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 367,181 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

DCIT (TDS), Dehradun vs. The Joint Secretary, Dehradun

Appeals are disposed off

ITA 799/DEL/2013[2010-11 (F.Y.- 2009-10)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2018

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani TanejaFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 133ASection 194CSection 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 271CSection 9(1)(vii)

…futility as on the one hand the assessee is required to pay the tax and on the other hand, the payee would be required to claim the refund. He vehemently relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages pvt. Ltd Vs. CIT 293 ITR 226 for this proposition. He further 626-627-798-799-Del-2013 and 1576-Del-2015-The Joint Secretary Organizing Committee for Winter Games, 11 relied upon his submissions made at page No. 1 to 15 of the paper book also. 14. The ld Departmental Representative (DR) vehemently supported the order of the ld AO and submitted that with respect to the pa…

DCIT (TDS), Dehradun vs. The Joint Secretary, Dehradun

Appeals are disposed off

ITA 798/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani TanejaFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 133ASection 194CSection 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 271CSection 9(1)(vii)

…futility as on the one hand the assessee is required to pay the tax and on the other hand, the payee would be required to claim the refund. He vehemently relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages pvt. Ltd Vs. CIT 293 ITR 226 for this proposition. He further 626-627-798-799-Del-2013 and 1576-Del-2015-The Joint Secretary Organizing Committee for Winter Games, 11 relied upon his submissions made at page No. 1 to 15 of the paper book also. 14. The ld Departmental Representative (DR) vehemently supported the order of the ld AO and submitted that with respect to the pa…

Shri the Joint Secretary, Dehradun vs. ACIT, Dehradun

Appeals are disposed off

ITA 627/DEL/2013[2010-11 (F.Y.- 2009-10)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2018

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani TanejaFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 133ASection 194CSection 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 271CSection 9(1)(vii)

…futility as on the one hand the assessee is required to pay the tax and on the other hand, the payee would be required to claim the refund. He vehemently relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages pvt. Ltd Vs. CIT 293 ITR 226 for this proposition. He further 626-627-798-799-Del-2013 and 1576-Del-2015-The Joint Secretary Organizing Committee for Winter Games, 11 relied upon his submissions made at page No. 1 to 15 of the paper book also. 14. The ld Departmental Representative (DR) vehemently supported the order of the ld AO and submitted that with respect to the pa…

Shri the Joint Secretary, Dehradun vs. ACIT, Dehradun

Appeals are disposed off

ITA 626/DEL/2013[2009-10 (F.Y. 2008-09)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2018

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani TanejaFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 133ASection 194CSection 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 271CSection 9(1)(vii)

…futility as on the one hand the assessee is required to pay the tax and on the other hand, the payee would be required to claim the refund. He vehemently relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages pvt. Ltd Vs. CIT 293 ITR 226 for this proposition. He further 626-627-798-799-Del-2013 and 1576-Del-2015-The Joint Secretary Organizing Committee for Winter Games, 11 relied upon his submissions made at page No. 1 to 15 of the paper book also. 14. The ld Departmental Representative (DR) vehemently supported the order of the ld AO and submitted that with respect to the pa…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Kavithtalaya Productions Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1287/CHNY/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1287/Chny/2013 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-2010 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Kavithalaya Productions Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, Media Circle 1, Vs. No. 34, Warren Road, Mylapore, Chennai. Chennai – 4. [Pan: Aaack2996E] (Appellant) (Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. S. Vijayaprabha, Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 31.07.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12.10.2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Vi, Chennai Dated 28.12.2012 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2009-10. The Revenue Has Raised Two Grounds Viz., (I) The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Disallowance Made Under Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“ Act” In Short] On The Sum Of ₹.3 Crores On The Ground That The Said Sum Was Directly Paid By M/S. Pyramid Saimira Entertainment Ltd. To M/S. Seven Arts Film & (Ii) The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Holding That ₹.75 Lakhs Repaid To M/S. Pyramid Saimira

For Appellant: Ms. S. Vijayaprabha, JCITFor Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 28Section 29Section 30Section 37Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘‘डी’’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद" एवं "ी धु"ु" आर.एल रे"ी, "ाियक सद" के सम" Before Shri A. Mohan Alankamony, Accountant Member & Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1287/Chny/2013 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-2010 The Deputy Commissioner of M/s. Kavithalaya Productions Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, Media Circle 1, Vs. No. 34, Warren Road, Mylapore, Chennai. Chennai – 4. [PAN: AAACK2996E] (Appellant) (Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant by : Ms. S. Vijayaprabha, JCIT ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent by…

Kaypan Vanijya Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO-6(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2943/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S Kaypan Vanijya Pvt. The Income Tax Ltd. 2, Vardhaman Officer-6(2)(4), Vs. Complex, Lbs Marg, Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Vikhroli (West), Mumbai- Road, Churchgate, 400083. Mumbai-400020 Pan No. Aaack3290K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Ms. Dinkle Hariya, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Sachchidanand Dube, Dr Date Of Hearing : 04/09/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 12/09/2018

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle Hariya, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Sachchidanand Dube, DR
Section 143(3)Section 40

…not called for. On the other hand, the Ld. DR supports the order passed by the AO. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials on record. Following the decision in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2007] 293 ITR 226/163 Taxman 355 (SC), who direct the AO to verify whether the payee has reflected the above amount in its return of income and paid tax thereon. If the answer is yes then no disallowance is called for. If the answer is no, then the AO would make the disallowance. We direct the assessee to file the relevant documents/evidence before the AO. M/s Ka…

ITO TDS-II, Agra vs. Punjab National Bank, Agra

In the result, all the three appeals are allowed

ITA 204/AGR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra07 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 12ASection 133ASection 197ASection 271CSection 273B

…show that the bonafide belief entertained by the assessee bank, as above, does not constitute a reasonable cause within the meaning of section 273B of the Act. Reference by the Department, in these facts, to ‘Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT’, 293 ITR 226 (SC), is of no aid to it. It also remains a fact, as noted for the assessment year (para 6 of the penalty order) for A.Y. 2012-13, that the AO, on verifying the documents filed by the bank, found that the Agra Development Authority had paid the requisite taxes for F.Ys. 2010-11 and 2011-12, relevant to A.Y. 2011-12 and 2012- 13. 10. Apropos A.…

ITO TDS-II, Agra vs. Punjab National Bank, Agra

In the result, all the three appeals are allowed

ITA 203/AGR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra07 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 12ASection 133ASection 197ASection 271CSection 273B

…show that the bonafide belief entertained by the assessee bank, as above, does not constitute a reasonable cause within the meaning of section 273B of the Act. Reference by the Department, in these facts, to ‘Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT’, 293 ITR 226 (SC), is of no aid to it. It also remains a fact, as noted for the assessment year (para 6 of the penalty order) for A.Y. 2012-13, that the AO, on verifying the documents filed by the bank, found that the Agra Development Authority had paid the requisite taxes for F.Ys. 2010-11 and 2011-12, relevant to A.Y. 2011-12 and 2012- 13. 10. Apropos A.…

Smt. Shehnaj Begum, Kota vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Kota

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

ITA 946/JPR/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Framing Huge Demand Of Rs. 1,64,186/- For Non-Collection Of Tcs U/S 201(1) & Rs. 1,10,759/- For Interest On Non-Collection Of Tcs U/S 201(1A) & The Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Sustaining The Same.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhlesh Kataria (CA)For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Jha (JCIT)
Section 139Section 201Section 201(1)Section 206CSection 206C(1)

…A). However, the ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated this issue while passing the impugned order. He has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the ITA 946/JP/2017_ 4 Shehnaj Begum Vs ITO(TDS) case of Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIR 293 ITR 226 (SC) and submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the amendment made by the Finance Act, 2012 is retrospective in application and therefore, this proviso to Section 206C(6A) is corresponding to the amendment made in Section 201 is also having retrospective effect. He has relied upon the decision of Special Bench of Rajkot Tribuna…

Damodar Valley Corporation, Bankura vs. ACIT, (TDS) Cir-4, Durgapur

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

ITA 512/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. P.M.Jagtap & Sh. S.S. Viswanethra Ravi[Assessment Year: 2011-12] Vs Acit (Tds), Damodar Valley Corporation, Mejia Thermal Power Station, Circle-4, Durgapur, P.O.-Mtps, Aaykar Bhawan, Distt.-Bankura-722183. City Centre, Pan-Caldo3390C Durgapur-713216. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Sanjay Bhattacharya, Fca Respondent By Sh. Shallong Yaden, Addl. Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 30.07.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 02.08.2018

Section 133ASection 194CSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)

…milar argument has been taken before the appellate proceedings which were taken before the A.O. It is also seen that the appellant had taken shelter of decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT [293 ITR 226]. Keeping in view of the aforesaid facts the A.O. is directed to verify the claim of the appellant if the deductees have filed their return and receipt of the same is included in their return, the addition stands deleted. If not so, the disallowance stands confirmed. The appellant is directed to submit his claim before the A.O. In the line of dec…

M/S. Pms Diesels, Phagwara vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Phagwara

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 65/ASR/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jul 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 65/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Bansal (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Rajeev K. Gubgotra, (D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 268ASection 40

…he file of the AO for examination as to if the tax liability thereon stands discharged by the concerned payees, i.e., in view of the decision by the Apex Court in Hindustan Coca Cola 3 PMS International Pvt. Ltd. v. Addl.CIT Beverage (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2007] 293 ITR 226 (SC). We find that the issue raised before and adjudicated by the Revenue authorities is qua the admissibility of the impugned payments to tax deduction at source provisions of Chapter XVII-B of the Act. The assessee’s plea is, under the circumstances, reasonable, to which the ld. DR also fairly did not dispute. The burden to prove its’ claim, i.…

Baweja Movies P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO TDS 1(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2671/MUM/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep ShridharFor Respondent: Shri D.G. Pansari
Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "E" Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Mahavir Singh, Judicial Member and Shri G. Manjunatha, Accountant Member ITA Nos. 2670 & 2671/Mum/2015 (Assessment Years: 2005-06 & 2006-07) M/s. Baweja Movies P. Ltd. ITO (T.D.S.) - 1(1)(3) C-65, Ashirwad, Lokhandwala 10th Floor, Smt. K.G. Mittal Vs. Complex, Andheri (W) Building, Charni Road Mumbai 400053 Mumbai 400020 PAN – AABCB6023C Appellant Respondent Appellant by: Shri Sandeep Shridhar Respondent by: Shri D.G. Pansari Date of Hearing: 31.07.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 31.07.2018 O R D E R Per G. Manjunatha, AM These two appeals fi…

Baweja Movies P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO TDS 1(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2670/MUM/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep ShridharFor Respondent: Shri D.G. Pansari
Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "E" Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Mahavir Singh, Judicial Member and Shri G. Manjunatha, Accountant Member ITA Nos. 2670 & 2671/Mum/2015 (Assessment Years: 2005-06 & 2006-07) M/s. Baweja Movies P. Ltd. ITO (T.D.S.) - 1(1)(3) C-65, Ashirwad, Lokhandwala 10th Floor, Smt. K.G. Mittal Vs. Complex, Andheri (W) Building, Charni Road Mumbai 400053 Mumbai 400020 PAN – AABCB6023C Appellant Respondent Appellant by: Shri Sandeep Shridhar Respondent by: Shri D.G. Pansari Date of Hearing: 31.07.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 31.07.2018 O R D E R Per G. Manjunatha, AM These two appeals fi…

Idea Cellular Ltd, Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, TDS Circle, Ward-1(1), Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals under consideration are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1446/HYD/2015[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Jul 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Ronak G. DoshiFor Respondent: Shri P. Chandrasekhar
Section 133ASection 191Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 1445 & 1446/Hyd/2015 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Idea Cellular Ltd., Hyderabad. Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax, TDS Circle, PAN – AACB 2100P Ward - 1(1), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ronak G. Doshi Revenue by : Shri P. Chandrasekhar Date of hearing : 19-06-2018 Date of pronouncement : 20-07-2018 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, A.M.: Both these appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the orde…

Idea Cellular Ltd, Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, TDS Circle, Ward-1(1), Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals under consideration are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1445/HYD/2015[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Jul 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Ronak G. DoshiFor Respondent: Shri P. Chandrasekhar
Section 133ASection 191Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 1445 & 1446/Hyd/2015 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Idea Cellular Ltd., Hyderabad. Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax, TDS Circle, PAN – AACB 2100P Ward - 1(1), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ronak G. Doshi Revenue by : Shri P. Chandrasekhar Date of hearing : 19-06-2018 Date of pronouncement : 20-07-2018 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, A.M.: Both these appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the orde…

Buldana Urban Co-Op Credit Society Ltd.and National Building Constrauction (J.V)., Buldhana vs. Income Tax Officer TDS Ward 1(2), Akola

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

ITA 164/NAG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur13 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz, Hon’Ble & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon’Ble

Section 206C

…member thereof is not “another person” and therefore there was no default in not making TCS and in support of assessee’s arguments, Ld. AR relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case M/s Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage Pvt. Ltd. v/s. CIT (2007) 293 ITR 226 (SC). The learned CIT(A) on the basis of submission filed by the assessee sought remand report from the AO and the AO vide letter dated 01.01.2015 addressed the various issues raised by the assessee. While relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and the relevant portion is…

Buldana Urban Co Op Credit Society Ltd and National Building Construction(Jv), Buldhana vs. I.T.O. (TDS)1(2), Akola

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

ITA 176/NAG/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur13 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz, Hon’Ble & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon’Ble

Section 206C

…member thereof is not “another person” and therefore there was no default in not making TCS and in support of assessee’s arguments, Ld. AR relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case M/s Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage Pvt. Ltd. v/s. CIT (2007) 293 ITR 226 (SC). The learned CIT(A) on the basis of submission filed by the assessee sought remand report from the AO and the AO vide letter dated 01.01.2015 addressed the various issues raised by the assessee. While relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and the relevant portion is…

The Asstt. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Srinagar vs. M/S. J&K Project Construction, Srinagar

In the result, as I am in concurrence with conclusion and reasoning given in rest part of the order dated 12

ITA 176/ASR/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. Nos. 100 & 101/Asr/2014 Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Abdul Rashid Dulloo (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Sandeep Chauhan, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…tax liability on the impugned sum has been discharged by the payee/s, no disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) would arise, there can be no double levy of tax on the same sum, even as explained by the Apex Court in Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [2007] 293 ITR 226 (SC). This in fact is also the sub-stratum of the subsequent amendments to section 40(a)(ia), held by the Hon’ble Courts as retrospective. The burden to prove its claim in this respect, however, would be on the assessee, for which it shall be allowed a reasonable opportunity by the AO. We may also here deliberate on the Revenue’s appeals. The Hon…

The Asstt. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Srinagar vs. M/S. J&K Project Construction, Srinagar

In the result, as I am in concurrence with conclusion and reasoning given in rest part of the order dated 12

ITA 175/ASR/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. Nos. 100 & 101/Asr/2014 Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Abdul Rashid Dulloo (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Sandeep Chauhan, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…tax liability on the impugned sum has been discharged by the payee/s, no disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) would arise, there can be no double levy of tax on the same sum, even as explained by the Apex Court in Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [2007] 293 ITR 226 (SC). This in fact is also the sub-stratum of the subsequent amendments to section 40(a)(ia), held by the Hon’ble Courts as retrospective. The burden to prove its claim in this respect, however, would be on the assessee, for which it shall be allowed a reasonable opportunity by the AO. We may also here deliberate on the Revenue’s appeals. The Hon…

M/S. Jammu & Kashmir Projects Construction, Jammu vs. The Assessing Officer, Srinagar

In the result, as I am in concurrence with conclusion and reasoning given in rest part of the order dated 12

ITA 101/ASR/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. Nos. 100 & 101/Asr/2014 Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Abdul Rashid Dulloo (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Sandeep Chauhan, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…tax liability on the impugned sum has been discharged by the payee/s, no disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) would arise, there can be no double levy of tax on the same sum, even as explained by the Apex Court in Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [2007] 293 ITR 226 (SC). This in fact is also the sub-stratum of the subsequent amendments to section 40(a)(ia), held by the Hon’ble Courts as retrospective. The burden to prove its claim in this respect, however, would be on the assessee, for which it shall be allowed a reasonable opportunity by the AO. We may also here deliberate on the Revenue’s appeals. The Hon…