CIT v. S.K. Tekriwal

361 ITR 432High Court2014#664 most cited

What is CIT v. S.K. Tekriwal authority for?

Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act does not apply to disallow expenses when there is a short deduction of tax at source. This includes situations where TDS is deducted at a lower rate than required or under an incorrect section.

150

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. S.K. Tekriwal · 361 ITR 432 · Section 40(a)(ia) disallowance · short deduction of tax · short deduction of TDS · TDS rate difference · Section 194C · Section 194J · disallowance of expenditure · TDS compliance

Also reported as

46 Taxmann.com 444260 CTR 73

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 143(3)Section 40(a)(ia)Section 10ASection 115JB Income Tax ActSection 139(1)Section 139(1) Income Tax ActSection 143(3) Income Tax Act

Issues it is cited on

short deduction of tdsshort deduction of taxdisallowance under section 40(a)(ia)section 194csection 40(a)(ia)section 40(a)section 201section 40section 194section 19section 20salary

Judgments citing CIT v. S.K. Tekriwal

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

…been deducted but same is deducted in wrong section or deducted less than the rate specified under the relevant section. In this regard we find pertinent to refer the judgment of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in case of CIT vs. S.K. Tekriwal reported in [2014] 361 ITR 432 where the Hon’ble Court in similar circumstances dismissed the appeal of the revenue by observing as under: Here in the present case before us, the assessee has deducted tax u/s. 194C(2) of the Act and not u/s. 194I of the Act and there is no allegation that this TDS is not deposited with the Government account. We are of the view that the provis…

M/S. K.N. Diamond, Bilimora vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Navsari Circle, Navsari

ITA 1788/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 Feb 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble(Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.1788/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S K.N.Diamond, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Soniwad, Bilimora, Of Income Tax, Navsari Navsari – 396 321. Circle, Navsari. [Pan: Aadfk 3167 H] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओर से /Assessee By Shri Parimalsinh Parmar – Advocate राज"वक"ओर से /Revenue By Smt. Anupama Singla – Sr.Dr

Section 194JSection 40Section 40A(2)(b)

…declared to be an assessee in default under section 201, but that cannot be a ground for disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. In support of his submission, the Authorised Representative relied upon the following decisions;  CIT Vs S.K.Tekriwal – 361 ITR 432 (Cal);  Kandwala Integrated Financial Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs JCIT (ITA No.634 & 532/Ahd/2011) and  CIT vs. Prayas Engineering Ltd. (Tax Appeal No.1237 of 2014) (Gujarat High Court). 8. In alternative submissions the learned AR for assessee submits that insertion of second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia) is declarative and curative in nature and ha…

Ivorybrick Homes LLP, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

ITA 1846/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Feb 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2016-17

For Respondent: Shri C Sandeep, C.A
Section 194CSection 194JSection 40

…nion as to the taxability of any expenditure or nature of payment falling under various TDS provisions. It was submitted that the decision of Hon’ble ITAT Kolkata in case of DCIT vs S.K.Tekriwal (supra) has been upheld by Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in (2014) 361 ITR 432. 12. Ld.AR submitted that branding fee paid to VBHC is towards grant of use of VBHC logo and for VBHC referring details of Page 6 of 10 clients interested in buying flats/units, actual conveyance/transfer/execution of documents, to assist assessee on a best effort basis in obtaining all know your customer information and obtaining all the documen…

Daawat Foods Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA

ITA 4158/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conferencing) & Daawat Foods Ltd., Vs. Acit, Unit No.134, 1St Floor, Central Circle – 19, Rectangle I, New Delhi Saket District Centre, Saket, New Delhi-110 017 Pan No. Aaccd 3698 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. Ms. Deepashree Rao, C.A. Shri Vibhu Gupta, C.A. Revenue By Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, Cit-D.R Date Of Hearing: 17/12/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/01/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Dated 28.03.2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-Xxxiii, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Years 2007-08 & 2008-09. Ita Nos.4157 & 4158/Del/2013 Daawat Foods Ltd Vs. Acit A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 2 2. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under:

Section 132Section 142Section 143(1)Section 153A

…uation, he submitted that no ITA Nos.4157 & 4158/Del/2013 Daawat Foods Ltd vs. ACIT A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 33 disallowance cannot be made u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act and in support of which he placed reliance on the decision in the case of CIT vs. S. K. Tekriwal 361 ITR 432. He further submitted that identical issue also arose in L T Foods, a group company in A.Y. 2007-08 wherein the Co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of S.K. Tekriwal (supra) decided the issue in favour of the assessee. He, therefore, submitted that disallowance made by AO u/s 40(a)(ia…

Daawat Foods Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA

ITA 4157/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conferencing) & Daawat Foods Ltd., Vs. Acit, Unit No.134, 1St Floor, Central Circle – 19, Rectangle I, New Delhi Saket District Centre, Saket, New Delhi-110 017 Pan No. Aaccd 3698 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. Ms. Deepashree Rao, C.A. Shri Vibhu Gupta, C.A. Revenue By Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, Cit-D.R Date Of Hearing: 17/12/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/01/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Dated 28.03.2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-Xxxiii, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Years 2007-08 & 2008-09. Ita Nos.4157 & 4158/Del/2013 Daawat Foods Ltd Vs. Acit A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 2 2. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under:

Section 132Section 142Section 143(1)Section 153A

…uation, he submitted that no ITA Nos.4157 & 4158/Del/2013 Daawat Foods Ltd vs. ACIT A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 33 disallowance cannot be made u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act and in support of which he placed reliance on the decision in the case of CIT vs. S. K. Tekriwal 361 ITR 432. He further submitted that identical issue also arose in L T Foods, a group company in A.Y. 2007-08 wherein the Co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of S.K. Tekriwal (supra) decided the issue in favour of the assessee. He, therefore, submitted that disallowance made by AO u/s 40(a)(ia…

M/S. Mahaveer Infra Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle, Barmer

In the result, the revenue’s appeal stand partly allowed for statistical purposes whereas the assessee’s appeal stand partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 212/JODH/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur21 Dec 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.186/Jodh/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.212/Jodh/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Acit Circle M/S. Mahaveer Infra Engineering Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Aaykar Bhavan E-109, Ansa Industrial Estate, Saki Vihar Mahaveer Nagar, Barmer Road, Saki Naka, Andheri (East) Vs. Rajasthan Mumbai-400 072 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafcm-8521-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.222/Jodh/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. C.O. No.18/Jodh/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No.186/Jodh/2018) ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. Mahaveer Infra Engineering Pvt. Ltd. Acit Circle बना E-109, Ansa Industrial Estate, Saki Vihar Aaykar Bhavan म/ Road, Saki Naka, Andheri (East) Mahaveer Nagar, Barmer Vs. Mumbai-400 072 Rajasthan "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafcm-8521-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Jain (Advocate) & MsFor Respondent: Shri K.C. Badhok- Ld. CIT- DR
Section 133(6)Section 68

…owance has been made since there was either short-deduction of TDS or no TDS. The short-deduction of TDS, in our considered opinion, would not fall for disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) as per the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in CIT Vs. S.K.Tekriwal [2014 46 Taxmann.com 444] as well as the 15 M/s. Mahaveer Infra Engineering Private Limited Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in CIT Vs. Kishore Rao & Others [2017 79 Taxmann.com 357]. Therefore, the disallowance to that extent is not sustainable. 15.4 However, no TDS deduction case would certainly fall for disallowance…

ACIT, Circle, Barmer vs. M/S. Mahaveer Infra Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the revenue’s appeal stand partly allowed for statistical purposes whereas the assessee’s appeal stand partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 186/JODH/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur21 Dec 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.186/Jodh/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.212/Jodh/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Acit Circle M/S. Mahaveer Infra Engineering Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Aaykar Bhavan E-109, Ansa Industrial Estate, Saki Vihar Mahaveer Nagar, Barmer Road, Saki Naka, Andheri (East) Vs. Rajasthan Mumbai-400 072 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafcm-8521-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.222/Jodh/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. C.O. No.18/Jodh/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No.186/Jodh/2018) ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. Mahaveer Infra Engineering Pvt. Ltd. Acit Circle बना E-109, Ansa Industrial Estate, Saki Vihar Aaykar Bhavan म/ Road, Saki Naka, Andheri (East) Mahaveer Nagar, Barmer Vs. Mumbai-400 072 Rajasthan "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafcm-8521-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Jain (Advocate) & MsFor Respondent: Shri K.C. Badhok- Ld. CIT- DR
Section 133(6)Section 68

…owance has been made since there was either short-deduction of TDS or no TDS. The short-deduction of TDS, in our considered opinion, would not fall for disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) as per the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in CIT Vs. S.K.Tekriwal [2014 46 Taxmann.com 444] as well as the 15 M/s. Mahaveer Infra Engineering Private Limited Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in CIT Vs. Kishore Rao & Others [2017 79 Taxmann.com 357]. Therefore, the disallowance to that extent is not sustainable. 15.4 However, no TDS deduction case would certainly fall for disallowance…

Kinetic Advertising India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT-7(3)(1), Mumbai

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 3194/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Oct 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 3194/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14)

For Respondent: Shri R. Bhoopathi, DR
Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 197Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C. N. PRASAD, JM & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 3194/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Kinetic Advertising India ACIT 7(3)(1), Room No. 126B, 1st floor, Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ M. K. Road, Aayakar 15th floor, R. TECH Park, Bhavan, Mumbai-400 020 Romell Real Estate, Next to Vs. Hub Mall Goregaon (East), Mumbai-400 063 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN No. AABCP1311M (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant Smt. Aarti Vissanji, AR : by प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Shri R. Bhoopathi, DR Virtual…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. L.T. Foods Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the Assessee is allowed in part and for statistical purposes

ITA 4046/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri K.Narasimha Charydcit Vs. L.T. Foods Ltd., Central Circle-19, Unit No. 134, First Floor, 3Rd Floor, Ara Centre, Rectangle-I, Saket District Centre Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi. New Delhi.

Section 115Section 132(4)Section 14ASection 153ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 69Section 80Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘D’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER DCIT Vs. L.T. Foods Ltd., Central Circle-19, Unit No. 134, First Floor, 3rd Floor, ARA Centre, Rectangle-I, Saket District Centre Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi. New Delhi. And L.T. Foods Ltd., ACIT Unit No. 134, First Floor, Vs. Central Circle-19, Rectangle-I, Saket District Centre New Delhi New Delhi. PAN No. AACCA3104G Appellants Respondents Assessee by Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate Smt. Deepashree Rao, CA Shri Vibhu Gupta, CA Reven…

M/S L.T. Foods Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the Assessee is allowed in part and for statistical purposes

ITA 4164/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri K.Narasimha Charydcit Vs. L.T. Foods Ltd., Central Circle-19, Unit No. 134, First Floor, 3Rd Floor, Ara Centre, Rectangle-I, Saket District Centre Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi. New Delhi.

Section 115Section 132(4)Section 14ASection 153ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 69Section 80Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘D’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER DCIT Vs. L.T. Foods Ltd., Central Circle-19, Unit No. 134, First Floor, 3rd Floor, ARA Centre, Rectangle-I, Saket District Centre Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi. New Delhi. And L.T. Foods Ltd., ACIT Unit No. 134, First Floor, Vs. Central Circle-19, Rectangle-I, Saket District Centre New Delhi New Delhi. PAN No. AACCA3104G Appellants Respondents Assessee by Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate Smt. Deepashree Rao, CA Shri Vibhu Gupta, CA Reven…

Sapiens Technologies (1982) India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT- 6(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 171/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Ajit JainFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar
Section 194CSection 194JSection 40

…(ia) of the Act have no application. Reliance was placed on the following decisions in support of his contentions: - (i) DCIT v. Chandabhoy and Jassobhoy – ITAT Mumbai (ii) Dish TV India Ltd. v. ACIT dated 10.10.2017 (ITAT, Mumbai) (iii) CIT v. S.K. Tekriwal [361 ITR 432 (Cal)] 6. Ld. DR vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below. (A.Ys. 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/s. Sapiens Technologies (1982) India Pvt. Ltd., 7. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below and the case laws relied on. We noticed that the issue in appeal has been decided by the Coordinate Benches of t…

Sapiens Technologies(1982) India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT - 6(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 170/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Ajit JainFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar
Section 194CSection 194JSection 40

…(ia) of the Act have no application. Reliance was placed on the following decisions in support of his contentions: - (i) DCIT v. Chandabhoy and Jassobhoy – ITAT Mumbai (ii) Dish TV India Ltd. v. ACIT dated 10.10.2017 (ITAT, Mumbai) (iii) CIT v. S.K. Tekriwal [361 ITR 432 (Cal)] 6. Ld. DR vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below. (A.Ys. 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/s. Sapiens Technologies (1982) India Pvt. Ltd., 7. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below and the case laws relied on. We noticed that the issue in appeal has been decided by the Coordinate Benches of t…

Dish Tv India Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 16(1), Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5900/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5900/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S Dish Tv India Limited Acit-16(1) बनाम/ R.No.439, 4Th Floor 135, Continental Building 135, Dr. Annie Besant Road Aaykar Bhavan, Mumbai 400 020. Vs. Worli, Mumbai 400 018 Pan/Gir No. Aaaca-5478-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5534/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Acit-16(1) M/S Dish Tv India Limited बनाम/ R.No.439, 4Th Floor 135, Continental Building Aaykar Bhavan, Mumbai 400 020 135, Dr. Annie Besant Road Vs. Worli, Mumbai 400 018 Pan/Gir No. Aaaca-5478-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Jay Bhansali – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sreekar-Ld. DR
Section 194HSection 40

…so that of ‘CAS, Middleware and SMS Charges’ by making a wrong assumption that the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of PVS Memorial Hospital Ltd. (supra) has not considered the decision of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. S.K. Tekriwal (361 ITR 432) thereby rendering the order of the Tribunal perverse. 4. The appellant prays that the order of the CIT(A) on the above grounds be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.” As evident, the assessee is aggrieved by confirmation of certain disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) whereas the revenue is aggrieved by deletion of certain similar di…

Exlservice.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 1708/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Dcit(Ltu), Vs. Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Circle-1, Ltd, Nbcc Plaza Pusph Vihar, 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Tower-B, New Delhi Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi Pan: Aaace5174C (Appellant) (Respondent) Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Dcit(Ltu), 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Tower-B, Plot Circle-1, No. 10 & 11, Dda District Nbcc Plaza Pusph Vihar, Centre, Jasola, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaace5174C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Pal, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92D

…herefore, the learned assessing officer disallowed the above sum. 30. The ld Authorised Representative submitted that Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act cannot be sustained for short deduction of tax at source, as held in i. CIT vs. S.K Tekriwal: 361 ITR 432 (Cal. HC) ii. ACIT vs. Pankaj Bhargava: ITA No. 86/Del./2012 (Del.) iii. Micromax Informatics Ltd. vs. DCIT: 154 ITD 156 (Del.) iv. UE Trade Corpn. (India) Ltd. vs. DCIT: 28 taxmann.com 77 (Del.) v. Hero Motocorp Ltd. vs. ACIT: 60 SOT 25 (Del.) Without prejudice, learned authorised representative further submitted that disallowance under section…

DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi vs. M/S. Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 1482/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Dcit(Ltu), Vs. Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Circle-1, Ltd, Nbcc Plaza Pusph Vihar, 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Tower-B, New Delhi Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi Pan: Aaace5174C (Appellant) (Respondent) Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Dcit(Ltu), 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Tower-B, Plot Circle-1, No. 10 & 11, Dda District Nbcc Plaza Pusph Vihar, Centre, Jasola, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaace5174C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Pal, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92D

…herefore, the learned assessing officer disallowed the above sum. 30. The ld Authorised Representative submitted that Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act cannot be sustained for short deduction of tax at source, as held in i. CIT vs. S.K Tekriwal: 361 ITR 432 (Cal. HC) ii. ACIT vs. Pankaj Bhargava: ITA No. 86/Del./2012 (Del.) iii. Micromax Informatics Ltd. vs. DCIT: 154 ITD 156 (Del.) iv. UE Trade Corpn. (India) Ltd. vs. DCIT: 28 taxmann.com 77 (Del.) v. Hero Motocorp Ltd. vs. ACIT: 60 SOT 25 (Del.) Without prejudice, learned authorised representative further submitted that disallowance under section…

The Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Cir.-1(2), Rajkot-Gujarat vs. M/S Dml Exim Pvt. Ltd., Rajkot-Gujarat

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 27/RJT/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Jul 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M. N. Maurya, CIT DR
Section 73(1)

…section 40(a)(ia) cannot be resorted to in the case of short deduction of tax at source, even if any and, therefore, the impugned disallowance is unsustainable in law. Reliance was placed on Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of CIT vs. S.K. Tekriwal, 260 CTR 73. Accepting these arguments, learned CIT(A) deleted the impugned disallowance and justified his stand as follows :- “7. While holding that the payments made to CHAs are liable for tax deduction at source u/s. 194J of the IT Act, 1961, the issue at hand is whether the assessing officer is justified to disallow the entire payment made to CHAs at Rs.6…

The Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Cir.-1(2), Rajkot-Gujarat vs. M/S D.M.L. Exim Pvt. Ltd., Rajkot-Gujarat

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 360/RJT/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Jul 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M. N. Maurya, CIT DR
Section 73(1)

…section 40(a)(ia) cannot be resorted to in the case of short deduction of tax at source, even if any and, therefore, the impugned disallowance is unsustainable in law. Reliance was placed on Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of CIT vs. S.K. Tekriwal, 260 CTR 73. Accepting these arguments, learned CIT(A) deleted the impugned disallowance and justified his stand as follows :- “7. While holding that the payments made to CHAs are liable for tax deduction at source u/s. 194J of the IT Act, 1961, the issue at hand is whether the assessing officer is justified to disallow the entire payment made to CHAs at Rs.6…

M/S. D.M.L. Exim Pvt. Ltd., Rajkot-Gujarat vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5, Rajkot-Gujarat

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 315/RJT/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Jul 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M. N. Maurya, CIT DR
Section 73(1)

…section 40(a)(ia) cannot be resorted to in the case of short deduction of tax at source, even if any and, therefore, the impugned disallowance is unsustainable in law. Reliance was placed on Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of CIT vs. S.K. Tekriwal, 260 CTR 73. Accepting these arguments, learned CIT(A) deleted the impugned disallowance and justified his stand as follows :- “7. While holding that the payments made to CHAs are liable for tax deduction at source u/s. 194J of the IT Act, 1961, the issue at hand is whether the assessing officer is justified to disallow the entire payment made to CHAs at Rs.6…

ACIT, Ltu - 2, 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

…aim of the assessee. On appeal, the ld. CIT(Appeals) not only entertained the claim of the assessee but also deleted the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) by following the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of DCIT –vs.- S.K. Tekriwal (361 ITR 432), wherein it was held that if there is any short-fall due to any difference of opinion as to the taxability of any item or the nature of payment falling under various TDS provisions, the assessee could be declared to be an assessee in default under section 201, but no disallowance could be made by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia). 4.…

Commercial Carriers Pvt. Ltd., Jamshepur vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Jamshepur

Appeal is allowed

ITA 192/RAN/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi04 Mar 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2010-11

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 194CSection 40

…olved in preceding assessment year 2009-10 as the learned co-ordinate bench’s order forms part of the case file pages 75 to 86 of the paper book. Coupled with this, hon’ble Calcutta high court’s judgment Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s S.K. Tekriwal (2014) 361 ITR 432 (Cal) holds that the impugned disallowance provision u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act does not come into play in case of an assessee’s partial default in deducting TDS. We are of the view in these facts that both the lower authorities have erred in disallowing assessee’s hire charges payments of Rs.33,460,529/-. The same ITA No.192/Ran/2019 A.Y. 2010-1…