DCT v. Cox & Kings (I) Ltd & Anr.

ACIT CENT. CIR 5(40, MUMBAI vs. M/S. WADHWA GROUP HOLDINGS PVT. LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2017-18 The Asstt. Commissioner M/S. Wadhwa Group Of Income Tax, Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle – 5(4), 301 Platina, Room No.1927, 19Th Floor, Plot C-59, Vs. Air India Building, G Block, Nariman Point, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai - 400021 Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 098 Pan: Aaccv3961G (Appellant) (Respondent)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Asstt. Commissioner M/s. Wadhwa Group of Income Tax, Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle – 5(4), 301 Platina, Room No.1927, 19th Floor, Plot C-59, Vs. Air India Building, G Block, Nariman Point, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai - 400021 Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 098 PAN: AACCV3961G (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Mahesh O. Rajora, A.R. Revenue by : Shri Kishor Dhule, D.R. Date of Hearing : 21 . 06 . 2022 Date of Pron…

ACIT 16(1), MUMBAI vs. UTV ENTERTAINMENT TELEVISION LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleacit – 16(1) V. M/S. Utv Entertainment Television Ltd., 1St Floor, Building No. 14 Room No. 439, Aayakar Bhavan Solitaire Corporate Park M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Guru Hargovind Marg, Chakala Andheri(E), Mumbai – 400 053 Pan: Aaccv4782D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajit Kumar Jain Department By : M. Samatha

…10,20,88,270/- and ₹.8,40,82,020/- for the A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2014-15 respectively u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act treating these payments as Royalty. 3 On appeal the Ld.CIT(A) following the decision of the Mumbai Bench in the case of DCT v. Cox & Kings (I) Ltd & Anr [160 DTR 201] and Dish TV Indai Ltd v. ACIT [159 DTR 257] deleted the disallowance made u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. In these decisions the Coordinate Bench held that when there is a short deduction of TDS there cannot be any disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. 4. Ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. Counsel for the assess…

SAPIENS TECHNOLOGIES (1982) INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT- 6(3)(1),, MUMBAI

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed

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

…10,20,88,270/- and ₹.8,40,82,020/- for the A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2014-15 respectively u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act treating these payments as Royalty. 3 On appeal the Ld.CIT(A) following the decision of the Mumbai Bench in the case of DCT v. Cox & Kings (I) Ltd & Anr [160 DTR 201] and Dish TV Indai Ltd v. ACIT [159 DTR 257] deleted the disallowance made u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. In these decisions the Coordinate Bench held that when there is a short deduction of TDS there cannot be any disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. 4. Ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. Counsel for the assess…

SAPIENS TECHNOLOGIES(1982) INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - 6(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed

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

…10,20,88,270/- and ₹.8,40,82,020/- for the A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2014-15 respectively u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act treating these payments as Royalty. 3 On appeal the Ld.CIT(A) following the decision of the Mumbai Bench in the case of DCT v. Cox & Kings (I) Ltd & Anr [160 DTR 201] and Dish TV Indai Ltd v. ACIT [159 DTR 257] deleted the disallowance made u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. In these decisions the Coordinate Bench held that when there is a short deduction of TDS there cannot be any disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. 4. Ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. Counsel for the assess…

ACIT-16(1), MUMBAI vs. TV 18 HOME SHOPPING NETWORK LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

…,20,88,270/- and ₹.8,40,82,020/- for the A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2014-15 respectively u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act treating these payments as Royalty. 3. On appeal the Ld.CIT(A) following the decision of the Mumbai Bench in the case of DCT v. Cox & Kings (I) Ltd & Anr [160 DTR 201] and Dish TV Indai Ltd v. ACIT [159 DTR 257] deleted the disallowance made u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. In these decisions the Coordinate Bench held that when there is a short deduction of TDS there cannot be any disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. (A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2013-14) M/s. TV18 Home Shopping Network Ltd., 4. Ld. DR strongly supported the or…

ACIT-16(1), MUMBAI vs. TV18 HOME SHOPPING NETWORK LTD.,, MUMBAI

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

…,20,88,270/- and ₹.8,40,82,020/- for the A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2014-15 respectively u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act treating these payments as Royalty. 3. On appeal the Ld.CIT(A) following the decision of the Mumbai Bench in the case of DCT v. Cox & Kings (I) Ltd & Anr [160 DTR 201] and Dish TV Indai Ltd v. ACIT [159 DTR 257] deleted the disallowance made u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. In these decisions the Coordinate Bench held that when there is a short deduction of TDS there cannot be any disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. (A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2013-14) M/s. TV18 Home Shopping Network Ltd., 4. Ld. DR strongly supported the or…