Jindal Thermal Company Ltd. v. DCIT (TDS)

321 ITR 31High Court2010#768 most cited

What is Jindal Thermal Company Ltd. v. DCIT (TDS) authority for?

Until the Finance Act, 2010 amendment to Section 9(2), services rendered by a non-resident had to be rendered in India for income to accrue or arise in India, and thus attract TDS obligations.

132

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Jindal Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. DCIT · Section 9(2) · Section 195 · services rendered in India · income deemed to accrue or arise · TDS obligation · non-resident · Finance Act 2010 · Ishikawajima case

Sections most often in play

Section 195Section 250Section 40(a)(i)Section 9

Issues it is cited on

section 9(2)section 5(2)(b)section 9(1)(vii)(b)section 144c(10)section 2(11)make available clausesection 195(1)sanction under section 151tax residency certificateretrospective amendmentsection 5(2)trc

Judgments citing Jindal Thermal Company Ltd. v. DCIT (TDS)

Infosys Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle-1(2), Bangalore

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 115/BANG/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.105 To 115/Bang/2021 Assessment Years: March 2016, March 2019 & Ay 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

…ng filed because the appeal is filed only for a declaration that no tax is payable on the sum paid to the non-resident in the hands of the non-resident in India. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Jindal Thermal Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT (TDS) (2010) 321 ITR 31 (Karn.) has held that an appeal u/s.248 is maintainable even though there was no adjudication by the Income Tax Authority under the Act. 5. The appeals filed by the Assessee were decided by the CIT(A) by consolidating the 11 appeals filed for the period mentioned in the first paragraph of this order.(11 months). The CIT(A) passed a common order f…

Infosys Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle-1(2), Bangalore

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 114/BANG/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.105 To 115/Bang/2021 Assessment Years: March 2016, March 2019 & Ay 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

…ng filed because the appeal is filed only for a declaration that no tax is payable on the sum paid to the non-resident in the hands of the non-resident in India. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Jindal Thermal Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT (TDS) (2010) 321 ITR 31 (Karn.) has held that an appeal u/s.248 is maintainable even though there was no adjudication by the Income Tax Authority under the Act. 5. The appeals filed by the Assessee were decided by the CIT(A) by consolidating the 11 appeals filed for the period mentioned in the first paragraph of this order.(11 months). The CIT(A) passed a common order f…

Infosys Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle-1(2), Bangalore

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 113/BANG/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.105 To 115/Bang/2021 Assessment Years: March 2016, March 2019 & Ay 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

…ng filed because the appeal is filed only for a declaration that no tax is payable on the sum paid to the non-resident in the hands of the non-resident in India. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Jindal Thermal Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT (TDS) (2010) 321 ITR 31 (Karn.) has held that an appeal u/s.248 is maintainable even though there was no adjudication by the Income Tax Authority under the Act. 5. The appeals filed by the Assessee were decided by the CIT(A) by consolidating the 11 appeals filed for the period mentioned in the first paragraph of this order.(11 months). The CIT(A) passed a common order f…

Infosys Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle-1(2), Bangalore

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 112/BANG/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.105 To 115/Bang/2021 Assessment Years: March 2016, March 2019 & Ay 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

…ng filed because the appeal is filed only for a declaration that no tax is payable on the sum paid to the non-resident in the hands of the non-resident in India. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Jindal Thermal Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT (TDS) (2010) 321 ITR 31 (Karn.) has held that an appeal u/s.248 is maintainable even though there was no adjudication by the Income Tax Authority under the Act. 5. The appeals filed by the Assessee were decided by the CIT(A) by consolidating the 11 appeals filed for the period mentioned in the first paragraph of this order.(11 months). The CIT(A) passed a common order f…

Infosys Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle-1(2), Bangalore

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 111/BANG/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.105 To 115/Bang/2021 Assessment Years: March 2016, March 2019 & Ay 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

…ng filed because the appeal is filed only for a declaration that no tax is payable on the sum paid to the non-resident in the hands of the non-resident in India. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Jindal Thermal Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT (TDS) (2010) 321 ITR 31 (Karn.) has held that an appeal u/s.248 is maintainable even though there was no adjudication by the Income Tax Authority under the Act. 5. The appeals filed by the Assessee were decided by the CIT(A) by consolidating the 11 appeals filed for the period mentioned in the first paragraph of this order.(11 months). The CIT(A) passed a common order f…

Infosys Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle-1(2), Bangalore

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 110/BANG/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.105 To 115/Bang/2021 Assessment Years: March 2016, March 2019 & Ay 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

…ng filed because the appeal is filed only for a declaration that no tax is payable on the sum paid to the non-resident in the hands of the non-resident in India. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Jindal Thermal Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT (TDS) (2010) 321 ITR 31 (Karn.) has held that an appeal u/s.248 is maintainable even though there was no adjudication by the Income Tax Authority under the Act. 5. The appeals filed by the Assessee were decided by the CIT(A) by consolidating the 11 appeals filed for the period mentioned in the first paragraph of this order.(11 months). The CIT(A) passed a common order f…

Infosys Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle-1(2), Bangalore

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 109/BANG/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.105 To 115/Bang/2021 Assessment Years: March 2016, March 2019 & Ay 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

…ng filed because the appeal is filed only for a declaration that no tax is payable on the sum paid to the non-resident in the hands of the non-resident in India. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Jindal Thermal Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT (TDS) (2010) 321 ITR 31 (Karn.) has held that an appeal u/s.248 is maintainable even though there was no adjudication by the Income Tax Authority under the Act. 5. The appeals filed by the Assessee were decided by the CIT(A) by consolidating the 11 appeals filed for the period mentioned in the first paragraph of this order.(11 months). The CIT(A) passed a common order f…

Infosys Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle-1(2), Bangalore

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 108/BANG/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.105 To 115/Bang/2021 Assessment Years: March 2016, March 2019 & Ay 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

…ng filed because the appeal is filed only for a declaration that no tax is payable on the sum paid to the non-resident in the hands of the non-resident in India. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Jindal Thermal Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT (TDS) (2010) 321 ITR 31 (Karn.) has held that an appeal u/s.248 is maintainable even though there was no adjudication by the Income Tax Authority under the Act. 5. The appeals filed by the Assessee were decided by the CIT(A) by consolidating the 11 appeals filed for the period mentioned in the first paragraph of this order.(11 months). The CIT(A) passed a common order f…

Infosys Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle-1(2), Bangalore

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 107/BANG/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.105 To 115/Bang/2021 Assessment Years: March 2016, March 2019 & Ay 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

…ng filed because the appeal is filed only for a declaration that no tax is payable on the sum paid to the non-resident in the hands of the non-resident in India. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Jindal Thermal Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT (TDS) (2010) 321 ITR 31 (Karn.) has held that an appeal u/s.248 is maintainable even though there was no adjudication by the Income Tax Authority under the Act. 5. The appeals filed by the Assessee were decided by the CIT(A) by consolidating the 11 appeals filed for the period mentioned in the first paragraph of this order.(11 months). The CIT(A) passed a common order f…

Infosys Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle-1(2), Bangalore

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 106/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.105 To 115/Bang/2021 Assessment Years: March 2016, March 2019 & Ay 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

…ng filed because the appeal is filed only for a declaration that no tax is payable on the sum paid to the non-resident in the hands of the non-resident in India. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Jindal Thermal Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT (TDS) (2010) 321 ITR 31 (Karn.) has held that an appeal u/s.248 is maintainable even though there was no adjudication by the Income Tax Authority under the Act. 5. The appeals filed by the Assessee were decided by the CIT(A) by consolidating the 11 appeals filed for the period mentioned in the first paragraph of this order.(11 months). The CIT(A) passed a common order f…

Infosys Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle-1(2), Bangalore

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 105/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.105 To 115/Bang/2021 Assessment Years: March 2016, March 2019 & Ay 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

…ng filed because the appeal is filed only for a declaration that no tax is payable on the sum paid to the non-resident in the hands of the non-resident in India. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Jindal Thermal Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT (TDS) (2010) 321 ITR 31 (Karn.) has held that an appeal u/s.248 is maintainable even though there was no adjudication by the Income Tax Authority under the Act. 5. The appeals filed by the Assessee were decided by the CIT(A) by consolidating the 11 appeals filed for the period mentioned in the first paragraph of this order.(11 months). The CIT(A) passed a common order f…

M/S. Infosys Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle- 1(2), Bangalore

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2167/BANG/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.2145 To 2167/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2018-19 To 2019-20 (April To February 2019)

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

…g filed because the appeal is filed only for a declaration that no tax is payable on the sum paid to the non- resident in the hands of the non-resident in India. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Jindal Thermal Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT (TDS) (2010) 321 ITR 31 (Karn.) has held that an appeal u/s.248 is maintainable even though there was no adjudication by the Income Tax Authority under the Act. 5. The appeals filed by the Assessee were decided by the CIT(A) by consolidating the 23 appeals filed for the period comprising of months April, 2017 to February, 2019 (23 months). The CIT(A) passed a common ord…

M/S. Infosys Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle- 1(2), Banglaore

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2166/BANG/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.2145 To 2167/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2018-19 To 2019-20 (April To February 2019)

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

…g filed because the appeal is filed only for a declaration that no tax is payable on the sum paid to the non- resident in the hands of the non-resident in India. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Jindal Thermal Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT (TDS) (2010) 321 ITR 31 (Karn.) has held that an appeal u/s.248 is maintainable even though there was no adjudication by the Income Tax Authority under the Act. 5. The appeals filed by the Assessee were decided by the CIT(A) by consolidating the 23 appeals filed for the period comprising of months April, 2017 to February, 2019 (23 months). The CIT(A) passed a common ord…

M/S. Infosys Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle- 1(2), Bangalore

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2165/BANG/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.2145 To 2167/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2018-19 To 2019-20 (April To February 2019)

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

…g filed because the appeal is filed only for a declaration that no tax is payable on the sum paid to the non- resident in the hands of the non-resident in India. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Jindal Thermal Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT (TDS) (2010) 321 ITR 31 (Karn.) has held that an appeal u/s.248 is maintainable even though there was no adjudication by the Income Tax Authority under the Act. 5. The appeals filed by the Assessee were decided by the CIT(A) by consolidating the 23 appeals filed for the period comprising of months April, 2017 to February, 2019 (23 months). The CIT(A) passed a common ord…

M/S. Infosys Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle- 1(2), Bangalore

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2164/BANG/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.2145 To 2167/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2018-19 To 2019-20 (April To February 2019)

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

…g filed because the appeal is filed only for a declaration that no tax is payable on the sum paid to the non- resident in the hands of the non-resident in India. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Jindal Thermal Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT (TDS) (2010) 321 ITR 31 (Karn.) has held that an appeal u/s.248 is maintainable even though there was no adjudication by the Income Tax Authority under the Act. 5. The appeals filed by the Assessee were decided by the CIT(A) by consolidating the 23 appeals filed for the period comprising of months April, 2017 to February, 2019 (23 months). The CIT(A) passed a common ord…

M/S. Infosys Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle- 1(2), Bangalore

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2163/BANG/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.2145 To 2167/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2018-19 To 2019-20 (April To February 2019)

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

…g filed because the appeal is filed only for a declaration that no tax is payable on the sum paid to the non- resident in the hands of the non-resident in India. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Jindal Thermal Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT (TDS) (2010) 321 ITR 31 (Karn.) has held that an appeal u/s.248 is maintainable even though there was no adjudication by the Income Tax Authority under the Act. 5. The appeals filed by the Assessee were decided by the CIT(A) by consolidating the 23 appeals filed for the period comprising of months April, 2017 to February, 2019 (23 months). The CIT(A) passed a common ord…

M/S. Infosys Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle- 1(2), Bangalore

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2162/BANG/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.2145 To 2167/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2018-19 To 2019-20 (April To February 2019)

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

…g filed because the appeal is filed only for a declaration that no tax is payable on the sum paid to the non- resident in the hands of the non-resident in India. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Jindal Thermal Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT (TDS) (2010) 321 ITR 31 (Karn.) has held that an appeal u/s.248 is maintainable even though there was no adjudication by the Income Tax Authority under the Act. 5. The appeals filed by the Assessee were decided by the CIT(A) by consolidating the 23 appeals filed for the period comprising of months April, 2017 to February, 2019 (23 months). The CIT(A) passed a common ord…

M/S. Infosys Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle- 1(2), Bangalore

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2161/BANG/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.2145 To 2167/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2018-19 To 2019-20 (April To February 2019)

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

…g filed because the appeal is filed only for a declaration that no tax is payable on the sum paid to the non- resident in the hands of the non-resident in India. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Jindal Thermal Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT (TDS) (2010) 321 ITR 31 (Karn.) has held that an appeal u/s.248 is maintainable even though there was no adjudication by the Income Tax Authority under the Act. 5. The appeals filed by the Assessee were decided by the CIT(A) by consolidating the 23 appeals filed for the period comprising of months April, 2017 to February, 2019 (23 months). The CIT(A) passed a common ord…

M/S. Infosys Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle- 1(2), Bangalore

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2160/BANG/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.2145 To 2167/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2018-19 To 2019-20 (April To February 2019)

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

…g filed because the appeal is filed only for a declaration that no tax is payable on the sum paid to the non- resident in the hands of the non-resident in India. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Jindal Thermal Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT (TDS) (2010) 321 ITR 31 (Karn.) has held that an appeal u/s.248 is maintainable even though there was no adjudication by the Income Tax Authority under the Act. 5. The appeals filed by the Assessee were decided by the CIT(A) by consolidating the 23 appeals filed for the period comprising of months April, 2017 to February, 2019 (23 months). The CIT(A) passed a common ord…

M/S. Infosys Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle- 1(2), Bangalore

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2159/BANG/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(It)A Nos.2145 To 2167/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2018-19 To 2019-20 (April To February 2019)

For Appellant: Shri H. Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195ASection 248Section 249

…g filed because the appeal is filed only for a declaration that no tax is payable on the sum paid to the non- resident in the hands of the non-resident in India. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Jindal Thermal Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT (TDS) (2010) 321 ITR 31 (Karn.) has held that an appeal u/s.248 is maintainable even though there was no adjudication by the Income Tax Authority under the Act. 5. The appeals filed by the Assessee were decided by the CIT(A) by consolidating the 23 appeals filed for the period comprising of months April, 2017 to February, 2019 (23 months). The CIT(A) passed a common ord…