CIT v. Sri Marikamba Transport Company

379 ITR 129High Court2015#6904 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2024.

Also reported as

57 Taxmann.com 273

Judgments citing CIT v. Sri Marikamba Transport Company

ITO WARD-1(1) NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. ASHWAMI SALES AND MARKETING PVT.LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 294/NAG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Hitesh P. ShahFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 143(1)Section 194(7)Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

…y when there is a requirement of deduction of tax at source and such requirement is either not fulfilled or having deducted tax at source is not deposited within prescribed time‖. 30. In CIT –vs.- Sri Marikamba Transport Co. in ITA No. 553 of 2013 reported in 379 ITR 129 (Karn.), Hon’ble Karnataka High Court has formulated a question as to whether non-filing of Form No. 15I/J within the prescribed time is only a technical default or the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act are attracted? and proceeded to answer the same as under:- ―Section 40(a)(ia) and Section 194C(3) of the Act reads thus: "Section 40(a)(…

RAVINDRA DAYANAND SANKESHWAR ,HUBBALI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1), HUBLI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 210/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2016-17 Shri Ravindra Dayanand The Deputy Sankeshwar, Commissioner Of 2Nd Floor, Giriraj Income Tax, Annexe, Circle – 1(1), Circuit House Road, Vs. Hubli. Hubbali – 580 029. Pan: Attps9364B Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Shri Narendra Kumar Jain, Advocate

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC-‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2016-17 Shri Ravindra Dayanand The Deputy Sankeshwar, Commissioner of 2nd Floor, Giriraj Income Tax, Annexe, Circle – 1(1), Circuit House Road, Vs. Hubli. Hubbali – 580 029. PAN: ATTPS9364B APPELLANT RESPONDENT : Shri Narendra Kumar Jain, Advocate Assessee by & Mrs. Geetha Rani .K, Advocate : Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Revenue by Counsel for Dept. Date of Hearing : 20-04-2023 Date of Pronouncement : 25-04-2023 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal is filed by assessee aga…

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 7, NEW DELHI vs. QUIPPO OIL AND GAS INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the ground no

ITA 3544/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Ms. Alka ArrenFor Respondent: Shri T. Kipgen

Section 32Section 40Section 43B

…y when there is a requirement of deduction of tax at source and such requirement is either not fulfilled or having deducted tax at source is not deposited within prescribed time". 30. In CIT -vs.- Sri Marikamba Transport Co. in ITA No. 553 of 2013 reported in 379 ITR 129 (Karn.), Hon'ble Karnataka High Court has formulated a question as to whether non-filing of Form No. 15I/J within the prescribed time is only a technical default or the provisions of section 4o(a)(ia) of the Act are attracted? and proceeded to answer the same as under:- "Section 40 (a)(ia) and Section 194C(3) of the Act reads thus: "Section 4o(a)…

ACIT, CIRCLE- 2, DEHRADUN vs. RAJESH BALLABH, DEHRADUN

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 44/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun19 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

Section 194CSection 201Section 40Section 44A

…ir accounts are audited and nothing discrepancy was found and therefore, no such disallowance should have been made. 7. Ld. CIT(A) considered the contentions of the assessee in the light of the decisions reported in CIT vs. Marikumba Transport Company (2015) 379 ITR 129, ACIT vs. Malamud Suhail in ITA No. 1536/HYD/2014 and Soma Rani Ghosh vs. DCIT (2016) 48 CCH 59 by the Kolkata Bench of Tribunal and granted relief to the assessee in respect of the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Ld. CIT(A) however restricted the disallowance of expenses to the tune of Rs.5 Lacs on the ground that such amount wo…

SHRI MOHMED SHAKIL MOHMED SHAFI MUTWALLI,,HIMATNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SABARKANTHA WARD-3., HIMATNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 238/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH (Conducted Through Virtual Court) Before: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Member And Shri Amarjit Singh, Accountant Member Assessment Year 2012-13 Shri Mohmed Shakil The ITO, Mohmed Shafi Mutawalli S.K. Ward-3, [Pop: Sabar Industries] Vs Himatnagar-383001 122, GIDC, Motipura, (Respondent) Himatnagar PAN: ABLPM3361L (Appellant) Revenue by: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. D.R. Assessee by: Shri Sanjay R. Shah, A.R. Date of hearing : 09-09-2021 Date of pronouncement : 16-09-2021 आदेश/ORDER PER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- This assessee’s appeal for…

ACIT, CIRCLE, BHARATPUR vs. M/S. JAGDAMBE STONE COMPANY, BHARATPUR

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1171/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Gupta (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 143(2)Section 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 40

…y when there is a requirement of deduction of tax at source and such requirement is either not fulfilled or having deducted tax at source is not deposited within prescribed time". 30. In CIT —vs.- Sri Marikamba Transport Co. in ITA No. 553 of 2013 reported in 379 ITR 129 (Karn.), Hon'ble Karnataka High Court has formulated a question as to whether non-filing of Form No. 151/J within the prescribed time is only a technical default or the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act are attracted? and proceeded to answer the same as under:- "Section 40 (a)(ia) and Section 194C(3) of the Act reads thus: "Section 40(a)…

SOUTH INDIA FREIGHT CARRIERS ,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(2)(4), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2586/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Nov 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Years : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Sudheendra B.R, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal, Addl. CIT

Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 40Section 44A

…2.2015, another Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal reached the same conclusion while following the decision of the Coordinate Bench in the case of CIT -vs.- ValibKhanbhai Mankad (supra) and CIT -vs.- Sri Marikamba Transport Co. in ITA No. 553: 2013 reported in 379 ITR 129 (Karn.). 32. It is worth noticing that in ACIT -vs.- Mr. Mohammed Suhail, Kurnool in ITA No. 1536.Hyd/2014, order dated Page 18 of 20 13.02.2015, the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal specifically held that the provisions of section 194C(6) are independent of section 194C(7), and just because there is violation of provisions of section 194C (7)…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1), DAVANGERE vs. M/S MUURUGARAJENDRA OIL INDUSTRY PVT LTD , CHITRADURGA

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2094/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri V. Srinivasan, Advocate

Section 194(6)Section 194(7)Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 40

…oviso to the amended section 194C(3) or the present section 194C(7).” The Tribunal after referring to the following decisions, CIT v. Valibhai Khambhai Mankad [2013] 216 Taxman 18/[2012] 28 taxmann.com 119 (Guj.), CIT v. Marikamba : 12 : Transport Co. [2015] 379 ITR 129/231 Taxman 84/57 taxmann.com 273 (Karnataka) and ultimately concluded as follows: “33. In view of the above and respectfully following the judicial reasoning delineated in the above judgments, we find that if the assessee complies with the provisions of section 194C(6), disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) does not arise just because there is vi…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, BHARATPUR vs. M/S ARIHANT TRADING CO., BHARATPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1113/JPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Mar 2019AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri K. C. Gupta (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 40

…iced, section 40(a)(ia) would apply when there is a requirement of deduction of tax at source and such requirement is either not fulfilled or having deducted tax at source is not deposited within prescribed time". 30. In CIT v. Marikamba Transport Co. [2015] 379 ITR 129/231 Taxman 84/57 taxmann.com 273, Hon'ble Karnataka High Court has formulated a question as to whether non-filing of Form No. 15I/J within the prescribed time is only a technical default or the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act are attracted? and proceeded to answer the same as under:— 'Section 40 (a)(ia) and Section 194C(3) of the Act r…

SHRI ANIL KHANDELWAL,INDORE vs. THE ITO-5(3), INDORE

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 299/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore12 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 143(3)Section 194(3)Section 194CSection 194C(3)Section 263Section 40

…ner of Commercial Tax, Jabalpur and Others (2012) 56 VST 84 (MP). (ii) The State of Madras Vs M/s. Radio and Electricals Ltd (1967) AIR 234, 1966 SCR 198 (S.C) (iii) CIT Vs Valibhai Khanbhai Mankad 216 Taxman 18 (Guj.) (iv) CIT Vs Shri Marikamba Transport Co. 379 ITR 129 (Kar.) (v) CIT Vs United Rice Land Ltd 322 ITR 0594 (P&H) (vi) CIT Vs Poompuhar Shipping Corporation Ltd 282 ITR 0003 (Mad) (vii) CIT-II, Indore passed u/s 263 7. On the other hand Ld. Departmental Representative supported the order of lower authorities. 8. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. The sole iss…

EAGLE STEEL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2871/AHD/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P. K. Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri James Kurian, Sr. D.R

Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 197Section 197ASection 40

…oticed, section 40(a)(ia) would apply when there is a requirement of deduction of tax at source and such requirement is either not fulfilled or having deducted tax at source is not deposited within prescribed time". 30. In CITv. Marikamba Transport Co. [2015] 379 ITR 129/231 Taxman 84/57 taxmann.com 273. Hon'ble Karnataka High Court has formulated a question as to whether non-filing of Form No. 15I/J within the prescribed time is only a technical default or the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act are attracted? and proceeded to answer the same as under:-- 'Section 40 (a)(ia) and Section 194C(3) of the Act…

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD UNIT AWARPUR CEMENT WORKS,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 345/NAG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negi

Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 201

…nt cannot be linked to the declaration of tax at source. Any such failure therefore cannot be visualized by adverse consequences provided under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. (Para 29) In CIT vs. Sri Marikamba Transport Co. in ITA No. 553 of 2013 reported in 379 ITR 129 (Kam.), Hon'ble Karnataka High Court has formulated a question as to whether non-filing of Form No. 151/J within the prescribed time is only a technical default or the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act are attracted and proceeded to answer the same. The combined reading of these two provisions make it clear that if there is any breach of…

INDER CHAND AGARWAL(HUF),HOOGHLY vs. ITO, WARD 45(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 1481/KOL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri M.Balaganesh & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl.CIT, ld.DR

Section 194CSection 194C(3)Section 40

…om the payments made to sub-contractors and no disallowance can be made under s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act, in support of his contention, relied on the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CIT vs. Sri Marikamba Transport Co reported in (2015) 57 Taxmann.com 273 (Karnataka) and we may refer to the relevant portion of which is reproduced here in below: 4. The combined reading of these two provisions make it clear that if there is any breach of requirements of Section 194C(3), the question of applicability of Section 40(a)(ia) arises. The exclusion provided in Sub-section of Section 194C from the l…

SOMA RANI GHOSH,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-49, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1420/KOL/2015[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Sept 2016AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 40

…, another Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal reached the same conclusion while following the decision of the Coordinate Bench in the case of CIT –vs.- Valibhai Khanbhai Mankad (supra) and CIT –vs.- Sri Marikamba Transport Co. in ITA No. 553 of 2013 reported in 379 ITR 129 (Karn.). 32. It is worth noticing that in ACIT –vs.- Mr. Mohammed Suhail, Kurnool in ITA No. 1536.Hyd/2014, order dated 13.02.2015, the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal specifically held that the provisions of section 194C(6) are independent of section 194C(7), and just because there is violation of provisions of section 194C(7), disallowance un…

NARESH KUMAR YADAV,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in I

ITA 443/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.315 & 443/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 Shri Naresh Kumar Yadav, The Assistant Commissioner Of 344, Walltax Road, V. Income Tax, Chennai - 600 079. Business Circle – Xi, Chennai - 600 006. Pan : Abapy 9894 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. N. Devanathan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sahadevan, JCIT

Section 154Section 194C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.315 & 443/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 Shri Naresh Kumar Yadav, The Assistant Commissioner of 344, Walltax Road, v. Income Tax, Chennai - 600 079. Business Circle – XI, Chennai - 600 006. PAN : ABAPY 9894 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Sh. N. Devanathan, Advocate ""यथ"…

NARESH KUMAR YADAV,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in I

ITA 315/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. N. Devanathan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sahadevan, JCIT

Section 154Section 194C

MAHALAXMI CARGO MOVERS,MUMBAI vs. ITO 15(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6191/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2015AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri B.V.JhaveriFor Respondent: Shri Aarsi Prasad

Section 194CSection 194C(3)Section 40

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ ‘बी’, म ुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM आमकय अऩीर सं./ITA No.6191/Mum/2013 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2009-2010) M/s Mahalaxmi Cargo Movers, Vs. ITO, Ward-15(1)(2), Shop No.2, Doshi Chambers, Mumbai-400007 Nandlal Jani Marg, Dana Bunder, Mumbai-400009 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ PAN/GIR No. : AAKFM 7546 H (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri B.V.Jhaveri याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Aarsi Prasad सुनवाई की तायीख / Date of Hearing : 14/…