CIT v. Spice Telecommunication Private Ltd.

369 ITR 72Reported decision2014#15780 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2023 to 2023.

Issues it is cited on

section 44aesection 133a(2a)section 201(1a)section 194csection 44asection 201(1)assessee in defaultsection 201section 194section 44absection 20section 44

Judgments citing CIT v. Spice Telecommunication Private Ltd.

BHARATPUR DUGDHA UTPADAK SAHKARI SANGH LIMITED ,BHARATPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, ALWAR, ALWAR RAJASTHAN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 325/JPR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 321 to 325/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2019-20 Bharatpur Dugdha Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Limited, Village Madarpur, Madarpur Road, Bharatpur cuke Vs. Income Tax Officer, TDS, Alwar LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAATB 8926 E vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Dheeraj Borad (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt.

For Appellant: Sh. Dheeraj Borad (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)
Section 133ASection 194CSection 201Section 201(1)

…rement or specification of a customer by using material purchased from a person other than such customer. In support of this submission the humble appellant craves leave to refer to and rely upon the judgement of hon’ble Karnataka High Court reported in(2014) 369 ITR 72 (Karn) in the case of CIT v/s Spice Tele communications Pvt. Ltd wherein thehon’ble court by observing that as the assessee did not supply any material to the manufacturers or suppliers for the supply of SIM or scratch cards as per their requirement or specification, such transactions could not be treated as ‘works contracts’ within the meaning of…

BHARATPUR DUGDHA UTPADAK SAHKARI SANGH LIMITED,BHARATPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, ALWAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 324/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 321 to 325/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2019-20 Bharatpur Dugdha Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Limited, Village Madarpur, Madarpur Road, Bharatpur cuke Vs. Income Tax Officer, TDS, Alwar LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAATB 8926 E vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Dheeraj Borad (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt.

For Appellant: Sh. Dheeraj Borad (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)
Section 133ASection 194CSection 201Section 201(1)

…rement or specification of a customer by using material purchased from a person other than such customer. In support of this submission the humble appellant craves leave to refer to and rely upon the judgement of hon’ble Karnataka High Court reported in(2014) 369 ITR 72 (Karn) in the case of CIT v/s Spice Tele communications Pvt. Ltd wherein thehon’ble court by observing that as the assessee did not supply any material to the manufacturers or suppliers for the supply of SIM or scratch cards as per their requirement or specification, such transactions could not be treated as ‘works contracts’ within the meaning of…

BHARATPUR DUGDHA UTPADAK SAHKARI SANGH LIMIITED,BHARATPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, ALWAR, ALWAR RAJASTHAN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 323/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 321 to 325/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2019-20 Bharatpur Dugdha Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Limited, Village Madarpur, Madarpur Road, Bharatpur cuke Vs. Income Tax Officer, TDS, Alwar LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAATB 8926 E vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Dheeraj Borad (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt.

For Appellant: Sh. Dheeraj Borad (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)
Section 133ASection 194CSection 201Section 201(1)

…rement or specification of a customer by using material purchased from a person other than such customer. In support of this submission the humble appellant craves leave to refer to and rely upon the judgement of hon’ble Karnataka High Court reported in(2014) 369 ITR 72 (Karn) in the case of CIT v/s Spice Tele communications Pvt. Ltd wherein thehon’ble court by observing that as the assessee did not supply any material to the manufacturers or suppliers for the supply of SIM or scratch cards as per their requirement or specification, such transactions could not be treated as ‘works contracts’ within the meaning of…

BHARATPUR DUGDHA UTPADAK SAHKARI SANGH LIMIITED ,BHARATPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, ALWAR, ALWAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 322/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 321 to 325/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2019-20 Bharatpur Dugdha Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Limited, Village Madarpur, Madarpur Road, Bharatpur cuke Vs. Income Tax Officer, TDS, Alwar LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAATB 8926 E vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Dheeraj Borad (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt.

For Appellant: Sh. Dheeraj Borad (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)
Section 133ASection 194CSection 201Section 201(1)

…rement or specification of a customer by using material purchased from a person other than such customer. In support of this submission the humble appellant craves leave to refer to and rely upon the judgement of hon’ble Karnataka High Court reported in(2014) 369 ITR 72 (Karn) in the case of CIT v/s Spice Tele communications Pvt. Ltd wherein thehon’ble court by observing that as the assessee did not supply any material to the manufacturers or suppliers for the supply of SIM or scratch cards as per their requirement or specification, such transactions could not be treated as ‘works contracts’ within the meaning of…

BHARATPUR DUGDHA UTPADAK SAHKARI SANGH LIMIITED ,BHARATPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, ALWAR, ALWAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 321/JPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 321 to 325/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2019-20 Bharatpur Dugdha Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Limited, Village Madarpur, Madarpur Road, Bharatpur cuke Vs. Income Tax Officer, TDS, Alwar LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAATB 8926 E vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Dheeraj Borad (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt.

For Appellant: Sh. Dheeraj Borad (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)
Section 133ASection 194CSection 201Section 201(1)

…rement or specification of a customer by using material purchased from a person other than such customer. In support of this submission the humble appellant craves leave to refer to and rely upon the judgement of hon’ble Karnataka High Court reported in(2014) 369 ITR 72 (Karn) in the case of CIT v/s Spice Tele communications Pvt. Ltd wherein thehon’ble court by observing that as the assessee did not supply any material to the manufacturers or suppliers for the supply of SIM or scratch cards as per their requirement or specification, such transactions could not be treated as ‘works contracts’ within the meaning of…

THE DCIT, CIRCLE (TDS), RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. M/S. GOPAL SNACKS P. LTD., RAJKOT, VILLAGE METODA, TAL. LODHIKA, DIST. RAJKOT

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

ITA 119/RJT/2019[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot10 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 133ASection 194CSection 201Section 201(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (Conducted Through Virtual Court) Before: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member And Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member Assessment Year: 2014-15 The DCIT, Circle (TDS), Gopal Snacks Pvt. Rajkot Ltd. Plot No. G-2322 Vs to 2324, Metoda, (Appellant) GIDC Lodhika, Rajkot PAN: RKTGO1801C (Respondent) Assessee Represented: Shri Hiren Shah, A.R. Revenue Represented: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr.D.R. Date of hearing : 02-02-2023 Date of pronouncement : 10-02-2023 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This appeal is filed by the Revenue again…

CIT v. Spice Telecommunication Private Ltd. (369 ITR 72) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax