CIT v. P.V.S. Memorial Hospital Ltd.

380 ITR 284High Court2016#6484 most cited
18

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also reported as

234 Taxmann 46

Sections most often in play

Section 194CSection 194JSection 250Section 40(a)(ia)

Issues it is cited on

short deduction of taxsection 194csection 40(a)section 40(a)(ia)section 40prescribedcompany

Judgments citing CIT v. P.V.S. Memorial Hospital Ltd.

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DEHRADUN vs. HALLIBURTON OFF SHORE SERVICES INC , MAHARASHTRA

In the result, ground no.3 is allowed

ITA 241/DDN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun11 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar Us & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.241/Ddn/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2021-22 बनाम Dy. Commissioner Of Income Halliburton Off Shore Services Inc.,Unit No.603, 6Th Floor, Tax, Vs. Aayakar Bhawan, 13-A, Subhash Satellite Gazebo, East Wing,Guru Road, Hargovindji Marg,Andheri Mumbai, Navi Dehradun, Uttarakhand. Mumbai,Maharashtra. Pan No.Aaach5154M अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 19Section 194CSection 194JSection 250Section 40

…se o* PCIT Vs. Future First Info Services Pvt. Ltd in ITA No. 195/2022 dated 14.07.2022 hadalso given the same proposition. The Id CIT(A) however relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of PVS International Hospital Ltd reported in 380 ITR 284 (Ker) and decided the issue against the assessee. As could be seen above, none of the High Court decisions referred are the decisions rendered by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vegetable Products Ltd reported in 88 ITR 192 had held that when there are divergent views of various non- Jurisdictional…

Commissioner Of Income Tax International Taxation 3 vs. Samsung Heavy Industries Company Limited

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA/10/2024HC Uttarakhand10 Jul 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G. NARENDAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK MAHRA

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 194JSection 260Section 40

…s. Future First info Services Pvt. Ltd in ITA No. 195/2022 dated 14.07.2022 had also given the same proposition. The ld CIT(A) however relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of PVS International Hospital Ltd reported in 380 ITR 284 (Ker) and decided the issue against the assessee. As could be seen above, none of the High Court decisions referred are the decisions rendered by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vegetable Products Ltd reported in 88 ITR 192 had held that when there are divergent views of various non- Jurisdi…

MEGA ENGINEERS & BUILDERS,PORT BLAIR vs. DCIT, CIR. 3(2) , PORT BLAIR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 312/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 194C

…as under: “4. We have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. Although the ld. D.R. has relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT –vs.- PVS Memorial Hospital Limited (380 ITR 284) in support of the Revenue’s case on this issue, it is observed that the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of S.K. Tekriwal (supra) relied upon by the ld. CIT(Appeals) in his impugned order to give relief to the assessee on this issue squarely covers this issue in favour of the assessee. We, therefore, respectfully follow th…

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. VIZAG SEAPORT PVT. LTD., VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 383/VIZ/2017[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam12 Apr 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon‟Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon‟Ble(Through Hybrid Hearing) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 383/Viz/2017 (धनधाारणिर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2012-13) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Vizag Seaport Pvt Ltd., Income Tax, Administrative Block, Circle-5(1), S4 Gallery, Port Area, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam – 530035. (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) [Pan :Aabcv2484K] अपीलाथी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Sri Fenil A Bhatt, Ar प्रत्याथी की ओर से/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुनिाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15/02/2024 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of : /04/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Pers. Balakrishnan:

For Appellant: Sri Fenil A Bhatt, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 194JSection 36(1)(iii)Section 40

…00,000/- U/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act for short deduction of tax. On this ground, the Ld. DR strongly relied on the decision of the Hon‟ble Kerala High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Kochi vs. P V S Memorial 5 Hospital Ltd reported in [2016] 380 ITR 284 (Kerala) wherein it was held that deduction under a wrong provision of law will not save an assessee from section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The Ld. DR also referred to Explanation (a) to section 194J of the Act wherein it was stated that “professional services include engineering services”. 6. Countering the argument of the Ld. DR, the Ld. Authorize…

SAMSUNG HEAVY INDUSTRIES CO. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 873/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun22 Dec 2023AY 2012-13
Section 143(3)Section 234C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DEHRADUN CIRCUIT BENCH: DEHRADUN BEFORE, SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER Dy. CIT M/s. Samsung Heavy (International Taxation) Industries Co. Ltd. Dehradun Vs. C/o Price Water House Coopers Pvt. Ltd. Building No.10 17th Floor Tower ‘C’ DLF Cyber City Gurgaon-122 002. PAN-AAJCS 7859K (Appellant) (Respondent) M/s. Samsung Heavy Dy. CIT Industries Co. Ltd. (International 34th FI, Samsung Life Taxation)-2 Insurance, Seocho Dehradun Tower, 1321-15, Seocho Dong, Seocho Gu, Seoul, Korea 137-955 PAN-AAJCS 7859K (Appellant) (Respondent…

DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), DEHRADUN vs. M/S. SAMSUNG HEAVY INDUSTRIES CO. LTD., GURGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1315/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun22 Dec 2023AY 2008-09
Section 143(3)Section 234C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DEHRADUN CIRCUIT BENCH: DEHRADUN BEFORE, SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER Dy. CIT M/s. Samsung Heavy (International Taxation) Industries Co. Ltd. Dehradun Vs. C/o Price Water House Coopers Pvt. Ltd. Building No.10 17th Floor Tower ‘C’ DLF Cyber City Gurgaon-122 002. PAN-AAJCS 7859K (Appellant) (Respondent) M/s. Samsung Heavy Dy. CIT Industries Co. Ltd. (International 34th FI, Samsung Life Taxation)-2 Insurance, Seocho Dehradun Tower, 1321-15, Seocho Dong, Seocho Gu, Seoul, Korea 137-955 PAN-AAJCS 7859K (Appellant) (Respondent…

M.V.A.SEETHARAMA RAJU,CHENNAI vs. DCIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 2, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 795/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.795/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Mr. M.V.A. Seetharama Raju, Tax, Flat No.32, Rishikesh Apartments, Non-Corporate Circle-2, 38, G.N.Chetty Road, T.Nagar, Chennai. Chennai-600 017. Pan: Agopr 1931M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. I.P.Roopa, JCIT
Section 139Section 192Section 201Section 40

…urt in the case of CIT Vs. S.K.Tekriwal, 15 taxmann.com 289. 5. The learned CIT(A), after considering relevant submissions of the assessee and also by following decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT Vs. P.V.S. Memorial Hospital Ltd., 380 ITR 284, opined that the assessee has deducted TDS at lower rates on payments made to parties and thus, not satisfied conditions prescribed u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act, for allowing deduction towards said payment. Therefore, 8 the learned CIT(A) opined that there is no error in the reasons given by the Assessing Officer to disallow sum paid by the assess…

THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1(2),, BARODA vs. M/S. DELOITTE HASKINS & SELLS, BARODA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2970/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2970/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 D.C.I.T., M/S Deloitee Haskins & Sells, Circle-1(2), Vs. 31-Nutan Bharat Society, Vadodara. Alkapuri, Baroda.

For Appellant: Shri Parcy Padiwala, A.RFor Respondent: Shri James Kurian, D.R
Section 194Section 40

…ult u/s. 201 of the Act and no disallowance can be made by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 15.6 It also pertinent to note that subsequently the Hon’ble Kerala High court in case of CIT vs. PVS Memorial Hospital Ltd reported in [2016] 380 ITR 284 decided the issue in favour of Revenue by observing as under: The expression 'tax deductible at source under Chapter XVII-B' occurring in the section 40(a)(ia) has to be understood as tax deductible at source under the appropriate provision of Chapter XVII-B. Therefore, as in this case, if tax was deductible under section 194J but was deducted un…

ACIT, LTU - 2, KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. UCO BANK, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 585/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jun 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Vs. M/S Uco Bank Acit, Ltu-2, Kolkata 10, Btm, Sarani, Kolkata – 700001. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacu3561B .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Shankar, CITFor Respondent: Shri D. S. Damle, FCA
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 211Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JM & DR. A.L. SAINI, AM Vs. M/s UCO Bank ACIT, LTU-2, Kolkata 10, BTM, Sarani, Kolkata – 700001. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAACU3561B .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Vijay Shankar, CIT Respondent by : Shri D. S. Damle, FCA सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 25/02/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 17/06/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini, AM: The captioned appeal filed by the Revenue pertaining to Assessment Year 2011-12 is directed against the order passed by Commiss…

ACIT, LTU - 2, KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. UCO BANK, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 584/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri A.T. Varkey

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 201Section 40

…40(a)(ia). 4. We have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. Although the ld. D.R. has relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT –vs.- PVS Memorial Hospital Limited (380 ITR 284) in support of the Revenue’s case on this issue, it is observed that the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of S.K. Tekriwal (supra) relied upon by the ld. CIT(Appeals) in his impugned order to give relief to the assessee on this issue squarely covers this issue in favour of the assessee. We, therefore, 2 Assessment Year: 2…

ACIT 16(1), MUMBAI vs. T.V. VISION LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 5862/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ravish Soodassistant Commissinoer Of M/S Tv Vision Ltd. Income Tax-16(1), 4Th Floor, Adhirai Chambers, R. No. 439, Aayakar Bhavan, Oberoi Complex, Vs. M.K. Marg, New Link Road, Andheri West, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 053

For Appellant: Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, D.RFor Respondent: Ms. Indra G. Anand, A.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 194JSection 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…source under the wrong provision would not render the assessee amenable for disallowance under Sec.40(a)(ia) of the Act, the ld. D.R had relied on the judgment of the Hon‟ble High Court Kerala in the case of CIT-1, Kochi Vs. PVS Memorial Hospital Ltd. (2016) 380 ITR 284 (Ker). 7. We have heard the authorised representatives for both the parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material available on record, as well as the judicial pronouncements relied upon by them. Our indulgence in the present appeal has been sought by the revenue to adjudicate as to whether the CIT(A) is right in law and th…

ACIT 16(1), MUMBAI vs. ZOOM ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee on this issue stands allowed

ITA 3385/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

Section 194CSection 194JSection 40Section 4OSection 9

…uch as he 5 M/s. Zoom Entertainment Network Limited has relied upon Hon'ble Calcutta High Court decision in the case of S.K. Tekriwal (supra) and Revenue has referred to the decision of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of P.V.S. Memorial Hospital Ltd. (380 ITR 284), wherein Hon'ble Kerala High Court has not agreed with Hon'ble Calcutta High Court and had taken a contrary view. 9. Upon careful consideration, we find that there are two decisions on this subject. One from Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in favour of the assessee and another from Hon'ble Kerala High Court in favour of the Revenue. No decision of…

SODEXO FOOD SOLUTIONS INDIA P LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 8(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 304/MUM/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.304 & 305/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2002-03 & 2003-04) Sodexo Food Solutions India Deputy Commissioner Of Income Private Limited Tax Range-8(3) (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality 2Nd Floor, Aaykar Bhavan बनाम/ Services Private Limited) M.K.Road, Mumbai -400 020 Gemstar Commercial Complex Vs. 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn. Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai-400 064 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.7042/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Sodexo Food Solutions India Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited Income Tax -8(3) (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality Room No.217, 2Nd Floor बनाम/ Services Private Limited) Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Gemstar Commercial Complex Vs. 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn. Mumbai -400 020 Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai-400 064 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.6864/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Assistant Commissioner Of Sodexo Food Solutions India Private Limited Income Tax -8(3) बनाम/ (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality Room No.217, 2Nd Floor Services Private Limited) Vs. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Gemstar Commercial Complex 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn.

For Appellant: J.D.Mistry, Ld.ARFor Respondent: V.Justin, Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 254

…ction 40(a)(ia) and made the disallowance in respect of both the expenditures. Before us the learned D.R. relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT v. P.V.S. Memorial Hospital Ltd. [2015] 60 taxmann.com 69/234 Taxman 46/[2016] 380 ITR 284 (Ker.) copy of which was placed before us in which it was held that deduction under a wrong provisions of the law will not save an assessee from section 40(a)(ia), i.e. where the tax was deductible under section 194J but was actually deducted under section 194C, such a deduction would not meet the requirements of section 40(a)(ia). We noted that…

SODEXO FOOD SOLUTIONS INDIA P.LTD ( FORMELRY KNWONA S RADHAKRISHNA HOSPIALALITY SERVICES P.LTD),MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 8(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7042/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.304 & 305/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2002-03 & 2003-04) Sodexo Food Solutions India Deputy Commissioner Of Income Private Limited Tax Range-8(3) (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality 2Nd Floor, Aaykar Bhavan बनाम/ Services Private Limited) M.K.Road, Mumbai -400 020 Gemstar Commercial Complex Vs. 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn. Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai-400 064 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.7042/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Sodexo Food Solutions India Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited Income Tax -8(3) (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality Room No.217, 2Nd Floor बनाम/ Services Private Limited) Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Gemstar Commercial Complex Vs. 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn. Mumbai -400 020 Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai-400 064 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.6864/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Assistant Commissioner Of Sodexo Food Solutions India Private Limited Income Tax -8(3) बनाम/ (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality Room No.217, 2Nd Floor Services Private Limited) Vs. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Gemstar Commercial Complex 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn.

For Appellant: J.D.Mistry, Ld.ARFor Respondent: V.Justin, Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 254

…ction 40(a)(ia) and made the disallowance in respect of both the expenditures. Before us the learned D.R. relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT v. P.V.S. Memorial Hospital Ltd. [2015] 60 taxmann.com 69/234 Taxman 46/[2016] 380 ITR 284 (Ker.) copy of which was placed before us in which it was held that deduction under a wrong provisions of the law will not save an assessee from section 40(a)(ia), i.e. where the tax was deductible under section 194J but was actually deducted under section 194C, such a deduction would not meet the requirements of section 40(a)(ia). We noted that…

ACIT 8(3), MUMBAI vs. SODEXO FOOD SOLUTIONS INDIA P.LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS RADHAKRISHNA HOSPITALITY SERVICES P.LTD)), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6864/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.304 & 305/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2002-03 & 2003-04) Sodexo Food Solutions India Deputy Commissioner Of Income Private Limited Tax Range-8(3) (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality 2Nd Floor, Aaykar Bhavan बनाम/ Services Private Limited) M.K.Road, Mumbai -400 020 Gemstar Commercial Complex Vs. 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn. Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai-400 064 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.7042/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Sodexo Food Solutions India Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited Income Tax -8(3) (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality Room No.217, 2Nd Floor बनाम/ Services Private Limited) Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Gemstar Commercial Complex Vs. 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn. Mumbai -400 020 Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai-400 064 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.6864/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Assistant Commissioner Of Sodexo Food Solutions India Private Limited Income Tax -8(3) बनाम/ (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality Room No.217, 2Nd Floor Services Private Limited) Vs. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Gemstar Commercial Complex 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn.

For Appellant: J.D.Mistry, Ld.ARFor Respondent: V.Justin, Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 254

…ction 40(a)(ia) and made the disallowance in respect of both the expenditures. Before us the learned D.R. relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT v. P.V.S. Memorial Hospital Ltd. [2015] 60 taxmann.com 69/234 Taxman 46/[2016] 380 ITR 284 (Ker.) copy of which was placed before us in which it was held that deduction under a wrong provisions of the law will not save an assessee from section 40(a)(ia), i.e. where the tax was deductible under section 194J but was actually deducted under section 194C, such a deduction would not meet the requirements of section 40(a)(ia). We noted that…

DCIT 1(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. COX & KINGS (I) LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Department is dismissed

ITA 5583/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manjunathad C I T – 1(1)(1) M/S. Cox & Kings (I) Ltd. Room No. 579, 5Th Floor Tuner Morrison Bldg. Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 16, Bank Street Mumbai 400020 Mumbai 400001 Pan – Aaacc1921B Appellant Respondent Co No. 117/Mum/2017 (In Ita No. 5583/Mum/2015) (Assessment Year: 2007-08)

For Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal
Section 14A

…7 M/s. Cox & Kings (I) Ltd. (ii) CIT vs. Kishore Rao, HUF (2016) 387 ITR 196 15. The learned D.R. supported the findings of the CIT(A). He also relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. PVS Memorial Hospital Ltd. (2016) 380 ITR 284. 16. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The short issue arising for consideration before us is, whether the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act can be invoked to make disallowance on account of expenditure claimed on which the assessee has deducted tax at source at a rate lower than the prescribed…

COX AND KINGS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Department is dismissed

ITA 5440/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manjunathad C I T – 1(1)(1) M/S. Cox & Kings (I) Ltd. Room No. 579, 5Th Floor Tuner Morrison Bldg. Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 16, Bank Street Mumbai 400020 Mumbai 400001 Pan – Aaacc1921B Appellant Respondent Co No. 117/Mum/2017 (In Ita No. 5583/Mum/2015) (Assessment Year: 2007-08)

For Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal
Section 14A

…7 M/s. Cox & Kings (I) Ltd. (ii) CIT vs. Kishore Rao, HUF (2016) 387 ITR 196 15. The learned D.R. supported the findings of the CIT(A). He also relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. PVS Memorial Hospital Ltd. (2016) 380 ITR 284. 16. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The short issue arising for consideration before us is, whether the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act can be invoked to make disallowance on account of expenditure claimed on which the assessee has deducted tax at source at a rate lower than the prescribed…

M/S AC CARGO MANAGEMENT P.LTD,,COCHIN vs. THE ITO, COCHIN

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

ITA 320/COCH/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri George George. K.] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 320/Coch/2013. िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2007-2008. Vs. M/S. Ac Cargo Management The Income Tax Officer, Pvt. Ltd, Ward 1(1) 1St Floor, Chacko Chambers, Kochi Civil Lines Road, Palarivattom, Kochi 682 025. [Pan Aaeca 2206K] (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/Appellant) अपीलाथ" (ू"यथ" ू"यथ" ू"यथ"/Respondent) ू"यथ"

For Appellant: Shri. R. Krishnan, C.A
Section 194Section 194CSection 194ISection 40

…. As per ld. DR the issue in all such case were whether such deduction was to be done u/sec. 194C or 194 I of the Act. Further, according to ld. DR, by virtue of judgments of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. PVS Memorial Hospital Ltd 380 ITR 284, CBDT vs. Cochin Goods Transport Association 236 ITR 993 and that of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Associated Cement Co. Ltd vs. CIT 201 ITR 435, payments made by the assessee to contractors were liable for TDS and the assessee had failed to effect such deductions. According to him, lower authorities were justified in applying Section 40(a…