Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

293 ITR 226Supreme Court of India2007#108 most cited

What is Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

The deductor cannot be treated as an assessee-in-default under Section 201(1) if the deductee has already paid the tax or offered the impugned receipts in their return of income. However, interest under Section 201(1A) for delayed deposit of tax can still be levied up to the date of filing of the return of income by the deductee.

576

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,164 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT · 293 ITR 226 · Section 201(1) assessee in default · Section 201(1A) interest · tax paid by deductee · deductor not in default · TDS non-deduction liability · Section 194C · CBDT Circular S/2013

Sections most often in play

Section 201(1A)Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 40(a)(ia)Section 143(3)Section 201Section 139Section 250

Issues it is cited on

interest under section 201(1a)section 271csection 201(1)assessee in defaultsection 201(1a)section 201section 194csection 20section 194section 19section 40(a)(ia)section 40(a)

Judgments citing Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

Badri Hari Babu, Nellore vs. Income Tax Officer(International Taxation), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed and the appeals filed by the respective assessees are dismissed

ITA 126/HYD/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 Badri Hari Babu Vs. Ito(International 15/342, Subedarpet Taxation) Andra Pradesh Nellore Nellore-524 001

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R.Murthy, Sr.AR
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 45(1)

…at source in respect of payment of Rs.2,00,76,000/-. He noted that 100% share of the Non Resident the provisions of section 45(1) of the I.T.Act. He noted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages (P) Ltd vs. CIT reported in 293 ITR 226 has held that liability to pay interest u/s. 201(1A) till the date of payment of tax by deductee assessee remains unaltered. Accordingly, the AO also levied the interest u/s. 201(1A) of the I.T.Act. 4. Before the ld.CIT(A), the assessee made elaborate submissions based on which the ld. CIT(A) called for a remand report from the AO. After conside…

Badri Hari Babu, Nellore vs. Income Tax Officer(International Taxation), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed and the appeals filed by the respective assessees are dismissed

ITA 125/HYD/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 Badri Hari Babu Vs. Ito(International 15/342, Subedarpet Taxation) Andra Pradesh Nellore Nellore-524 001

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R.Murthy, Sr.AR
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 45(1)

…at source in respect of payment of Rs.2,00,76,000/-. He noted that 100% share of the Non Resident the provisions of section 45(1) of the I.T.Act. He noted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages (P) Ltd vs. CIT reported in 293 ITR 226 has held that liability to pay interest u/s. 201(1A) till the date of payment of tax by deductee assessee remains unaltered. Accordingly, the AO also levied the interest u/s. 201(1A) of the I.T.Act. 4. Before the ld.CIT(A), the assessee made elaborate submissions based on which the ld. CIT(A) called for a remand report from the AO. After conside…

Income Tax Officer (International Taxation), Nellore vs. Badri Manjula, Nellore

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed and the appeals filed by the respective assessees are dismissed

ITA 780/HYD/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 Badri Hari Babu Vs. Ito(International 15/342, Subedarpet Taxation) Andra Pradesh Nellore Nellore-524 001

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R.Murthy, Sr.AR
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 45(1)

…at source in respect of payment of Rs.2,00,76,000/-. He noted that 100% share of the Non Resident the provisions of section 45(1) of the I.T.Act. He noted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages (P) Ltd vs. CIT reported in 293 ITR 226 has held that liability to pay interest u/s. 201(1A) till the date of payment of tax by deductee assessee remains unaltered. Accordingly, the AO also levied the interest u/s. 201(1A) of the I.T.Act. 4. Before the ld.CIT(A), the assessee made elaborate submissions based on which the ld. CIT(A) called for a remand report from the AO. After conside…

M/S. Bharti Airtel Limited, Indore vs. The CIT- (TDS), Bhopal

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 411/IND/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore14 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Bharti Airtel Limited Cit-(Tds) बनाम Indore Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) /Vs. Pan: Bplb1146F Assessee By Shri Sumit Nema, Sr. Adv. & Shri Gagan Tiwari, Ars Revenue By Shri P.K. Mitra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 04.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 14.09.2022 आदेश / / O R D E R O R D E R / / O R D E R O R D E R

Section 131Section 194HSection 194JSection 201(1)Section 263

…ubmitted any evidence to establish that the recipient service providers to whom the assessee has paid the roaming charges, have paid their entire taxes for the F.Y. 2009- 10. Hence, the decision of Apex Court in Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. VS. CIT 293 ITR 226 is not applicable in assessee’s case. In view of above it is held that the tax payable u/s 201 and interest payable u/s 201(1A) have been under- asessed.” It is noteworthy that the Ld. CIT has himself, on immediately preceding page i.e. Page No. 3 of his order, reproduced the reply of assessee from which it is clear that the assessee has submitte…

Pandharpur Muncipal Council, Solapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax (CPC)- TDS, Ghaziabad

ITA 315/PUN/2020[2015-16 (Q1-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 154Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 220Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 250

…e 4 of 12 Pandharpur Municipal Council ITA No. 305 to 315/PUN/2020 AY: 2011-12 to 2015-16 service the first proviso to section 201(1), r.w.e to section 191 of the Act and decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.” reported in 293 ITR 226(SC), contended that, since more or less all the contractors from whose accounts TDS was deducted, must have disclosed the said receipts as income in their respective returns and paid the taxes due thereon, hence assessee should not be treated as ‘assessee in default’ u/s 201(1) of the Act, resultantly holding so, there leaves no scope for applica…

Pandharpur Muncipal Council, Solapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax (CPC)- TDS, Ghaziabad

ITA 314/PUN/2020[2014-15 (Q4-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 154Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 220Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 250

…e 4 of 12 Pandharpur Municipal Council ITA No. 305 to 315/PUN/2020 AY: 2011-12 to 2015-16 service the first proviso to section 201(1), r.w.e to section 191 of the Act and decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.” reported in 293 ITR 226(SC), contended that, since more or less all the contractors from whose accounts TDS was deducted, must have disclosed the said receipts as income in their respective returns and paid the taxes due thereon, hence assessee should not be treated as ‘assessee in default’ u/s 201(1) of the Act, resultantly holding so, there leaves no scope for applica…

Pandharpur Muncipal Council, Solapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax (CPC)- TDS, Ghaziabad

ITA 313/PUN/2020[2014-15 (Q2-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 154Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 220Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 250

…e 4 of 12 Pandharpur Municipal Council ITA No. 305 to 315/PUN/2020 AY: 2011-12 to 2015-16 service the first proviso to section 201(1), r.w.e to section 191 of the Act and decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.” reported in 293 ITR 226(SC), contended that, since more or less all the contractors from whose accounts TDS was deducted, must have disclosed the said receipts as income in their respective returns and paid the taxes due thereon, hence assessee should not be treated as ‘assessee in default’ u/s 201(1) of the Act, resultantly holding so, there leaves no scope for applica…

Pandharpur Muncipal Council, Solapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax (CPC)- TDS, Ghaziabad

ITA 312/PUN/2020[2014-15 (Q1-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 154Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 220Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 250

…e 4 of 12 Pandharpur Municipal Council ITA No. 305 to 315/PUN/2020 AY: 2011-12 to 2015-16 service the first proviso to section 201(1), r.w.e to section 191 of the Act and decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.” reported in 293 ITR 226(SC), contended that, since more or less all the contractors from whose accounts TDS was deducted, must have disclosed the said receipts as income in their respective returns and paid the taxes due thereon, hence assessee should not be treated as ‘assessee in default’ u/s 201(1) of the Act, resultantly holding so, there leaves no scope for applica…

Pandharpur Muncipal Council, Solapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax (CPC)- TDS, Ghaziabad

ITA 311/PUN/2020[2013-14 (Q4-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 154Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 220Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 250

…e 4 of 12 Pandharpur Municipal Council ITA No. 305 to 315/PUN/2020 AY: 2011-12 to 2015-16 service the first proviso to section 201(1), r.w.e to section 191 of the Act and decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.” reported in 293 ITR 226(SC), contended that, since more or less all the contractors from whose accounts TDS was deducted, must have disclosed the said receipts as income in their respective returns and paid the taxes due thereon, hence assessee should not be treated as ‘assessee in default’ u/s 201(1) of the Act, resultantly holding so, there leaves no scope for applica…

Pandharpur Muncipal Council, Solapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax (CPC)- TDS, Gaziabad

ITA 310/PUN/2020[2013-14(Q3-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 154Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 220Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 250

…e 4 of 12 Pandharpur Municipal Council ITA No. 305 to 315/PUN/2020 AY: 2011-12 to 2015-16 service the first proviso to section 201(1), r.w.e to section 191 of the Act and decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.” reported in 293 ITR 226(SC), contended that, since more or less all the contractors from whose accounts TDS was deducted, must have disclosed the said receipts as income in their respective returns and paid the taxes due thereon, hence assessee should not be treated as ‘assessee in default’ u/s 201(1) of the Act, resultantly holding so, there leaves no scope for applica…

Pandharpur Municipal Council, Solapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (CPC)-TDS, Ghaziabad

ITA 309/PUN/2020[2013-2014 (Q2 - 26 Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 154Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 220Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 250

…e 4 of 12 Pandharpur Municipal Council ITA No. 305 to 315/PUN/2020 AY: 2011-12 to 2015-16 service the first proviso to section 201(1), r.w.e to section 191 of the Act and decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.” reported in 293 ITR 226(SC), contended that, since more or less all the contractors from whose accounts TDS was deducted, must have disclosed the said receipts as income in their respective returns and paid the taxes due thereon, hence assessee should not be treated as ‘assessee in default’ u/s 201(1) of the Act, resultantly holding so, there leaves no scope for applica…

Pandharpur Muncipal Council, Solapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax (CPC)- TDS, Ghaziabad

ITA 308/PUN/2020[2013-14(Q1-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 154Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 220Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 250

…e 4 of 12 Pandharpur Municipal Council ITA No. 305 to 315/PUN/2020 AY: 2011-12 to 2015-16 service the first proviso to section 201(1), r.w.e to section 191 of the Act and decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.” reported in 293 ITR 226(SC), contended that, since more or less all the contractors from whose accounts TDS was deducted, must have disclosed the said receipts as income in their respective returns and paid the taxes due thereon, hence assessee should not be treated as ‘assessee in default’ u/s 201(1) of the Act, resultantly holding so, there leaves no scope for applica…

Pandharpur Muncipal Council, Solapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax (CPC)- TDS, Ghaziabad

ITA 307/PUN/2020[2012-13(Q4-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 154Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 220Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 250

…e 4 of 12 Pandharpur Municipal Council ITA No. 305 to 315/PUN/2020 AY: 2011-12 to 2015-16 service the first proviso to section 201(1), r.w.e to section 191 of the Act and decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.” reported in 293 ITR 226(SC), contended that, since more or less all the contractors from whose accounts TDS was deducted, must have disclosed the said receipts as income in their respective returns and paid the taxes due thereon, hence assessee should not be treated as ‘assessee in default’ u/s 201(1) of the Act, resultantly holding so, there leaves no scope for applica…

Pandharpur Muncipal Council, Solapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax (CPC)- TDS, Ghaziabad

ITA 306/PUN/2020[2012-13 (Q3-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 154Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 220Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 250

…e 4 of 12 Pandharpur Municipal Council ITA No. 305 to 315/PUN/2020 AY: 2011-12 to 2015-16 service the first proviso to section 201(1), r.w.e to section 191 of the Act and decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.” reported in 293 ITR 226(SC), contended that, since more or less all the contractors from whose accounts TDS was deducted, must have disclosed the said receipts as income in their respective returns and paid the taxes due thereon, hence assessee should not be treated as ‘assessee in default’ u/s 201(1) of the Act, resultantly holding so, there leaves no scope for applica…

Pandharpur Municipal Council, Pandharpur vs. DCIT (CPC)-TDS, Ghaziabad

ITA 305/PUN/2020[2011-2012(Q 4 - 26 Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 154Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 220Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 250

…e 4 of 12 Pandharpur Municipal Council ITA No. 305 to 315/PUN/2020 AY: 2011-12 to 2015-16 service the first proviso to section 201(1), r.w.e to section 191 of the Act and decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.” reported in 293 ITR 226(SC), contended that, since more or less all the contractors from whose accounts TDS was deducted, must have disclosed the said receipts as income in their respective returns and paid the taxes due thereon, hence assessee should not be treated as ‘assessee in default’ u/s 201(1) of the Act, resultantly holding so, there leaves no scope for applica…

Datacorp Traffic Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 502/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jul 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Ms.Veena V.H., CAFor Respondent: Sri.Narayana K.R., , Addl.CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

…ed the material on record. Once the payee has paid the taxes, admittedly, the assessee cannot be liable u/s 201 of the I.T.Act by virtue of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT reported in (2007) 293 ITR 226 (SC). The principle enunciated by the Hon’ble Apex Court has been incorporated in proviso to section 201(1) of the I.T.Act. Section 40(a)(ia) of the I.T.Act deals with disallowance of an expenditure, where the TDS ought to have been made and the assessee has failed to deduct the tax. The proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the I.T.Act inserted by Fin…

Datacorp Traffic Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 501/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Ms.Veena V.H., CAFor Respondent: Sri.Narayana K.R., , Addl.CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

…ed the material on record. Once the payee has paid the taxes, admittedly, the assessee cannot be liable u/s 201 of the I.T.Act by virtue of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT reported in (2007) 293 ITR 226 (SC). The principle enunciated by the Hon’ble Apex Court has been incorporated in proviso to section 201(1) of the I.T.Act. Section 40(a)(ia) of the I.T.Act deals with disallowance of an expenditure, where the TDS ought to have been made and the assessee has failed to deduct the tax. The proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the I.T.Act inserted by Fin…

M/S. Ozone Urban Infra Developers Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax TDS, Circel-2(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee

ITA 225/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Jul 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri. George George K & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2019-20 M/S. Ozone Urbana Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit Tds, No.30, Ulsoor Road, Bengaluru North, Circle – 2(1), Bengaluru – 560 042. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaecm 5394 G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Narendra Kumar Jain, Advocate Revenue By : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 05.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.07.2022

For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Kumar Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 131Section 133ASection 194ASection 2Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250

…under section 201 of the Act. 6. The ld AR in rebuttal to the contention that the proviso to section 201(1) is not applicable to assessee’s case submitted that the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan CocaCola Beverage (P.) Ltd vs CIT [2007] 293 ITR 226 (SC) covers the assessee’s case and hence prayed that the assessee should be given an opportunity to substantiate that the payees have paid the tax on the payments made by the assessee. 7. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The assessee has deducted tax as per details below but had not remitted the same into the Go…

M/S.Sagar Tobacco & Industries Pvt.Ltd., Sagar vs. Assistance Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1(1), Jabalpur

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 48/JAB/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur08 Jul 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Abhijeet Srivastava, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Mehrotra, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 194Section 40

…a retrospective effect. This is as, though definitely a substantive provision, which would normally be applicable prospectively, the amendment only seeks to give effect to the decision by the Apex Court in Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt Ltd. vs. CIT [2007] 293 ITR 226 (SC), wherein it stands clarified that the recovery of the tax liable to be deducted and deposited u/c. XVII is subject to the same 3 | P a g e Sagar Tobacco Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT having been not paid direct by the payee, which in the instant case is being claimed as not applicable as the latter has no liability to tax for the relev…

ACIT Circle-74(1), New Delhi vs. Fortis Healthcare Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5330/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 5322/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year 2017-18 Ita No. 5323/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year 2016-17 Ita No. 5324/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year 2017-18 Ita No. 5327/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year 2016-17 Ita No. 5328/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year 2016-17 Ita No. 5329/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year 2017-18 Ita No. 5330/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year 2017-18 Acit, Vs. Fortis Hospitals Ltd., Circle-74(1), Escort Heart Institute & Research New Delhi-110092 Centre, Okhla Road, South Delhi, New Delhi-110025 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcf3718N

For Appellant: Sh. R. M. Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Lalit Kishore, Sr. DR
Section 192Section 192BSection 194JSection 201

…f the explanation inserted by the Fijance Act, 2008 w.e.f. 01.06.2003 the liability to deduct tax gets abated the moment theije is a direct payment. Section 201 7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages (P) Ltd. vs CIT (2007) 293 ITR 226 (SC) took the view that no demand u/s 201 could be enforced once the deductor had satisfied the AO that the deductee had paid the taxes. The other judgements are Children's Education Society us DCIT (TDS) (2009) 319 ITR 409 (Karl), TRO vs Bharat Hotels ITA Nos. 5322 to 5330/Del/2019 6 Fortis Hospitals & C-Doc Healthcare Ltd. Ltd. (2009) 318 ITR…