What is CIT v. Idea Cellular Ltd. authority for?

Discounts offered to distributors under a tightly controlled relationship constitute commission and are subject to tax deduction at source under Section 194H of the Income-tax Act.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Idea Cellular Ltd.?

155 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Idea Cellular Ltd. (325 ITR 148), spanning 2014 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Idea Cellular Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 194H, Section 40(a)(ia), Section 37(1), Section 143(3), Section 35ABB, Section 271(1)(c).

CIT v. Idea Cellular Ltd. (325 ITR 148)

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) Circle-2(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Idea Cellular Limited, Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2206/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri R.N. Siddappaji, Addl. CIT (DR)For Respondent: Shri Ronak G. Doshi, CA

Section 201(1)

…onsidered the same judgement of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court rendered in the case of Bharti Airtel Ltd. Vs. DCIT (supra) and has also considered the judgement of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Idea Cellular Ltd. as reported in (2010) 325 ITR 148 (Delhi). He further pointed out that it is noted by Hon’ble Calcutta High Court that Hon’ble Delhi High Court has considered the judgement of Hon’ble Kerala High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Director, Prasar Bharti as reported in (2010) 325 ITR 205 (Kerala) and also another judgement of Hon’ble Kerala High Court rendered in the case of V…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) Circle-2(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Idea Cellular Limited, Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1942/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri R.N. Siddappaji, Addl. CIT (DR)For Respondent: Shri Ronak G. Doshi, CA

Section 201(1)

…onsidered the same judgement of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court rendered in the case of Bharti Airtel Ltd. Vs. DCIT (supra) and has also considered the judgement of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Idea Cellular Ltd. as reported in (2010) 325 ITR 148 (Delhi). He further pointed out that it is noted by Hon’ble Calcutta High Court that Hon’ble Delhi High Court has considered the judgement of Hon’ble Kerala High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Director, Prasar Bharti as reported in (2010) 325 ITR 205 (Kerala) and also another judgement of Hon’ble Kerala High Court rendered in the case of V…

Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed with above direction

ITA 412/DEL/2015[2007-08 (F.Y.- 2006-07)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2019

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishivodafone Mobile Services Ltd, Vs. Acit, (Earlier Known As Vodafone Circle-51(1), Essar Mobile Services Ltd), New Delhi Circle Office, C-48, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-Ii, New Delhi Pan: Aaacs4457Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sparsh Bhargava, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeet Singh, CIT DR

Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)Section 3

…therefore, the question of TDS of such discount amounting to Rs. 128351086/- does not arise. 4. The ld AO rejected the contention of the assessee since the issue is covered by the decision of the Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Idea Cellular 325 ITR 148. Therefore, the ld AO held that assessee is an „Assessee in default‟ and therefore, worked out TDS liability along with interest of Rs. 10810220/- with respect to commission paid to distributors. The ld AO further noted that relevant tax has already been paid by recipient as argued by the assessee, is also not applicable, as the assessee is to sa…

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

…h 31,2011. 19. Mr. Dileep Shivpuri, the learned senior standing counsel for the Revenue, however, seeks to advance a different line of argument. According to him the action taken by the Department was pursuant to a decision in CIT v. Idea Cellular Ltd. [2010] 325 ITR 148 (Delhi) where the amounts paid to the channel partners for the pre-paid cards and other products was held to be "commission" by the court within the meaning of section 194H of the Act. It is stated that it is consequent upon the said decision that the Department issued the impugned notices to these petitioners and that thisy was permissible in te…

Sabri Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., Baroda vs. The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Baroda

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

ITA 1019/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Nov 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1019/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13) Sabri Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., Acit, बनाम/ A/2/236, Gidc, Nandesari, Circle 2(1)(1), Vs. Baroda – 391 340. Baroda. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccs 9406 K .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri M. J. Shah, A.R. अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr. D.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By:

For Appellant: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: 04/10/2018

Section 143(3)Section 28Section 36(1)(va)Section 36(2)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘Mh* Mh* Mh* अहमदाबाद । Mh* IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ D ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD ds le{kA LkoZJh oZJh oZJh olhe oZJh olhe olhe vgen olhe vgen vgen] ys[kk lnL; , vgen ] ys[kk lnL; , ] ys[kk lnL; ,oaoaoaoa Ek/Ek/Ek/Ek/kqferk ] ys[kk lnL; , kqferk kqferk jkW; kqferk jkW; jkW;] U; jkW; ] U; ] U;kfkfkfkf;d lnL; ] U; ;d lnL; ;d lnL; ds le{kA ;d lnL; ds le{kA ds le{kA BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SMT MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1019/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13) Sabri Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., ACIT, बनाम/ A/2/236,…

Tata Sky Ltd., Mumbai vs. A.C.I.T.(TDS) RG.3(1), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed and the Revenue’s appeal stands

ITA 6923/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sunil M. LalaFor Respondent: Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy

Section 194CSection 194HSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)Section 40

…ati Cellular Ltd, 294 ITR (AT) 283, (Kolkata ITAT) (c) Bharti Cellular Ltd. Vs. ACIT, 244 CTR 185 (Cat.) (d) BPL Mobile Cellular Ltd, Writ Petition No. 29202/2005 (Ker. HC) (e) Vodafone Essar Cellular Vs. ACIT, 332 ITR 255 (Ker.) (0 CIT Vs. idea Cellular Ltd, 325 ITR 148 (Del.) (g) CIT Vs. Durga Prasad More, 82 ITR 540 (SC) 8. The AO thereafter held that the facts of the present case are identical to the facts of above cases, where the courts have held that the nature of payment by telecom operators to the distributors for recharge coupons, prepaid SIM cards etc. is on account of commission as defined u/s. 194H…

Aditya Birla Power Co.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 8(1), Mumbai

ITA 1115/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1115/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2007-08) Aditya Birla Power Company Limited Assistant Commissioner Of C-1, Aditya Birla Centre Income Tax -8(1) बनाम/ Room No.204, 2Nd Floor S.K. Ahire Marg, Worli Vs. Mumbai-400 030 Aaykar Bhavan Mumbai-400 020 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Aabcb-7067-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Revenue By : Rajesh Kumar Yadav,Ld.Dr Assessee By : Yogesh Thar & Hardik Nirmal, Ld.Ar’S सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 02/07/2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 07/09/2018 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Yogesh Thar & Hardik Nirmal, Ld.AR’sFor Respondent: Rajesh Kumar Yadav,Ld.DR

Section 143(3)Section 28Section 36Section 36(2)Section 37(1)

…ITA No.1115/Mum/2012 Aditya Birla Power Company Limited Assessment Year-2007-08 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ए” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI "ी सी .नाग" "साद, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JM AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1115/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2007-08) Aditya Birla Power Company Limited Assistant Commissioner of C-1, Aditya Birla Centre Income Tax -8(1) बनाम/ Room No.204, 2nd Floor S.K. Ahire Marg, Worli Vs. Mumbai-400 030 Aaykar Bhavan Mumbai-400 020 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.…

Nexgenix (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 8(2), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 5242/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shr666666I N.K Pradhanm/S. Nexgenix (India) Pvt. Ltd. Unit No.149, Sdf–V, Seepz ……………. Appellant Andheri (E), Mumbai 400 096 Pan – Aabcn3687N V/S Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Range–8(2), Mumbai M/S. Nexgenix (India) Pvt. Ltd. Unit No.149, Sdf–V, Seepz ……………. Appellant Andheri (E), Mumbai 400 096 Pan – Aabcn3687N V/S Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Range–8(2), Mumbai M/S. Nexgenix (India) Pvt. Ltd. Unit No.149, Sdf–V, Seepz ……………. Appellant Andheri (E), Mumbai 400 096 Pan – Aabcn3687N V/S Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Range–8(2), Mumbai

For Appellant: Shri R.C. JainFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai

Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHR666666I N.K PRADHAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. Nexgenix (India) Pvt. Ltd. Unit no.149, SDF–V, Seepz ……………. Appellant Andheri (E), Mumbai 400 096 PAN – AABCN3687N v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Range–8(2), Mumbai M/s. Nexgenix (India) Pvt. Ltd. Unit no.149, SDF–V, Seepz ……………. Appellant Andheri (E), Mumbai 400 096 PAN – AABCN3687N v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Range–8(2), Mumbai M/s. Nexgenix (India) Pvt. Ltd. Unit no.149, SDF–V, Seepz ……………. Appellant Andheri (E), Mumba…

Rakesh Kumar, New Delhi vs. CIT, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3386/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O. P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Yadav, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Deepali Chandra, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 194Section 194HSection 263

…e of products but the discount offered by its assessee to his dealers and sub-dealers has to be treated in the nature of commission. Ld. CIT has also referred to the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Idea Cellular, reported in (2010) 325 ITR 148 and also ITAT Chennai Bench decision in the case of Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd., reported in 141 TTJ 461. He further noted that assessee himself labeled the payment as incentive/commission while debiting the amount in the P&L account, and therefore, provision of Section 194H is clearly applicable and since assessee is not deducted TDS the disall…

Idea Cellular Ltd, Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, TDS Circle, Ward-1(1), Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals under consideration are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1446/HYD/2015[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Jul 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Ronak G. DoshiFor Respondent: Shri P. Chandrasekhar

Section 133ASection 191Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

…n tum sold or are remained unsold. • For the A.Ys 2004-05 to 2009-10, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Hyderabad Tribunal, vide it's order dated May 23, 2014 [(66 SOT 184 (THyd URO)], has, following the order of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Assessee's own case (325 ITR 148) and Hon'ble Jurisidctional Andhra Pradesh High Court's order in the case of Vodafone Essar South Ltd. (ITA 291/2013), held the discount allowed to prepaid distributors to be in the nature of commission within the meaning of section 194H and accordingly assessee to be as assessee-in-default for non-deduction of tax at source U/S 201(1) r.w.s 194H…

Idea Cellular Ltd, Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, TDS Circle, Ward-1(1), Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals under consideration are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1445/HYD/2015[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Jul 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Ronak G. DoshiFor Respondent: Shri P. Chandrasekhar

Section 133ASection 191Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

…n tum sold or are remained unsold. • For the A.Ys 2004-05 to 2009-10, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Hyderabad Tribunal, vide it's order dated May 23, 2014 [(66 SOT 184 (THyd URO)], has, following the order of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Assessee's own case (325 ITR 148) and Hon'ble Jurisidctional Andhra Pradesh High Court's order in the case of Vodafone Essar South Ltd. (ITA 291/2013), held the discount allowed to prepaid distributors to be in the nature of commission within the meaning of section 194H and accordingly assessee to be as assessee-in-default for non-deduction of tax at source U/S 201(1) r.w.s 194H…

M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Chandigarh vs. ITO TDS-II, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 340/CHANDI/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms.Annapurna Guptam/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Tds-Ii, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The A.C.I.T.(Tds), Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A & M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The A.C.I.T.(Tds), Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anil BhallaFor Respondent: Shri Ram Mohan Singh, CIT DR

Section 133ASection 194Section 194CSection 194HSection 194JSection 201(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH ‘A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Plot No.21, I.T. Park, TDS-II, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. PAN: AAACB2894G TAN: PTLB10577A M/s Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The A.C.I.T.(TDS), Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. PAN: AAACB2894G TAN: PTLB10577A & M/s Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The A.C.I.T.(TDS), Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. PAN: AAACB2894G TAN: PTLB10577A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appell…

M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Chandigarh vs. ACIT (TDS), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 217/CHANDI/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms.Annapurna Guptam/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Tds-Ii, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The A.C.I.T.(Tds), Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A & M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The A.C.I.T.(Tds), Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anil BhallaFor Respondent: Shri Ram Mohan Singh, CIT DR

Section 133ASection 194Section 194CSection 194HSection 194JSection 201(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH ‘A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Plot No.21, I.T. Park, TDS-II, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. PAN: AAACB2894G TAN: PTLB10577A M/s Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The A.C.I.T.(TDS), Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. PAN: AAACB2894G TAN: PTLB10577A & M/s Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The A.C.I.T.(TDS), Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. PAN: AAACB2894G TAN: PTLB10577A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appell…

M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Chandigarh vs. ACIT (TDS), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 216/CHANDI/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms.Annapurna Guptam/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Tds-Ii, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The A.C.I.T.(Tds), Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A & M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The A.C.I.T.(Tds), Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. Pan: Aaacb2894G Tan: Ptlb10577A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anil BhallaFor Respondent: Shri Ram Mohan Singh, CIT DR

Section 133ASection 194Section 194CSection 194HSection 194JSection 201(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH ‘A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Plot No.21, I.T. Park, TDS-II, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. PAN: AAACB2894G TAN: PTLB10577A M/s Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The A.C.I.T.(TDS), Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. PAN: AAACB2894G TAN: PTLB10577A & M/s Bharti Airtel Limited, Vs. The A.C.I.T.(TDS), Plot No.21, I.T. Park, Chandigarh. Sector 26, Chandigarh. PAN: AAACB2894G TAN: PTLB10577A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appell…

Smt. Sarla Gupta, Jagdalpur (Cg) vs. I.T.O., Jagdalpur (Cg)

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years

ITA 110/BIL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Assessment Year: 2008-09 Smt. Sarla Gupta, The Income Tax Officer, W/O Late Mukesh Gupta, Aayakar Bhawan, Prop. M/S Electronics Traders, Behind Jhankar Tlkies, Vadhera Complex, Vs. Civil Lines, Jagdalpur (C.G.) Jagdalpaur (C.G.) Pan: Adcpg9930C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.R. Rao (Advocate) Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 09/03/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 25/05/2018

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar (DR)

Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 194HSection 40

…vider namely, BSNL. This in itself to have given a reason to invoke the provisions under Chapter XVIIB demolishes the stand taken by the learned CIT (A) after relying on the decision of Vodafone ESSAR Cellular Ltd. (supra) and CIT v. Idea Cellular Ltd. (2010) 325 ITR 148 (Del). It is not the case of the service provider to keep track of its commission foregone at the same selling price of its products which are shared amongst the various franchisees and sub-franchisees would lost its identity as commission in the first place and also cannot be appreciated as a matter of contract between the service provider and t…

DCIT, Cir-6(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 3017/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil MalaviyaFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Patankar

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 40

…discount on MRP given by the assessee to the distributor on sale of prepaid sim card and RCVs is in the nature of commission as per section 194H of the Act. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT v/s Idea Cellular Ltd.[2010] 325 ITR 148, and the decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in case of Bharti Cellular Ltd. v/s ACIT[2013] 354 ITR 507, the Assessing Officer ultimately held that the discount given to the dealers is in the nature of commission on which tax was deductible at source under section 194H of the Act. Accordingly, he made disallowance under section 40(a)(ia)…

ACIT - 8(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Tata Teleservices (M) Ltd., Navi Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 5031/MUM/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil MalaviyaFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Patankar

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 40

…discount on MRP given by the assessee to the distributor on sale of prepaid sim card and RCVs is in the nature of commission as per section 194H of the Act. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT v/s Idea Cellular Ltd.[2010] 325 ITR 148, and the decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in case of Bharti Cellular Ltd. v/s ACIT[2013] 354 ITR 507, the Assessing Officer ultimately held that the discount given to the dealers is in the nature of commission on which tax was deductible at source under section 194H of the Act. Accordingly, he made disallowance under section 40(a)(ia)…

DCIT TDS 1(1), Mumbai vs. Bharat Business Channels Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee in both the years are allowed

ITA 7047/MUM/2012[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm

Section 194CSection 194HSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)

…CIT [(2010)332 ITR 255 (Ker)]. The same approach has been adopted by some various other Hon'ble non jurisdictional High Courts as well, such as in the cases of Bharti Cellular Limited Vs ACIT [(2013) 354 ITR 507 (Cal)] and CIT Vs Idea Cellular Limited [(2010) 325 ITR 148 (Del)]. In the case of Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd (supra) Their Lordships have, inter alia, observed as follows :- 4. The main question to be considered is whether Section 194H is applicable for the "discount" given by the assessee to the distributors in the course of selling Sim Cards and Recharge coupons under prepaid scheme against advance pa…

DCIT 6(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Clear Trip Travel Services P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 85/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit, M/S Clear Trip Travel Pvt. Circle-6(2)(1), Ltd. बनाम/ R. No.563, Aayakar Bhavan Unit No.1, Ground Floor, Vs. M.K. Road, Dtc Bldg, Sitaram Mills Mumbai-400020 Compound, N.M. Johi Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No.Aaccc6016B

Section 133ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)Section 40

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, ‘सी’,मुंबई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “C”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी जी. मंजूनाथ, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri JOGINDER SINGH, Judicial Member, and Shri G. MANJUNATHA, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2011-12 DCIT, M/s Clear Trip Travel Pvt. Circle-6(2)(1), Ltd. बनाम/ R. No.563, Aayakar Bhavan Unit No.1, Ground Floor, Vs. M.K. Road, DTC Bldg, Sitaram Mills Mumbai-400020 Compound, N.M. Johi Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No.AACCC6016B राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by Shri H.N.Singh CIT-DR "नधा"रती क…

ACIT, Cir-3(TDS), Kolkata vs. Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd. (Formerly Known As Vodafone South Ltd.), Kolkata

Appeals are partly allowed and that of Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 233/KOL/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2017AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 191Section 194HSection 201(1)Section 250

…, of the franchisee towards assessee subsists. There has been indirect payment by the assessee to the franchisee of the commission and the same is attractable under s. 194H.—CIT vs. Idea Cellular Ltd. (2010) 230 CTR (Del) 43 : (2010) 35 DTR (Del) 219 : (2010) 325 ITR 148 (Del) and Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd. vs. Asstt. CIT (2010) 235 CTR (Ker) 393 : (2010) 45 DTR (Ker) 217 : (2010) 194 Taxman 518 (Ker) concurred with; Ahmedabad Stamp ITA No.1499-1502, 1537-1540/Kol/2015 & 136-137 & 232-233/Kol/2016 Vodafone East Ltd./Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd. Vs. ACIT/DCIT(TDS) Cir-3/59 Kol Page 11 Vendor Association vs. Un…

CIT v. Idea Cellular Ltd.

What is CIT v. Idea Cellular Ltd. authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Idea Cellular Ltd.

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) Circle-2(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Idea Cellular Limited, Bangalore

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) Circle-2(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Idea Cellular Limited, Bangalore

Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

Sabri Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., Baroda vs. The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Baroda

Tata Sky Ltd., Mumbai vs. A.C.I.T.(TDS) RG.3(1), Mumbai

Aditya Birla Power Co.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 8(1), Mumbai

Nexgenix (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 8(2), Mumbai

Rakesh Kumar, New Delhi vs. CIT, Ghaziabad

Idea Cellular Ltd, Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, TDS Circle, Ward-1(1), Hyd, Hyderabad

Idea Cellular Ltd, Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, TDS Circle, Ward-1(1), Hyd, Hyderabad

M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Chandigarh vs. ITO TDS-II, Chandigarh

M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Chandigarh vs. ACIT (TDS), Chandigarh

M/S Bharti Airtel Limited, Chandigarh vs. ACIT (TDS), Chandigarh

Smt. Sarla Gupta, Jagdalpur (Cg) vs. I.T.O., Jagdalpur (Cg)

DCIT, Cir-6(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

ACIT - 8(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Tata Teleservices (M) Ltd., Navi Mumbai

DCIT TDS 1(1), Mumbai vs. Bharat Business Channels Ltd, Mumbai

DCIT 6(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Clear Trip Travel Services P.Ltd, Mumbai

ACIT, Cir-3(TDS), Kolkata vs. Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd. (Formerly Known As Vodafone South Ltd.), Kolkata