections. The Act is to be read as an integrated Code. 17. Section 195 appears in Chapter XVII which deals with collection and recovery. As held in the case of C.I.T. Vs. Eli Lilly & Co. (India) (P.) Ltd. [312 ITR 225] the provisions for deduction of TAS which is in Chapter XVII dealing with collection of taxes and the charging provisions of the I.T. Act form one single integral, inseparable Code and, therefore, the provisions relating to TDS applies only to those sums which are "chargeable to tax" under the I.T. Act. It is true that the judgment in Eli Lilly…

ITO TDS (International Taxation), Noida vs. M/S Continental India Ltd., Meerut

In the result, the appeals filed by the in ITA Nos

ITA 5633/DEL/2016[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri K.N. Chary[Assessment Year: 2014-15] & [Assessment Year: 2015-16] The I.T.O [Tds] Vs. Continental India Ltd International Taxation Nh 58, Meerut Roorke Road Noida Modipuram, Meerut Pan: Aafcm 5366 B [Appellant] [Respondent] Date Of Hearing : 14.05.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.05.2019

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Abhiskek Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 206ASection 90(2)

…ase of Azadi Bachao Andolan and Others (supra). Thus, in so far as the applicability of the scop W.P.(C) 5908/2015 Page 10 of 11 context of section 195 of the Act also, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Eli Lily & Co., MANU/SC/0487/2009 : (2009) 312 ITR 225 (SC) observed that the provisions of tax withholding i.e. section 195 of the Act would apply only to sums which are otherwise chargeable to tax under the Act. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GE India Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT,MANU/SC/0688/2010 : (2010) 327 ITR 456 (SC) held that the provisions of DTAAs along with the sections 4…

ITO TDS (International Taxation), Noida vs. M/S Continental India Ltd., Meerut

In the result, the appeals filed by the in ITA Nos

ITA 5632/DEL/2016[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri K.N. Chary[Assessment Year: 2014-15] & [Assessment Year: 2015-16] The I.T.O [Tds] Vs. Continental India Ltd International Taxation Nh 58, Meerut Roorke Road Noida Modipuram, Meerut Pan: Aafcm 5366 B [Appellant] [Respondent] Date Of Hearing : 14.05.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.05.2019

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Abhiskek Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 206ASection 90(2)

…ase of Azadi Bachao Andolan and Others (supra). Thus, in so far as the applicability of the scop W.P.(C) 5908/2015 Page 10 of 11 context of section 195 of the Act also, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Eli Lily & Co., MANU/SC/0487/2009 : (2009) 312 ITR 225 (SC) observed that the provisions of tax withholding i.e. section 195 of the Act would apply only to sums which are otherwise chargeable to tax under the Act. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GE India Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT,MANU/SC/0688/2010 : (2010) 327 ITR 456 (SC) held that the provisions of DTAAs along with the sections 4…

M/S at & T Global Betwork Services (India) Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 4882/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh[A.Y 2008-09] At &T Global Network Services [India] Vs. The Dy. C.I.T Pvt Ltd, Vatika Triangle Circle - 2 (1) 3Rd Floor, Sushant Lok - I New Delhi Block A, Gurgaon Pan: Aafca 8810 L [A.Y 2008-09] The Dy. C.I.T Vs. At &T Global Network Services Circle 2(1) [India] Pvt Ltd, Vatika Triangle 3Rd Floor, Sushant Lok - I New Delhi Block A, Gurgaon Pan: Aafca 8810 L (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kanchan Kaushal, Adv Ms. Chinu Bhasin, Ca Department By : Shri H.K. Choudhary, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Shri Kanchan Kaushal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 153Section 234B

…are not chargeable lo tax m India. Reliance in this regard, amongst others, is pieced on the following Judicial precedents: CE India Technology Centre Private Limited 327ITR 453 (SC); Transmission Corporation of A.P. Lid 239 ITR 537 (SC); EM LiMy & Company (312 ITR 225); Ship Breaking Corporation (314 ITR 309)(SC); Accordingly, In the Instant case as well, it needs to be first established that Inter-group charges paid by AT&T GNS to AT&T CSI Inc. are chargeable to tax in the hands of AT&T CSI Inc. in India. Since AT&T CSI Inc. qualifies as a tax resident on US, taxability of the aforesaid payments in the hand…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (It) Circle-1(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Beml Limited, Bangalore

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is dismissed

ITA 1398/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. R. E. Balasubramanyam, CAFor Respondent: Shri. R. N. Siddappaji, Addl. CIT
Section 195Section 200ASection 206ASection 90(2)

…the assessee to deduct tax at source on payments to a non-resident cannot be looked upon as a charging provision. In fact, in the context of section 195 of the Act also, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Eli Lily & Co MANU/SC/0487/2009 : (2009) 312 ITR 225 (SC) observed that the provisions of tax withholding i.e. section 195:c the Act would apply only to sums which are otherwise chargeable to tax under the Act. The Hon'ble Supreme Cow in the case of GE India Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT, [(2010) 327 ITR 456 SC) = [TS-201-SC-2010-01 held that the provisions of DTAAs along with the sections 4,…

Giesecke & Devrient (India) Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2544/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(10)

…payments in question were made prior to circular No. 7/2009, no reason to interfere with the order passed by the tribunal deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer under Section 40(a)(i). CIT versus Eli Lilly Company (India) Private Limited, (2009) 312 ITR 225 (SC) ; G.E India Technologies Centre Private Limited versus CIT, (2010) 327 ITR 456 (SC), CIT versus 45 Toshoku Limited, (1980) 125 ITR 525 (SC), Catholic Syrian Bank Limited versus Commissioner of Income Tax, (2012) 3 SCC 784, followed. (Paras 4, 9, 10) We, accordingly, decide this issue in favour of the assessee. 28. Charging of interest u/…

Central Electronics Ltd., Uttar Pradesh vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4205/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 195(1)Section 32Section 40Section 9

…considering the Circulars issued by the CBDT and judgments of various High Courts and Supreme Court, held as under: “…………………………………. In the light of the judgments of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Eli Lilly and Co. (India) P. Ltd. [2009], 312 ITR 225 (SC) and GE India Technology Centre P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [2010] 327 ITR 456 (SC), once the income was not exigible or chargeable to tax, TDS was not required to be deducted. Money paid to the third parties, who did not have any office or permanent establishment in India, was exempt and not chargeable to tax. Thus, on the said pa…

Mrs.Tarulata Shah, Mumbai vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) Range-2(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 6464/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mrs. Sonal Shah Joint Commissioner Of 17/18, Swastik Bldg. 4Th Vs. Income Tax (Tds) Floor, N.S. Road, No. 1. Range-3, Mumbai. Jvpd Scheme, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai-400056. Pan No. Aqops1855M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mrs. Tarulata Shah Joint Commissioner Of 21/22, Swastik Bldg. Vs. Income Tax (Tds) 5Thfloor, N.S. Road, No. 1. Range-3, Mumbai. Jvpd Scheme, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai-400056. Pan No. Aadps0777K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Raveevwaglay, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Chaudhary Arunkumar Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 29/11/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 25/02/2019

For Appellant: Mr. RaveevWaglay, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Chaudhary Arunkumar Singh, DR
Section 143(3)Section 271C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mrs. Sonal Shah Joint Commissioner of 17/18, Swastik Bldg. 4th Vs. Income Tax (TDS) Floor, N.S. Road, No. 1. Range-3, Mumbai. JVPD Scheme, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai-400056. PAN No. AQOPS1855M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mrs. Tarulata Shah Joint Commissioner of 21/22, Swastik Bldg. Vs. Income Tax (TDS) 5thFloor, N.S. Road, No. 1. Range-3, Mumbai. JVPD Scheme, Vile Parle (W), Mu…

Mrs. Sonal Shah, Mumbai vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) Range-3, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 6462/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mrs. Sonal Shah Joint Commissioner Of 17/18, Swastik Bldg. 4Th Vs. Income Tax (Tds) Floor, N.S. Road, No. 1. Range-3, Mumbai. Jvpd Scheme, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai-400056. Pan No. Aqops1855M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mrs. Tarulata Shah Joint Commissioner Of 21/22, Swastik Bldg. Vs. Income Tax (Tds) 5Thfloor, N.S. Road, No. 1. Range-3, Mumbai. Jvpd Scheme, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai-400056. Pan No. Aadps0777K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Raveevwaglay, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Chaudhary Arunkumar Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 29/11/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 25/02/2019

For Appellant: Mr. RaveevWaglay, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Chaudhary Arunkumar Singh, DR
Section 143(3)Section 271C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mrs. Sonal Shah Joint Commissioner of 17/18, Swastik Bldg. 4th Vs. Income Tax (TDS) Floor, N.S. Road, No. 1. Range-3, Mumbai. JVPD Scheme, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai-400056. PAN No. AQOPS1855M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mrs. Tarulata Shah Joint Commissioner of 21/22, Swastik Bldg. Vs. Income Tax (TDS) 5thFloor, N.S. Road, No. 1. Range-3, Mumbai. JVPD Scheme, Vile Parle (W), Mu…

M/S Bg Exploration & Production India Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO (TDS), Dehradun

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2443/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jan 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 153Section 192Section 200Section 201Section 221Section 9

…e charging sections of that Act de hors the machinery sections. The Act is to be read as an integrated code. Section 195 appears in Chapter XVII which deals with collection and recovery. As held in the case of CIT v. Eli Lilly and Co. (India) (P.) Ltd. [2009] 312 ITR 225 the provisions for deduction of TAS which are in Chapter XVII dealing with collection of taxes and the charging provisions of the Income-tax Act form one single integral, inseparable code and, therefore, the provisions relating to TDS apply only to those sums which are "chargeable to tax" under the Income-tax Act. It is true that the judgment in…