DIT v. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd.

365 ITR 560High Court2014#2050 most cited

What is DIT v. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. authority for?

If a sum is not chargeable to tax in the hands of the recipient, the payer is not obligated to deduct tax at source, and consequently, no disallowance under section 40(a)(i) can be made. The Bombay High Court also affirmed that penalty proceedings under section 271B may be quashed in certain circumstances.

56

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Also referred to as

DIT v. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. · 365 ITR 560 · Bombay High Court · section 40(a)(i) · section 195 · recipient's income not taxable · no TDS obligation · disallowance for non-deduction · penalty section 271B

Sections most often in play

Section 139(1)Section 250Section 132Section 139(4)Section 142(2A)Section 153ASection 271BSection 274

Issues it is cited on

section 201(3)section 206c(6)section 206c(6a)section 206c(7)section 153(1)(a)tax collected at sourceprincipal officerpenalty proceedings initiatedsection 142(2a)assessee in defaultsection 192section 201(1)

Judgments citing DIT v. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd.

Aarambh Advertising & Marketing Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-57(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 937/KOL/2015[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jul 2018AY 2004-2005

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A Nos. 936 & 937/Kol/2015 Assessment Years : 2003-04 & 2004-05 Aarambh Advertising & Marketing Ltd. -Vs- Ito(Tds), Wd-57(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aaeca 7340 B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G. Banerjee, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri M.Balaganesh, AM & Hon’ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, JM] I.T.A Nos. 936 & 937/Kol/2015 Assessment Years : 2003-04 & 2004-05 Aarambh Advertising & Marketing Ltd. -vs- ITO(TDS), Wd-57(1), Kolkata [PAN: AAECA 7340 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri G. Banerjee, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri A. Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT Date of Hearing : 26.06.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 06.07.2018 ORDER Per M.Balaganesh, AM 1. These appeals by the Assessee arise out of the separate orders of the Learned Commissioner of In…

Aarambh Advertising & Marketing Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO (TDS) WD-57(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 936/KOL/2015[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jul 2018AY 2003-2004

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A Nos. 936 & 937/Kol/2015 Assessment Years : 2003-04 & 2004-05 Aarambh Advertising & Marketing Ltd. -Vs- Ito(Tds), Wd-57(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aaeca 7340 B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G. Banerjee, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri M.Balaganesh, AM & Hon’ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, JM] I.T.A Nos. 936 & 937/Kol/2015 Assessment Years : 2003-04 & 2004-05 Aarambh Advertising & Marketing Ltd. -vs- ITO(TDS), Wd-57(1), Kolkata [PAN: AAECA 7340 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri G. Banerjee, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri A. Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT Date of Hearing : 26.06.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 06.07.2018 ORDER Per M.Balaganesh, AM 1. These appeals by the Assessee arise out of the separate orders of the Learned Commissioner of In…

Tech Mahindra Ltd. (Ca Satyam Asp Pvt. Ltd. Since Merged With Tech Mahindra Ltd.), Mumbai vs. ITO (International Taxation) - 1, Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed only on the ground of limitation

ITA 5283/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jun 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K Pradhantech Mahindra Limited (Ca Satyam Asp Pvt. Ltd. Since Merged With Tech Mahindra Limited) ……………. Appellant Gateway Building, Apollo Bunder Mumbai 400 001 Pan – Aaacm3484F V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent I.T. Circle–1, Mumbai Assessee By : Shri Karthik Natrajan Revenue By : Shri M.V. Raj Guru

For Appellant: Shri Karthik NatrajanFor Respondent: Shri M.V. Raj Guru
Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)

…of Vodafone Essar Mobile Services Ltd. and Anr. v/s Union of India, [2016] 385 ITR 436 (Del.) and in CIT v/s C.J. International Hotels Pvt. Ltd., ITA no.57 of 2015. The Hon'ble 9 Tech Mahindra Limited Jurisdictional High Court in Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd., 365 ITR 560 also followed the decision in NHK Japan Broadcasting Corporation (supra). We are also conscious of the fact that the Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, in Vodafone India Ltd. v/s ITO, ITA no.4511/Mum./2012 and Ors. dated 12th March 2018, following the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in NJK Japan Broadcasting Corporation (supra) held that initiation of…

Win Cable & Datacom P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT (TDS) 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 3635/MUM/2016[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Apr 2018AY 2001-02

Bench: S/Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Amarjit Singh (Jm) I.T.A. No. 3635/Mum/2016(Assessment Year 2001-02)

Section 191Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)

…edings. It is noted that the Special Bench in the case of Mahindra & Mahindra took a decision on the issue of period of limitations and the Department challenged the said decision before the Hon'ble High Court, wherein, (DIT vs Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. (2014) 365 ITR 560) (Bom.) it was held as under:- “6 It appears that after the Appeals were filed an additional ground was raised on 18.05.2006 which reads as under: “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 195 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is void abinitio being barred by limitation?” 7 I…

M/S.Us Technology Resources P. Ltd, Trivandrum vs. The ACIT(International Taxation), Trivandrum

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the Stay Petition filed

ITA 122/COCH/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Apr 2018AY 2007-08

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

Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 40

…f the financial year in which the transaction was made. The ld. Counsel for the assessee strongly relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Director of Income-tax (International Taxation) vs. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. reported in 365 ITR 560. 5. The Ld. DR on the other hand strongly supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A). 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. As regards the issue on merits, it was fairly admitted by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the matter is covered in favour of the Revenue by the orders of S.P. N…

ITO (TDS) 3 (4), Mumbai vs. Vodafone Essar Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, (a) appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2000-01, 2001-02,

ITA 4808/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm)

For Appellant: Bajpai (AR)For Respondent: Yadav (DR)
Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)

…limit for completion of the TDS proceedings as one year from the end of the financial year in which proceedings u/s 201(1) of the Act was initiated. The decision of special bench has since been upheld by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the same case reported in 365 ITR 560. 12. The Ld. counsel further submitted that the impugned orders u/s 201(1) of the Act has been passed for assessment years 2000-01 to 2004-05 on 24-03- 2011. He submitted that the Income tax officer issued first notice on 08-03- Assessment Years: 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2007-08 2004 in the form of a letter calling for detai…

ITO (OSD) (TDS) 3(1), Mumbai vs. Vodafone Essar Ltd ( Now Known As Vodafone India Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, (a) appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2000-01, 2001-02,

ITA 5293/MUM/2012[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2018AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm)

For Appellant: Bajpai (AR)For Respondent: Yadav (DR)
Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)

…limit for completion of the TDS proceedings as one year from the end of the financial year in which proceedings u/s 201(1) of the Act was initiated. The decision of special bench has since been upheld by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the same case reported in 365 ITR 560. 12. The Ld. counsel further submitted that the impugned orders u/s 201(1) of the Act has been passed for assessment years 2000-01 to 2004-05 on 24-03- 2011. He submitted that the Income tax officer issued first notice on 08-03- Assessment Years: 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2007-08 2004 in the form of a letter calling for detai…

ITO (OSD) (TDS) 3(1), Mumbai vs. Vodafone Essar Ltd ( Now Known As Vodafone India Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, (a) appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2000-01, 2001-02,

ITA 4638/MUM/2012[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2018AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm)

For Appellant: Bajpai (AR)For Respondent: Yadav (DR)
Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)

…limit for completion of the TDS proceedings as one year from the end of the financial year in which proceedings u/s 201(1) of the Act was initiated. The decision of special bench has since been upheld by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the same case reported in 365 ITR 560. 12. The Ld. counsel further submitted that the impugned orders u/s 201(1) of the Act has been passed for assessment years 2000-01 to 2004-05 on 24-03- 2011. He submitted that the Income tax officer issued first notice on 08-03- Assessment Years: 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2007-08 2004 in the form of a letter calling for detai…

Vodafone India Ltd. (Formerly Known As Vodafone Essar Ltd.), Mumbai vs. I.T.O. (OSD) (TDS) RG. 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, (a) appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2000-01, 2001-02,

ITA 4511/MUM/2012[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2018AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm)

For Appellant: Bajpai (AR)For Respondent: Yadav (DR)
Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)

…limit for completion of the TDS proceedings as one year from the end of the financial year in which proceedings u/s 201(1) of the Act was initiated. The decision of special bench has since been upheld by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the same case reported in 365 ITR 560. 12. The Ld. counsel further submitted that the impugned orders u/s 201(1) of the Act has been passed for assessment years 2000-01 to 2004-05 on 24-03- 2011. He submitted that the Income tax officer issued first notice on 08-03- Assessment Years: 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2007-08 2004 in the form of a letter calling for detai…

Hathway C Net P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. TRO (TDS) RG 1, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4112/MUM/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Hathway C-Net Private The Tax Recovery Officer Limited, Rahejas, 4Th Floor, (Tds)-1 Smt. K.G. Mittal बिधम/ Corners Of Main Avenue & Ayurvedic Hospital Bldg, Vs. V.P. Road, Santa Cruz (West) Charni Road-(West), Mumbai- 400054 Mumbai-400 002 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaach8338K (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop, D.R
Section 133ASection 194CSection 201Section 201(1)

…in which the proceedings under Sec. 201(1) were initiated, therefore, the same was barred by limitation. The ld. A.R in support of his contention relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of DIT Vs. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. (2014) 365 ITR 560 (Bom). It was submitted by the ld. A.R that the issue under consideration was squarely covered by the order passed by the coordinate bench of this Tribunal, viz. ITAT, Mumbai “H”, Mumbai in the case of the assessee for A.Ys: 2001-02 and 2002-03, marked as ITA No. 6996/Mum/2014, and ITA No. 4261/Mum/2014, respectively (copy placed on record). The…

Hatway Nasik Cable Network P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. TRO (TDS) 1, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby Allowed

ITA 5190/MUM/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Feb 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. No.5190/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2003-04) बनाम/ Hathway Nasik Cable The Tax Recovery Officer Network Private Limited (Tds) Rg. -1 Vs. Rahejas, 4Th Floor, Corners Smt. K.G.Mittal Ayurvedic Of Main Avenue & V.P.Road, Hospital Bldg. Santacruz (West) Charni Road – West, Mumbai - 400054 Mumbai - 400002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaach9070Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi & Manoj DixitFor Respondent: Shri M. C. Omi Ningshen
Section 133Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)

…come Tax ITA No.5190.M.14 A.Y. 2003-04 Act, 1961, has been held to be one year. The appellant, in support of its contentions, relies on the following judicial pronouncement: Director of Income-tax (International Taxation) v. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. [(2014) 365 ITR 560 (Bom HC)] The Hon’ble court held that, even though section 201 does not prescribe any limitation period for assessee being declared as an assessee in default yet revenue will have to exercise power in that regard within a reasonable time. The passing of the order under section 201(1) has to be within one year from the end of the financial year in…

Hathway C-Net P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Tax Recovery (TDS) 1, Mumbai

The appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 4261/MUM/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Taneja

Section 201Section 201(1)

…or initiation of proceedings u/s 201(1) and also for passing order after initiation of proceedings. 6. The Ld A.R relied on the decision rendered by the jurisdictional Hon’ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of DIT Vs. Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd (2014)(365 ITR 560). The above said decision has been rendered by the Hon’ble High Court on the appeal filed by the revenue challenging the decision rendered by the Special bench. The Special bench of Tribunal had rendered its decision on the issue of limitation period as under:- (a) The proceedings u/s 201(1) can be initiated in the extended period of six years fr…

Hathway Cable & Datacom Ltd, Mumbai vs. TRO (TDS) RG 1, Mumbai

The appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 3512/MUM/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Taneja

Section 201Section 201(1)

…or initiation of proceedings u/s 201(1) and also for passing order after initiation of proceedings. 6. The Ld A.R relied on the decision rendered by the jurisdictional Hon’ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of DIT Vs. Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd (2014)(365 ITR 560). The above said decision has been rendered by the Hon’ble High Court on the appeal filed by the revenue challenging the decision rendered by the Special bench. The Special bench of Tribunal had rendered its decision on the issue of limitation period as under:- (a) The proceedings u/s 201(1) can be initiated in the extended period of six years fr…

Hathway Cable and Datacom Ltd, Mumbai vs. TRO (TDS) 1, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed

ITA 1810/MUM/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jun 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: S/Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & C.N. Prasad (Jm)

Section 133ASection 149(1)(a)Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)

…or initiation of proceedings u/s 201(1) and also for passing order after initiation of proceedings. 6. The Ld A.R relied on the decision rendered by the jurisdictional Hon’ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of DIT Vs. Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd (2014)(365 ITR 560). The above said decision has been rendered by the Hon’ble High Court on the appeal filed by the revenue challenging the decision rendered by the Special bench. The Special bench of Tribunal had rendered its decision on the issue of limitation period as under:- (a) The proceedings u/s 201(1) can be initiated in the extended period of six years fr…

Tril Infopark Limited, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

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

ITA 699/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jun 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.699/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. R. VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Dr. S. Moharana, CIT
Section 200Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” 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 No.699/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/s TRIL Infopark Limited, The Income Tax Officer(TDS) Ramanujan IT City, Taramani, v. Ward I(1), Rajiv Gandhi Salai, OMR, Chennai - 600 034. Chennai - 600 113. PAN : AACCT 9203 B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Sh. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advo…

Commissioner of Income Tax, Guntur vs. Agricultural Market Committee, Krosur

ITTA/166/2011HC Telangana21 Apr 2011

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN