Frontier Offshore Exploration (India) Ltd. v. DCIT

118 ITD 494Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2009#18865 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2017.

Judgments citing Frontier Offshore Exploration (India) Ltd. v. DCIT

MAGICK WOODS EXPORTS P LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 2105/CHNY/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jun 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

Section 1Section 10BSection 10fSection 143(3)Section 2Section 250(6)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 438

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘एस.एम.सी’ ‘बी’’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘SMC’ ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी,लेखा सद"य केसम" Before Shri A. Mohan Alankamony, Accountant Member आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.2105/Mds/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Vs The DCIT, M/s. Magick Woods Exports P Ltd., C/o. S. Sridhar, Advocate, Salary Circle III, New No.14, Old No.82, Flat No.5, Chennai 1st Avenue, Indira Nagar, Adyar, Chennai – 600 020. PAN: AADCM6228N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri S. Sridhar & Sriraman, अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Appellant by Advocates : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kuma…

A. KISORE RAO AND OTHERS vs. ITO,

In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2010-11 is allowed as indicated above

ITA 1737/BANG/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2015AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri K.K. Chythanya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr.P.K. Srihari, Addl. CIT (D.R.)
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 201Section 40

…ing Officer was of the view that deduction of tax at a lower rate cannot be taken as TDS made in accordance with the provisions of Chapter XVII-B. Following the decisions of the ITAT, Chennai Bench in the case of Frontier Offshore Exploration (I) Ltd. V DCIT (118 ITD 494) and ACIT V Pixie Enterprises (2011) 15 Taxmann 314 (Chennai), the Assessing Officer held that even in case of short deduction, the liability to deduct taxes exist as on the date of filing of the return of income and therefore that amount which has not suffered TDS is liable for disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and accordingly disa…

CONFERENCECALL SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD.,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 484/CHNY/2014[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2015AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.484 & 1057/Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri. T. Banusekar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. A.V. Sreekanth, IRS, JCIT
Section 195Section 195(2)Section 40Section 9

…itting the same would not qualify as expenditure u/s.40(a)(i) of the Act. 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the material on record. A similar issue was considered by the Tribunal in the case of Frontier Offshore Exploration (India) Ltd. vs. DCIT, 118 ITD 494 (Chennai) wherein held that ‘’The provisions of section 195 clearly show that any person responsible for Making payment to a non-resident in respect of any interest or any other sum chargeable under the provisions of this Act has to deduct tax at the rates in force. Obviously 'any other sum’ chargeable under the provisions of this Act would mean…

CONFERENCECALL SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD.,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1057/CHNY/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2015AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.484 & 1057/Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri. T. Banusekar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. A.V. Sreekanth, IRS, JCIT
Section 195Section 195(2)Section 40Section 9

…itting the same would not qualify as expenditure u/s.40(a)(i) of the Act. 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the material on record. A similar issue was considered by the Tribunal in the case of Frontier Offshore Exploration (India) Ltd. vs. DCIT, 118 ITD 494 (Chennai) wherein held that ‘’The provisions of section 195 clearly show that any person responsible for Making payment to a non-resident in respect of any interest or any other sum chargeable under the provisions of this Act has to deduct tax at the rates in force. Obviously 'any other sum’ chargeable under the provisions of this Act would mean…

Frontier Offshore Exploration (India) Ltd. v. DCIT (118 ITD 494) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax