CIT v. Hewlett-Packard India Sales (P.) Ltd.

382 ITR 496High Court#14172 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Judgments citing CIT v. Hewlett-Packard India Sales (P.) Ltd.

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAHARA INDIA MASS COMMUNICATION LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 2480/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2026AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 40

…disallowance on account of short deduction of TDS is allowed. Hence, Ground No. 10 to13are partly allowed.” It was similarly held in the following cases: - CIT v. Kishore Rao & Others (HUF): 387 ITR 196 (Kar HC) - CIT v. Hewlett-Packard India Sales (P.) Ltd.: 382 ITR 496 (Kar HC) - CIT v. S. K. Tekriwal: 361 ITR 432 (Cal HC) - Three Star Granites (P.) Ltd v. ACIT [32 ITR(T) 398] (ITAT Cochin) - M.V.A. SeetharamaRaju v. DCIT [194 ITD 359] (ITAT Chennai) In view of the above facts and legal position, it is respectfully submitted that in the assessee’s case, there are two types of payment: 1. Payment of Rs. 1,58,365…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAHARA INDIA MASS COMMUNICATION LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 2479/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2026AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 40

…disallowance on account of short deduction of TDS is allowed. Hence, Ground No. 10 to13are partly allowed.” It was similarly held in the following cases: - CIT v. Kishore Rao & Others (HUF): 387 ITR 196 (Kar HC) - CIT v. Hewlett-Packard India Sales (P.) Ltd.: 382 ITR 496 (Kar HC) - CIT v. S. K. Tekriwal: 361 ITR 432 (Cal HC) - Three Star Granites (P.) Ltd v. ACIT [32 ITR(T) 398] (ITAT Cochin) - M.V.A. SeetharamaRaju v. DCIT [194 ITD 359] (ITAT Chennai) In view of the above facts and legal position, it is respectfully submitted that in the assessee’s case, there are two types of payment: 1. Payment of Rs. 1,58,365…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAHARA INDIA MASS COMMUNICATION LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 2478/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2026AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 40

…disallowance on account of short deduction of TDS is allowed. Hence, Ground No. 10 to13are partly allowed.” It was similarly held in the following cases: - CIT v. Kishore Rao & Others (HUF): 387 ITR 196 (Kar HC) - CIT v. Hewlett-Packard India Sales (P.) Ltd.: 382 ITR 496 (Kar HC) - CIT v. S. K. Tekriwal: 361 ITR 432 (Cal HC) - Three Star Granites (P.) Ltd v. ACIT [32 ITR(T) 398] (ITAT Cochin) - M.V.A. SeetharamaRaju v. DCIT [194 ITD 359] (ITAT Chennai) In view of the above facts and legal position, it is respectfully submitted that in the assessee’s case, there are two types of payment: 1. Payment of Rs. 1,58,365…

M/S. NEEMRANA HOTELS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 98/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

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

Section 194Section 234BSection 40

…Act. We also note that a similar view has been taken by the ITAT Mumbai Bench in the case of DCIT vs. Chandabhoy reported in (2012) 17 taxmann. Com 158(Mum.) and Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in CIT-LTU vs. Hewlett- Packard India Sales (P.) Ltd. reported in 382 ITR 496 (Kar). Accordingy, respectfully following the ratio of the judgments as aforesaid, we allow ground no. 4 of the assessee’s appeal.” The issues are identical in the present case. Therefore the matter is squarely covered and hence appeal of the assessee is allowed. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the Open C…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NEEMRANA HOTELS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4554/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2010-11

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194Section 194CSection 194ISection 40Section 40A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘E’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 DCIT, CIRCLE 13(1), Vs. M/S NEEMRANA HOTELS PVT. ROOM NO. 212, C.R. BUILDING, LTD. I.P. ESTATE, A-58, NIZAMUDDIN EAST, NEW DELHI NEW DELHI – 110 013 (PAN: AAACN0674J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Department by Ms. Rinku Singh, Sr. DR Assessee by Sh. Sanat Kapoor, Adv. ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the Order dated 28.5.2014 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-XVI, New Delhi relating to assessment year 2010-11 o…

M/S NEEMRANA HOTELS PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, ground no. 4 stands allowed

ITA 2893/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 194CSection 194ISection 40Section 40a

…te that a similar view has been taken by the ITAT Mumbai Bench in the case of DCIT vs. Chandabhoy & Jassobhoy reported in (2012) 17 taxmann.com 158 (Mum.) and Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in CIT -LTU vs. Hewlett-Packard India Sales (P.) Ltd. reported in 382 ITR 496 (Kar). Accordingly, respectfully following the ratio of the judgments as aforesaid, we allow ground no. 4 of the assessee’s appeal. 6.0 In the result, ground no. 4 stands allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 27th November, 2018. (O.P. KANT) (SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 27th NOVEMBER, 2018 ‘GS’…

DHANASHEKAR MUNISWAMY vs. ACIT,

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1135/BANG/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Sept 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri. Vijay Pal Rao & Shri. Inturi Rama Raoi.T.A No.1135/Bang/2013 (Assessment Year : 2008-09) Dhanashekar Muniswamy, No.52A, 2Nd Cross, 2Nd Main, Prakash Nagar, Bengaluru 560 021 .. Appellant Pan : Ahbpm4579A V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle -6(1), Bangalore .. Respondent Assessee By : Shri. G. Bhaskar, Advocate Revenue By : Smt. Swapna Das, Jcit Heard On : 23.08.2016 Pronounced On : 08.09.2016 O R D E R Per Vijay Pal Rao:

For Appellant: Shri. G. Bhaskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Swapna Das, JCIT
Section 40

…al has decided this issue by holding that Section 40(a)(ia) cannot be applied only for the reason that there was a short-deduction of tax. He has then referred to the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. HP (India) Sales P. Ltd [382 ITR 496] and submitted that the similar view taken by the Tribunal has been upheld by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court. 12. On the other hand the Ld. DR has relied upon the orders of the authorities below and submitted that there is a concurrent finding by the AO as well as the CIT (A) that the payment in question was made as a composite payment un…

CIT v. Hewlett-Packard India Sales (P.) Ltd. (382 ITR 496) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax