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 366,470 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

Motwani Constructions Pvt. Limited, Khorda vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assesee is allowed

ITA 452/CTK/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.452/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014) Motwani Constructions Pvt. Limited Vs Dcit, Circle-1(1), Cuttack At:- Ground Floor, Samabaya Bhawan, Janpath, Khurda 751022 Pan No. : Aagcm 2496 K (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Sarangi, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Ld.Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac), Delhi Order Dated 13/08/2025 Passed In Appeal No. Nfac/2012-13/10027542 For The Assessment Year 2013-2014. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That In The Course Of Assessment, The Ao Had Disallowed The Salary Paid To The Director To An Extent Of Rs.15 Lakhs On The Ground That There Is A Delay In Deduction Of Tds & Payment Of The Same To The Credit Of The Government. It Was The Submission That The Returns Of The Directors Have Also Been Filed Wherein The Tds Has Been Claimed & The Credits Have Been Allowed. It Was The Submission That No Disallowance Is Called For In View Of The Decision Of The Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Sarangi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR
Section 201Section 271C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री राजेश कुमार, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.452/CTK/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014) Motwani Constructions Pvt. Limited Vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), Cuttack At:- Ground Floor, Samabaya Bhawan, Janpath, Khurda 751022 PAN No. : AAGCM 2496 K (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri S.K.Sarangi, AR राजस्व…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, International Taxation Circle - 4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5070/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms. Padmavathy S., Am

For Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta
Section 133(6)Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VP AND MS. PADMAVATHY S., AM ITA No. Assessment Year 5070/Mum/2024 2013-14 5069/Mum/2024 2014-15 5068/Mum/2024 2015-16 5067/Mum/2024 2016-17 5066/Mum/2024 2017-18 5065/Mum/2024 2018-19 State Bank of India The Asst. CIT, International Financial Reporting & Taxation Taxation, Circle-4(2)(1) 3rd Floor, Corporate Centre, Room No. 627, 6th Floor, Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Kautilya Bhawan, G Block BKC, Vs. Mumbai-400 021 Gilban Area, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051 PAN/GIR No. AAACS 8577 K (Appellant) : (Respondent)…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, International Tax Circle - 4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5069/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms. Padmavathy S., Am

For Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta
Section 133(6)Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VP AND MS. PADMAVATHY S., AM ITA No. Assessment Year 5070/Mum/2024 2013-14 5069/Mum/2024 2014-15 5068/Mum/2024 2015-16 5067/Mum/2024 2016-17 5066/Mum/2024 2017-18 5065/Mum/2024 2018-19 State Bank of India The Asst. CIT, International Financial Reporting & Taxation Taxation, Circle-4(2)(1) 3rd Floor, Corporate Centre, Room No. 627, 6th Floor, Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Kautilya Bhawan, G Block BKC, Vs. Mumbai-400 021 Gilban Area, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051 PAN/GIR No. AAACS 8577 K (Appellant) : (Respondent)…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, International Taxation Circle - 4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5068/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms. Padmavathy S., Am

For Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta
Section 133(6)Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VP AND MS. PADMAVATHY S., AM ITA No. Assessment Year 5070/Mum/2024 2013-14 5069/Mum/2024 2014-15 5068/Mum/2024 2015-16 5067/Mum/2024 2016-17 5066/Mum/2024 2017-18 5065/Mum/2024 2018-19 State Bank of India The Asst. CIT, International Financial Reporting & Taxation Taxation, Circle-4(2)(1) 3rd Floor, Corporate Centre, Room No. 627, 6th Floor, Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Kautilya Bhawan, G Block BKC, Vs. Mumbai-400 021 Gilban Area, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051 PAN/GIR No. AAACS 8577 K (Appellant) : (Respondent)…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, International Taxation Circle - 4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5067/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms. Padmavathy S., Am

For Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta
Section 133(6)Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VP AND MS. PADMAVATHY S., AM ITA No. Assessment Year 5070/Mum/2024 2013-14 5069/Mum/2024 2014-15 5068/Mum/2024 2015-16 5067/Mum/2024 2016-17 5066/Mum/2024 2017-18 5065/Mum/2024 2018-19 State Bank of India The Asst. CIT, International Financial Reporting & Taxation Taxation, Circle-4(2)(1) 3rd Floor, Corporate Centre, Room No. 627, 6th Floor, Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Kautilya Bhawan, G Block BKC, Vs. Mumbai-400 021 Gilban Area, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051 PAN/GIR No. AAACS 8577 K (Appellant) : (Respondent)…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, International Taxation Circle - 4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5066/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms. Padmavathy S., Am

For Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta
Section 133(6)Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VP AND MS. PADMAVATHY S., AM ITA No. Assessment Year 5070/Mum/2024 2013-14 5069/Mum/2024 2014-15 5068/Mum/2024 2015-16 5067/Mum/2024 2016-17 5066/Mum/2024 2017-18 5065/Mum/2024 2018-19 State Bank of India The Asst. CIT, International Financial Reporting & Taxation Taxation, Circle-4(2)(1) 3rd Floor, Corporate Centre, Room No. 627, 6th Floor, Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Kautilya Bhawan, G Block BKC, Vs. Mumbai-400 021 Gilban Area, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051 PAN/GIR No. AAACS 8577 K (Appellant) : (Respondent)…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, International Taxation Circle - 4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5065/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms. Padmavathy S., Am

For Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta
Section 133(6)Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VP AND MS. PADMAVATHY S., AM ITA No. Assessment Year 5070/Mum/2024 2013-14 5069/Mum/2024 2014-15 5068/Mum/2024 2015-16 5067/Mum/2024 2016-17 5066/Mum/2024 2017-18 5065/Mum/2024 2018-19 State Bank of India The Asst. CIT, International Financial Reporting & Taxation Taxation, Circle-4(2)(1) 3rd Floor, Corporate Centre, Room No. 627, 6th Floor, Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Kautilya Bhawan, G Block BKC, Vs. Mumbai-400 021 Gilban Area, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051 PAN/GIR No. AAACS 8577 K (Appellant) : (Respondent)…

Muthoot Fincorp Limited, Trivandrum vs. ITO, Circle Central, Trivandrum

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 496/COCH/2025[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Aug 2025AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194CSection 40

…a provision can only be prospective as held by this Court in Prudential Logistics and Transports (supra). Therefore, this contention raised also cannot be accepted. 16. Relying on the Apex Court judgment in Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2007] 293 ITR 226/163 Taxman 355, learned Senior Counsel for the appellants contended that the recipients of the amounts paid by the appellants, the firms of which they are partners, have already paid tax and that therefore, it is illegal to disallow the interest paid. First of all, Section 40(a)(ia) is in very categoric terms and the provision is automatically at…

Muthoot Fincorp Limited, Thiruvananthapuram vs. JCIT, Special Range, Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 465/COCH/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Aug 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194CSection 40

…a provision can only be prospective as held by this Court in Prudential Logistics and Transports (supra). Therefore, this contention raised also cannot be accepted. 16. Relying on the Apex Court judgment in Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2007] 293 ITR 226/163 Taxman 355, learned Senior Counsel for the appellants contended that the recipients of the amounts paid by the appellants, the firms of which they are partners, have already paid tax and that therefore, it is illegal to disallow the interest paid. First of all, Section 40(a)(ia) is in very categoric terms and the provision is automatically at…

Muthoot Fincorp Limited, Thiruvananthapuram vs. JCIT, Special Range, Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 464/COCH/2025[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Aug 2025AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194CSection 40

…a provision can only be prospective as held by this Court in Prudential Logistics and Transports (supra). Therefore, this contention raised also cannot be accepted. 16. Relying on the Apex Court judgment in Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2007] 293 ITR 226/163 Taxman 355, learned Senior Counsel for the appellants contended that the recipients of the amounts paid by the appellants, the firms of which they are partners, have already paid tax and that therefore, it is illegal to disallow the interest paid. First of all, Section 40(a)(ia) is in very categoric terms and the provision is automatically at…

M/S. the Coimbatore District Central Co-Op. Bank Ltd., Coimbatore vs. ITO, TDS Ward-2, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1004/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1004/Chny/2025 िनधा9रण वष9 /Assessment Year: 2020-21 M/S. Coimbatore District Central The Income Tax Officer, Co-Op. Bank Ltd., Vs. Tds Ward-2 (I/C), 80, State Bank Road, Coimbatore. Coimbatore – 641 018. [Pan: Aabat 3010F]

For Appellant: Shri T.Vasudevan, Advocate
Section 133ASection 194NSection 201Section 201(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद! एवं "ी जगदीश, लेखा सद! के सम( BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1004/Chny/2025 िनधा9रण वष9 /Assessment Year: 2020-21 M/s. Coimbatore District Central The Income Tax Officer, Co-op. Bank Ltd., Vs. TDS Ward-2 (i/c), 80, State Bank Road, Coimbatore. Coimbatore – 641 018. [PAN: AABAT 3010F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri T.Vasudevan, Advocate FGथ" की ओर से /Respondent by Ms. Gauthami M…

Duraiswamy Balu, Red Hills vs. The Income Tax Officer, Non-Corp. Ward 22(1), Tambaram

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1335/CHNY/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. S.B. Rajendra Kumar
Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 206ASection 250

…fied, incorrect, invalid and not sustainable both on facts and in law. 10. The ADDL./JCIT (A)-2, Lucknow failed to appreciate that in any event, the principle envisaged by the Supreme Court in the case of M/s Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage (P.) Ltd. reported in 293 ITR 226 enunciating the object of the TDS provisions, which received legislative sanction, where in the seller of the property has duly disclosed the capital gains in the return of income filed, there by achieving the purpose of the TDS provisions. 11. The ADDL./JCIT (A)-2, Lucknow ought to have appreciated that the order under Section 200A of the Act wa…

DCIT-5(2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Vodafone Idea Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the ground no

ITA 2987/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

Section 194Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…he assessee contended that the distributors would have paid the tax on the income and therefore the assessee was not entitled to pay any tax on the same and relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (293 ITR 226). The ld. AO made a disallowance of the impugned amount for failing to deduct TDS on payments made as discount which were given to prepaid distributors u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. 43. The ld. CIT(A) on the other hand allowed this ground of appeal in favour of the assessee by relying on his own order for A.Y. 2010-11 and 2012-13 and also decision of…

Vodafone Idea Limited (Formerly Idea Cellular Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT - 14(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the ground no

ITA 2150/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

Section 194Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…he assessee contended that the distributors would have paid the tax on the income and therefore the assessee was not entitled to pay any tax on the same and relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (293 ITR 226). The ld. AO made a disallowance of the impugned amount for failing to deduct TDS on payments made as discount which were given to prepaid distributors u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. 43. The ld. CIT(A) on the other hand allowed this ground of appeal in favour of the assessee by relying on his own order for A.Y. 2010-11 and 2012-13 and also decision o…

DCIT - 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Idea Cellular Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the ground no

ITA 2179/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

Section 194Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…he assessee contended that the distributors would have paid the tax on the income and therefore the assessee was not entitled to pay any tax on the same and relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (293 ITR 226). The ld. AO made a disallowance of the impugned amount for failing to deduct TDS on payments made as discount which were given to prepaid distributors u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. 43. The ld. CIT(A) on the other hand allowed this ground of appeal in favour of the assessee by relying on his own order for A.Y. 2010-11 and 2012-13 and also decision of…

DCIT - 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Idea Cellular Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the ground no

ITA 2178/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

Section 194Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…he assessee contended that the distributors would have paid the tax on the income and therefore the assessee was not entitled to pay any tax on the same and relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (293 ITR 226). The ld. AO made a disallowance of the impugned amount for failing to deduct TDS on payments made as discount which were given to prepaid distributors u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. 43. The ld. CIT(A) on the other hand allowed this ground of appeal in favour of the assessee by relying on his own order for A.Y. 2010-11 and 2012-13 and also decision of…

Idea Cellular Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - 14(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the ground no

ITA 1777/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

Section 194Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…he assessee contended that the distributors would have paid the tax on the income and therefore the assessee was not entitled to pay any tax on the same and relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (293 ITR 226). The ld. AO made a disallowance of the impugned amount for failing to deduct TDS on payments made as discount which were given to prepaid distributors u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. 43. The ld. CIT(A) on the other hand allowed this ground of appeal in favour of the assessee by relying on his own order for A.Y. 2010-11 and 2012-13 and also decision of…

Idea Cellular Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - 14(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the ground no

ITA 1775/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

Section 194Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…he assessee contended that the distributors would have paid the tax on the income and therefore the assessee was not entitled to pay any tax on the same and relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (293 ITR 226). The ld. AO made a disallowance of the impugned amount for failing to deduct TDS on payments made as discount which were given to prepaid distributors u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. 43. The ld. CIT(A) on the other hand allowed this ground of appeal in favour of the assessee by relying on his own order for A.Y. 2010-11 and 2012-13 and also decision of…

DCIT - 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Idea Cellular Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the ground no

ITA 5945/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

Section 194Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…he assessee contended that the distributors would have paid the tax on the income and therefore the assessee was not entitled to pay any tax on the same and relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (293 ITR 226). The ld. AO made a disallowance of the impugned amount for failing to deduct TDS on payments made as discount which were given to prepaid distributors u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. 43. The ld. CIT(A) on the other hand allowed this ground of appeal in favour of the assessee by relying on his own order for A.Y. 2010-11 and 2012-13 and also decision of…

Idea Cellular Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Hq (Judl.) to CIT-14, Mumbai

In the result, the ground no

ITA 5765/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

Section 194Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…he assessee contended that the distributors would have paid the tax on the income and therefore the assessee was not entitled to pay any tax on the same and relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (293 ITR 226). The ld. AO made a disallowance of the impugned amount for failing to deduct TDS on payments made as discount which were given to prepaid distributors u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. 43. The ld. CIT(A) on the other hand allowed this ground of appeal in favour of the assessee by relying on his own order for A.Y. 2010-11 and 2012-13 and also decision o…