CIT v. Vector Shipping Services (P) Ltd.

357 ITR 642High Court2013#1326 most cited

What is CIT v. Vector Shipping Services (P) Ltd. authority for?

Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, applies only when an amount is payable (accrued) and not when the amount has already been disbursed or paid.

87

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Vector Shipping Services (P) Ltd. · Section 40(a)(ia) · applicability of Section 40(a)(ia) · amounts payable · amounts paid · TDS default disallowance · Allahabad High Court 2013 · SLP dismissed Supreme Court · disallowance expenses · unpaid liabilities

Also reported as

38 Taxmann.com 77218 Taxmann 93

Sections most often in play

Section 194CSection 195Section 40(a)(ia)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 197Section 197ASection 43B

Issues it is cited on

section 194csection 201(1)section 40(a)section 40(a)(ia)non-application of mindsection 40speaking ordersection 143(3)previous yearindiaprescribedcompany

Judgments citing CIT v. Vector Shipping Services (P) Ltd.

MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED,TRIVANDRUM vs. ITO,CIRCLE CENTRAL, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 496/COCH/2025[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Aug 2025AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194CSection 40

…nancial year, is not attracted. Therefore, according to the appellants, disallowance cannot be sustained. This contention was sought to be substantiated by relying on the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in CIT v. Vector Shipping Services (P.) Ltd. [2013] 357 ITR 642/38 taxmann.com 77/218 Taxman 93 (Mag.). Primarily, this contention should be answered with reference to the language used in the statutory provision. Section 40(a)(ia) makes it clear that the consequence of disallowance is attracted when an individual, who is liable to deduct tax on any interest payable to a resident on which tax is deductible at…

MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 465/COCH/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Aug 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194CSection 40

…nancial year, is not attracted. Therefore, according to the appellants, disallowance cannot be sustained. This contention was sought to be substantiated by relying on the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in CIT v. Vector Shipping Services (P.) Ltd. [2013] 357 ITR 642/38 taxmann.com 77/218 Taxman 93 (Mag.). Primarily, this contention should be answered with reference to the language used in the statutory provision. Section 40(a)(ia) makes it clear that the consequence of disallowance is attracted when an individual, who is liable to deduct tax on any interest payable to a resident on which tax is deductible at…

MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 464/COCH/2025[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Aug 2025AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194CSection 40

…nancial year, is not attracted. Therefore, according to the appellants, disallowance cannot be sustained. This contention was sought to be substantiated by relying on the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in CIT v. Vector Shipping Services (P.) Ltd. [2013] 357 ITR 642/38 taxmann.com 77/218 Taxman 93 (Mag.). Primarily, this contention should be answered with reference to the language used in the statutory provision. Section 40(a)(ia) makes it clear that the consequence of disallowance is attracted when an individual, who is liable to deduct tax on any interest payable to a resident on which tax is deductible at…

M/S. JAGANNATH CONSTRUCTION,RAYAGADA vs. ITO, RAYAGADA WARD, RAYAGADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 147/CTK/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack13 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2012-13 M/S.Jagannath Construction, M/S.Jagannath Construction, Vs. Ito, Ito, Rayagada Rayagada Ward, Ward, At/Po: Tikini, Rayagada At/Po: Tikini, Rayagada Rayagada Pan/Gir No. No.Aaifj 0479 L (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri J.M.Pattnaik Asnd Subit Sahu, Advs J.M.Pattnaik Asnd Subit Sahu, Advs Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 13/8 8/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 13/8 /8/2024 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri J.M.Pattnaik asnd Subit Sahu, AdvsFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty
Section 40

…lication and the same came to be disposed off vide an order in M.A.No.34/CTK/2017 dated 24.6.2022. It was the submission that originally, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal had followed the decision in the case of Victor Shipping Services Pvt Ltd., (2013) 357 ITR 642 (All) and subsequently on the reversal of the same by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Palam Gas vs CIT,(2017) 81 taxmann.com 43(SC) order dated 9th May, 2017, the revenue had filed M.A. and the order of the Tribunal had been recalled. It was the submission that now the issue was squarely covered by the decision of the Co-…

RYATAR SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMIT.,HUBLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD, BELGAUM., BELGAUM

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 161/PAN/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri N. Shrikanth
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH : PANAJI (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G.D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA.No. A.Y. Assessee/ Dept./ Order Appealed Proceedings No. Appellant Respondent against CIT(A), u/sec. Belgaum 1. 152/PAN./2015 2005-06 No.498/BGM/2014- Ryatar 2015, dated 18.03.2015 Sahakari Sakkare 2. 153/PAN./2015 2006-07 No.499/BGM/2014- 2015, dated Karkhane The ACIT, u/s. 143(3) 18.03.2015 Niyamit, Circle-1, of the 3. 154/PAN./2015 2008-09 No.495/BGM/2014- Timmapur 2015, dated Mangal Income Tax 18.03.2015 PIN – 587 122 Mudho…

RYATAR SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMIT.,HUBLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD, BELGAUM., BELGAUM

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 160/PAN/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri N. Shrikanth
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH : PANAJI (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G.D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA.No. A.Y. Assessee/ Dept./ Order Appealed Proceedings No. Appellant Respondent against CIT(A), u/sec. Belgaum 1. 152/PAN./2015 2005-06 No.498/BGM/2014- Ryatar 2015, dated 18.03.2015 Sahakari Sakkare 2. 153/PAN./2015 2006-07 No.499/BGM/2014- 2015, dated Karkhane The ACIT, u/s. 143(3) 18.03.2015 Niyamit, Circle-1, of the 3. 154/PAN./2015 2008-09 No.495/BGM/2014- Timmapur 2015, dated Mangal Income Tax 18.03.2015 PIN – 587 122 Mudho…

RYATAR SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMIT.,HUBLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD, BELGAUM., BELGAUM

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 159/PAN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 Jul 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri N. Shrikanth
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH : PANAJI (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G.D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA.No. A.Y. Assessee/ Dept./ Order Appealed Proceedings No. Appellant Respondent against CIT(A), u/sec. Belgaum 1. 152/PAN./2015 2005-06 No.498/BGM/2014- Ryatar 2015, dated 18.03.2015 Sahakari Sakkare 2. 153/PAN./2015 2006-07 No.499/BGM/2014- 2015, dated Karkhane The ACIT, u/s. 143(3) 18.03.2015 Niyamit, Circle-1, of the 3. 154/PAN./2015 2008-09 No.495/BGM/2014- Timmapur 2015, dated Mangal Income Tax 18.03.2015 PIN – 587 122 Mudho…

RYATAR SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMIT.,HUBLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD, BELGAUM., BELGAUM

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 158/PAN/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri N. Shrikanth
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH : PANAJI (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G.D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA.No. A.Y. Assessee/ Dept./ Order Appealed Proceedings No. Appellant Respondent against CIT(A), u/sec. Belgaum 1. 152/PAN./2015 2005-06 No.498/BGM/2014- Ryatar 2015, dated 18.03.2015 Sahakari Sakkare 2. 153/PAN./2015 2006-07 No.499/BGM/2014- 2015, dated Karkhane The ACIT, u/s. 143(3) 18.03.2015 Niyamit, Circle-1, of the 3. 154/PAN./2015 2008-09 No.495/BGM/2014- Timmapur 2015, dated Mangal Income Tax 18.03.2015 PIN – 587 122 Mudho…

RYATAR SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMIT.,HUBLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BAGALKOT., BAGALKOT

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 157/PAN/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri N. Shrikanth
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH : PANAJI (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G.D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA.No. A.Y. Assessee/ Dept./ Order Appealed Proceedings No. Appellant Respondent against CIT(A), u/sec. Belgaum 1. 152/PAN./2015 2005-06 No.498/BGM/2014- Ryatar 2015, dated 18.03.2015 Sahakari Sakkare 2. 153/PAN./2015 2006-07 No.499/BGM/2014- 2015, dated Karkhane The ACIT, u/s. 143(3) 18.03.2015 Niyamit, Circle-1, of the 3. 154/PAN./2015 2008-09 No.495/BGM/2014- Timmapur 2015, dated Mangal Income Tax 18.03.2015 PIN – 587 122 Mudho…

RYATAR SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMIT.,HUBLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BAGALKOT., BAGALKOT

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 155/PAN/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri N. Shrikanth
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH : PANAJI (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G.D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA.No. A.Y. Assessee/ Dept./ Order Appealed Proceedings No. Appellant Respondent against CIT(A), u/sec. Belgaum 1. 152/PAN./2015 2005-06 No.498/BGM/2014- Ryatar 2015, dated 18.03.2015 Sahakari Sakkare 2. 153/PAN./2015 2006-07 No.499/BGM/2014- 2015, dated Karkhane The ACIT, u/s. 143(3) 18.03.2015 Niyamit, Circle-1, of the 3. 154/PAN./2015 2008-09 No.495/BGM/2014- Timmapur 2015, dated Mangal Income Tax 18.03.2015 PIN – 587 122 Mudho…

RYATAR SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMIT.,HUBLI vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1. BIJAPUR., BIJAPUR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 154/PAN/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 Jul 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri N. Shrikanth
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH : PANAJI (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G.D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA.No. A.Y. Assessee/ Dept./ Order Appealed Proceedings No. Appellant Respondent against CIT(A), u/sec. Belgaum 1. 152/PAN./2015 2005-06 No.498/BGM/2014- Ryatar 2015, dated 18.03.2015 Sahakari Sakkare 2. 153/PAN./2015 2006-07 No.499/BGM/2014- 2015, dated Karkhane The ACIT, u/s. 143(3) 18.03.2015 Niyamit, Circle-1, of the 3. 154/PAN./2015 2008-09 No.495/BGM/2014- Timmapur 2015, dated Mangal Income Tax 18.03.2015 PIN – 587 122 Mudho…

RYATAR SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMIT.,HUBLI vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1. BIJAPUR., BIJAPUR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 153/PAN/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 Jul 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri N. Shrikanth
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH : PANAJI (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G.D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA.No. A.Y. Assessee/ Dept./ Order Appealed Proceedings No. Appellant Respondent against CIT(A), u/sec. Belgaum 1. 152/PAN./2015 2005-06 No.498/BGM/2014- Ryatar 2015, dated 18.03.2015 Sahakari Sakkare 2. 153/PAN./2015 2006-07 No.499/BGM/2014- 2015, dated Karkhane The ACIT, u/s. 143(3) 18.03.2015 Niyamit, Circle-1, of the 3. 154/PAN./2015 2008-09 No.495/BGM/2014- Timmapur 2015, dated Mangal Income Tax 18.03.2015 PIN – 587 122 Mudho…

RYATAR SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMIT.,HUBLI vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1. BIJAPUR., BIJAPUR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 152/PAN/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 Jul 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri N. Shrikanth
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH : PANAJI (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G.D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA.No. A.Y. Assessee/ Dept./ Order Appealed Proceedings No. Appellant Respondent against CIT(A), u/sec. Belgaum 1. 152/PAN./2015 2005-06 No.498/BGM/2014- Ryatar 2015, dated 18.03.2015 Sahakari Sakkare 2. 153/PAN./2015 2006-07 No.499/BGM/2014- 2015, dated Karkhane The ACIT, u/s. 143(3) 18.03.2015 Niyamit, Circle-1, of the 3. 154/PAN./2015 2008-09 No.495/BGM/2014- Timmapur 2015, dated Mangal Income Tax 18.03.2015 PIN – 587 122 Mudho…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1-1, KOTA vs. SHRI CHANDI RAM, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 662/JPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Siddharth Ranka (Adv.) &For Respondent: Smt Runi Pal (Addl. CIT)
Section 143(3)

…f Rs.7,55,642/- stating that in the original assessment order, AO added FDR interest of Rs.6,23,298/- over and above net profit estimated @ 10% of the turnover 3. Deleted the addition of Rs.39,96,030/- considering the case of Vector ShippingServices Pvt. Ltd. 357 ITR 642 (All) in which SLP was dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court stating that the section 40(a)(ia) are applicable only when the amount is payable and not when the amount is already paid. 4. ITAT:- The Hon'ble ITAT vide its order in of Revenue appeal of ITA No. 11/1P/201528.02.2017 passed order as under:- 1 Dismissed the appeal on the issue of deleting…

KONARK AQUATICS & EXPORT (P) LTD,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), BHUBANESWAR,

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 358/CTK/2014[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack20 Mar 2023AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate assisted by MissFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR assisted by Shri
Section 40

…ellaneous application filed by the revenue in MA No.33/CTK/2017, in respect of the grounds No.5 & 6 of the assessee’s appeal which was been allowed by following the decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Victor Shipping Pvt. Ltd., reported in 357 ITR 642(All). Subsequent to the reversal of the said decision by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Palam Gas Service, reported in 394 ITR 300 (SC), the order of the Tribunal dated 28.04.2017 came to be 2 recalled for readjudication of grounds No.5 & 6 of the assessee’ s appeal. Consequently, only grounds No.5 & 6 of the assesse’s appeal is being a…

HI-LITE BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOZHIKODE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 620/COCH/2022[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2009-2010

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Mr. Shameem Ahamed, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. AR
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40

…disallow the amounts which had actually Page 4 of 16 been paid during the previous year as held in Merlyn Shipping and Transports vs. Additional CIT [(2012) 16 ITR(Trib.) 1 (SB) (Vishakhapatnam)] affirmed in CIT vs. Vector Shipping Services (P) Ltd. [(2013) 357 ITR 642(All)]. 6. That the CIT (A) is unjustified in not accepting the judgements in the case of a. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Shri M.K. Gurumurthy (ITAT Bangalore) dated 10/ 05 /2012 relating to Assessment Year 2008-09. b. IN THE ITAT BANGALORE BENCH 'B' -Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 1, Udupi Vs. Ananda Marakala* [ASSESSMENT Y…

SHRI SHRI NISHANT JAIN,BILASPUR(CG) vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,RANGE-I, BILASPUR(CG)

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 199/BIL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.199/Rpr/2016 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Nishant Jain, Vs Jcit, Range-1, Bilaspur(Cg) M/S Landmark Engineer, Flat No.27, Shantinagar, Ring Road No.2, Bilaspur Pan No. : Agepj 9793 M (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N.Singh, Sr. DR
Section 40

…आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, रायऩुर न्यायऩीठ, रायऩुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR श्री रविश सूद, न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री अरुण खोड़वऩया, ऱेखा सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM आयकर अऩीऱ सं./ITA No.199/RPR/2016 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Nishant Jain, Vs JCIT, Range-1, Bilaspur(CG) M/s Landmark Engineer, Flat No.27, Shantinagar, Ring Road No.2, Bilaspur PAN No. : AGEPJ 9793 M (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri R.B.Doshi, CA राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri G.N.Singh, Sr. DR सुनिाई की तारीख /…

M/S. RATAN CONDUCTORS,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR

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

ITA 1259/JPR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1259/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Ratan Conductors, Cuke A.C.I.T., Vs. H-377(B), Road No. 17, Vki Area, Circle-4, Jaipur. Jaipur. Pan No.: Aabfr 8166 P Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Ashok Kr. Gupta (Adv) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Jcit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 05/08/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 02/09/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Jaipur Dated 21/08/2019 For The A.Y. 2012-13 Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee: “1. Disallowance Of Interest Of Rs. 17,73,769/- On Account Of Non Tds:- That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case Ld. Cit(A) Has Grossly Erred In Law & Facts In Confirming Disallowance Of Interest Of Rs.17,73,769/- Paid To M/S Barelays Investment & Loan (India) Ltd. (Rs. 298826/-) & M/S Future Capital (Rs. 1474943/-) On Account Of Non Deduction Of Tds Thereon By Invoking Provisions Of Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The It Act 1961. (A) The Assessee Firm Paid, Interest Of Rs. 2,98,826/- To Nbfc. M/S Barelays Investment & Loan (India) Ltd. & Rs.14,74,943/- To M/S Future Capital Another Nbfc. The Assessee Firm Raised Loan

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Kr. Gupta (Adv)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 40

…40 (a) (ia) would cover not only to the amounts which are payable as on 31st March of the particular year but also which are payable at any time during the year. However, the Allahabad High Court in case of CIT Vs. Vector Shipping Services (P) Ltd. 94 DTR 101/357 ITR 642 held that it is only the amount which is payable and not that which as been already paid by to end of the year that can be disallowed u/s 40 (a) (ia). Against the said decision of Allahabad High Court, the department filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) in the Supreme Court which was dismissed by the Supreme Court vide its order Dt. 02.07.2014. T…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SOUL SPACE PROJECTS LTD., DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 193/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jun 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 193/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 1849/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Acit, Vs Soul Space Projects Ltd., Central Circle-15, E-23/B-1, Extn. Mcie, Mathura New Delhi-110055 Road, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajcs7736F Co No. 271/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Co No. 284/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Soul Space Projects Ltd., Vs Acit, E-23/B-1, Extn. Mcie, Mathura Central Circle-15, Road, New Delhi-110044 New Delhi-110055 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajcs7736F

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(2)(b)

…not payable (not outstanding) as on the last day of financial year, therefore, to this extent, the Id. CIT(A) erred in not excluding such expenditure outside the preview of Section 40 (a) (ia). Reliance is placed upon CIT Vs. Vector Shipping Services (P) Ltd. 357 ITR 642 (ALLAHBAD) (SLP of the Department has been dismissed by Hon’ble Apex Court vide order dated 02.07.2014 5.2 That without prejudice, out of total expenditure Rs.9,65,53,346/-, only Rs. 46,96,235/- have been claimed as deduction and balance have been transferred to work in progress, therefore not claimed as a deduction, thus only 4.86% of the total…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SOUL SPACE PROJECTS LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1849/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jun 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 193/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 1849/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Acit, Vs Soul Space Projects Ltd., Central Circle-15, E-23/B-1, Extn. Mcie, Mathura New Delhi-110055 Road, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajcs7736F Co No. 271/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Co No. 284/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Soul Space Projects Ltd., Vs Acit, E-23/B-1, Extn. Mcie, Mathura Central Circle-15, Road, New Delhi-110044 New Delhi-110055 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajcs7736F

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(2)(b)

…not payable (not outstanding) as on the last day of financial year, therefore, to this extent, the Id. CIT(A) erred in not excluding such expenditure outside the preview of Section 40 (a) (ia). Reliance is placed upon CIT Vs. Vector Shipping Services (P) Ltd. 357 ITR 642 (ALLAHBAD) (SLP of the Department has been dismissed by Hon’ble Apex Court vide order dated 02.07.2014 5.2 That without prejudice, out of total expenditure Rs.9,65,53,346/-, only Rs. 46,96,235/- have been claimed as deduction and balance have been transferred to work in progress, therefore not claimed as a deduction, thus only 4.86% of the total…

Showing 1–20 of 87 · Page 1 of 5