DCIT v. Movies Stunt Artist

6 SOT 204Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2006#21140 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 350,364 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2023.

Judgments citing DCIT v. Movies Stunt Artist

DCIT (TDS)(OSD)-2(3), Mumbai vs. Uber India Systems Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 126/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Hiten ChandeFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kapoor
Section 165ASection 204Section 250

…ers reported in 179 Taxman 151 (Del.). c) Decision of Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Hardarshan Singh reported in 216 Taxman 283 (Del.). d) Decision of Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. Movies Stunt Artist reported in 6 SOT 204 (Mum.). e) Decision of Co-ordinate Bench of Indore Tribunal in the case of Chief medical Officer vs. ITO reported in 40 taxmann.com 156 3.5.8. We also find that the above views and propositions are also supported bv the circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes clarifying that an intermediary is not required to deduct tax at source. Few…

Uber India Systems Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT (TDS)-2(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 711/MUM/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhuber India Systems Vs. The Dcit(Tds)-2(3) Private Limited Smt. K.G. Mittal Unit 41/46, Floor 3 Ayurvedic Hospital Paragon, Phoenix Market Building, City, Lbs Marg, Charni Road (West) Kurla (W), Mumbai - 400002 Mumbai – 400070 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcu6223H Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : J.D. Mistry & Hiten Chande Respondent By : Achal Sharma

For Appellant: J.D. Mistry &For Respondent: Achal Sharma
Section 194Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)Section 204Section 206A

…ers reported in 179 Taxman 151 (Del.). c) Decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Hardarshan Singh reported in 216 Taxman 283 (Del.). d) Decision of Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. Movies Stunt Artist reported in 6 SOT 204 (Mum.). e) Decision of Co-ordinate Bench of Indore Tribunal in the case of Chief medical Officer vs. ITO reported in 40 taxmann.com 156 3.5.8. We also find that the above views and propositions are also supported bv the circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes clarifying that an intermediary is not required to deduct tax at source. Few…

Uber India Systems Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Jt.CIT (TDS)(OSD)-2(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5862/MUM/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Mar 2021AY 2016-17
Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)Section 204Section 206ASection 251(2)

…ers reported in 179 Taxman 151 (Del.). c) Decision of Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Hardarshan Singh reported in 216 Taxman 283 (Del.). d) Decision of Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. Movies Stunt Artist reported in 6 SOT 204 (Mum.). e) Decision of Co-ordinate Bench of Indore Tribunal in the case of Chief medical Officer vs. ITO reported in 40 taxmann.com 156 3.5.8. We also find that the above views and propositions are also supported bv the circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes clarifying that an intermediary is not required to deduct tax at source. Fe…

M/S.Malayalam Communication Ltd, Trivandrum vs. The ACIT, Trivandrum

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 403/COCH/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 194CSection 194JSection 201(1)

…ents made by the assessee to Matrix India on behalf of Ms. Katrina Kaif did not attract the provisions of section 194J of the Act. Accordingly, the grounds raised are allowed.” EMC vs. ITO (2010) 37 SOT 31 (Mum.), CIT v. Movies Stunt Artists Association(2006) 6 SOT 204 (Mum.), relied on.” I.T.A. No.403/Coch/2018 (3) Jasminder Singh vs. Addl. CIT (2016 (11) TMI 956 - ITAT Lucknow) wherein it was held as under: There is a difference between an "artist/entertainer" and a "film artist". An artist/entertainer can be called a film artist, if he renders his/her services pursuant to production of film. However, an art…

DCIT v. Movies Stunt Artist (6 SOT 204) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax