P.M.S. Diesels & Ors. v. Commissioner of Income Tax

374 ITR 562High Court2015#9969 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2023.

Judgments citing P.M.S. Diesels & Ors. v. Commissioner of Income Tax

ASUS INDIA PVT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE LD. ADDL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ACIT/ ITO, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2427/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Asus India Private Limited The Learned. 402, Supreme Chambers, Addl/Joint/Deputy/Acit/Ito 17-18 Shah Industrial Estate, Room No.305, Ara Centre 2-E Veera Desai Road, Vs. Jhandewalan Extn, New Delhi, Andheri (West), Delhi-110055 Mumbai-400 053 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajca6450C Assessee By : Mr. Vijay Mehta, Adv. Revenue By : Mr. Nihar Ranjan Samal, Sr. Ar Date Of Hearing: 19.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.08.2023

For Appellant: Mr. Vijay Mehta, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. Nihar Ranjan Samal, Sr. AR

Section 115JSection 143Section 144BSection 144CSection 194Section 194CSection 194HSection 40

…determine the true nature and character of the transaction, but all other ancillary and incidental facts have to be seen. In support of this contention, the learned D.R. relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble P&H High Court in PMS Diesels & Ors v. CIT [2015] 374 ITR 562 (P&H). 10. In rejoinder, the learned Authorised Representative submitted, the learned Counsel for the Revenue has misconceived the facts as the assessee has not sold any product directly to the end user. As regards the invoice placed at Page-27 of the paper book referred to ITA No. 2427/Mum/2022; Asus India Private Ltd; 2018-19 by the learned De…

SHRI SATNAM SINGH WADHAWA,PROP M/S PALI TRANSPORT & M/S COAL MOVERS,H.NO. 20,BEEDPARA, WARD NO.10,DIST: RAIGARH(CG) vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), MAHIMA COMPLEX, VYAPAR VIHAR, BILASPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed in terms of my aforesaid observations

ITA 177/RPR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur23 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 177/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Satnam Singh Wadhawa Prop. M/S. Patil Transport & M/S. Coal Movers, H. No.20, Beedpara, Ward No.10, Dist. Raigarh (C.G.) Pan :Aahpw1157H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Gitesh Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 40

…il Appeal No.5512 of 2017; dated 03.05.2017. In its aforesaid order, the Hon’ble Supreme Court upholding the view taken by the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of P.M.S. Diesels & Ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax –2, Jalandhar & Ors., (2015) 374 ITR 562 (P&H) had rejected the claim of the assessee that the term “payable” in Section 6 Shri Satnam Singh Wadhawa Vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1) 40(a)(ia) would mean only when the amount is payable, and not when it is actually paid. Accordingly, now when the aforesaid issue is no more res-integra pursuant to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, therefore,…

SHRI KAALI TEXTILE,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 12(4), CHENNAI

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

ITA 993/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.993/Chny/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr.G.Johnson, Addl.CIT

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 200Section 40

…es. We noted that all the arguments raised in the grounds :- 3 -: of appeal by the assessee are already been considered by the decisions of various High Courts viz., the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of PMS Diesels v. CIT reported in [2015] 374 ITR 562 (P&H), the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT v. Crescent Export Syndicate reported in [2013] 1 ITR-OL 1 (Cal), the Hon’ble High Madras Court in the case of Tube Investments of India Ltd. v. ACIT reported in (TDS) [2010] 325 ITR 610 (Mad) and also by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s.Palam Gas Service v.C…

ASUS INDIA PVT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIRCLE- 9 (1)(2), MUMBAI

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

ITA 7831/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 194CSection 40

…termine the true nature and character of the transaction, but all other ancillary and incidental facts have to be seen. In support of this contention, the learned D.R. relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble P&H High Court in PMS Diesels & Ors v/s CIT, [2015] 374 ITR 562 (P&H). 10. In rejoinder, the learned Authorised Representative submitted, the learned Counsel for the Revenue has misconceived the facts as the assessee has not sold any product directly to the end user. As regards the invoice placed at Page-27 of the paper book referred to by the learned Departmental Representative, the learned Authorised Repres…

SH. RANA,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, LUDHIANA

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

ITA 171/CHANDI/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna, Addl. CIT

Section 253(5)Section 40

…0(a)(ia) of the Act are not applicable. 6. The reply so filed by the assessee was not found acceptable to the AO. As per the AO, the matter is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of P.M.S. Diesel Vs. CIT 374 ITR 562 wherein it has been held that the term ‘payable’ is descriptive of the payment which attract the liability to deduct tax at source and it does not categorize default on the basis when the payments are actually made to the payee which attract liability to deduct tax at source. Accordingly, the AO made an addition of Rs.48,19,477/- by invoking t…

M/S. BALASORE CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD.,BALASORE vs. ACIT, BALASORE CIRCLE, BALASORE

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

ITA 467/CTK/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack07 Oct 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.467/Ctk/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) M/S Balasore Cooperative Bank Vs. Acit, Balasore Circle, Limited, Balasore Bibekananda Marg, Balasore-756001 Pan No. : Aaccb 7823 M (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.N.Sahu/Somnath Sahoo,Advs राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 13/08/2020 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/10/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A), Cuttack, Dated 04.08.2017, For The Assessment Year 2012-2013, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- 1) That The Order Of The Id. Cit(Appeals) Confirming The Additions & Disallowances Made By The A.O. Is Illegal, Arbitrary, Unjustified & Not In Accordance With Law. 2) That The Addition Of Rs. 36,79,148/- U/S. 40(A)(Ia) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 Confirmed By Cit(Appeals) To The Extent Of Rs. 36,30,998/- Is Illegal, Arbitrary, Uncalled For & Not In Accordance With Law & The Same Should Have Been Deleted By The Learned Cit(Appeals). 3) That The Disallowance U/S 40(A)(Ia) Of Rs. 36,79,148/- As Detailed Below Is Illegal, Arbitrary & Unjustified & Hence Should Have Been Deleted By The Learned Cit(A) As The Genuineness Is Not In Doubt. Non-Deduction Of Tds Is A Separate Issue. A) Commission Payment To Dlds Collection Agents Rs. 33,45,248/- B) Legal Expenses Rs. 2,52,000/- C) Audit Fees Rs. 81,900/-

For Appellant: Shri S.N.Sahu/Somnath Sahoo,AdvsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR

Section 36Section 40Section 43B

…e (supra) is a direct answer to all the contentions urged on behalf of the appellant in the present case. In that case, this Court approved the views of Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of P.M.S. Diesels and Ors. v. Commissioner of Income-Tax: (2015) 374 ITR 562 as regards mandatory nature of the provisions relating to the liability to deduct tax at source in the following words (at pp. 306-308 of ITR):- "11. The Punjab & Haryana High Court in P.M.S. Diesels v. CIT [2015] 374 ITR 562 (P&H), has held these provisions to be mandatory in nature with the following observations: "The liability to deduct tax a…

ASUS INDIA PVT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIRCLE- 9(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 942/MUM/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Oct 2020AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Harit

Section 194CSection 40

…termine the true nature and character of the transaction, but all other ancillary and incidental facts have to be seen. In support of this contention, the learned D.R. relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble P&H High Court in PMS Diesels & Ors v/s CIT, [2015] 374 ITR 562 (P&H). 10. In rejoinder, the learned Authorised Representative submitted, the learned Counsel for the Revenue has misconceived the facts as the assessee has not sold any product directly to the end user. As regards the invoice placed at Page–27 of the paper book referred to by the learned Departmental Representative, the learned Authorised Repre…

SHREE CHOUDHARY TRANSPORT CO. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

C.A. No.-007865-007865 - 2009Supreme Court29 Jul 2020

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI

Section 40

…is a direct answer to all the contentions urged on behalf of the appellant in the present case. In that case, this Court approved the views of Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of P.M.S. Diesels and Ors. v. Commissioner of Income-Tax: (2015) 374 ITR 562 as regards mandatory nature of the provisions relating to the liability to deduct tax at source in the following words (at pp. 306-308 of ITR):- 36 “11. The Punjab & Haryana High Court in P.M.S. Diesels v. CIT [2015] 374 ITR 562 (P&H), has held these provisions to be mandatory in nature with the following observations: “The liability to dedu…

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. ESKAY DESIGNS, CHENNAI

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

ITA 247/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 247/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Eskay Designs, No. 25, 1St Street, Cenotaph Road, Income Tax, Non-Corporate Circle 3, Vs. 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Teynampet, Chennai 600 018. Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aaafe1480C] (Appellant) (Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Mrs. S. Vijayaprabha, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri K. Ravi, Advocate सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 07.02.2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.02.2018 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) 4, Chennai Dated 31.10.2016 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2012-13. The First Issue Raised In The Appeal Of The Revenue Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Directing To Assess The Rental Income Received By The Assessee On Sub-Letting Of Its Leased Out Properties Under The Head “Income From House Property” & The Second Issue Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Directing To Allow The Expenses If They Are Paid As On 2

For Appellant: Mrs. S. Vijayaprabha, JCITFor Respondent: Shri K. Ravi, Advocate

Section 27Section 40

…stipulated time. The time within which the payment is to be deposited with the Central Government is mentioned in Rule 30(2) of the Rules. 11) The Punjab & Haryana High Court in P.M.S. Diesels & Ors. v. Commissioner of Income Tax – 2, Jalandhar & Ors., (2015) 374 ITR 562, has held these provisions to be mandatory in nature with the following observations: “13. The liability to deduct tax at source under the provisions of Chapter XVII is mandatory. A person responsible for paying any sum is also liable to deposit the amount in the Government account. All the sections in Chapter XVII-B require a person to deduct th…

KRISHNAMURTHY SRINIVASAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 3396/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Jul 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.3396/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 Shri Krishnamurthy Srinivasan, The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 1C, Vanagaram Road, Athipet, Vs. Income Tax, Ambattur Industrial Estate, Ambattur, Non Corporate Circle 7(1), Chennai 600 058. Chennai. [Pan:Bbkps4428J] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Mohamed Mustafa, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 25.05.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12.07.2017 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 7, Chennai, Dated 17.10.2016 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2012-13. The Only Effective Ground Raised By The Assessee Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Of ₹.75,66,470/- Made Under Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Mohamed Mustafa, JCIT

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194Section 201(1)Section 40Section 44A

M/S. TRIAMBAKE INFO TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3732/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini

Section 133(6)Section 40

…which it was held that “provisions u/s 40(a)(ia) would cover amount payable at any time during Page 6 of 6 the accounting year”. The issue is also decided against the assessee by judgment of Hon’ble P & H High Court in the case of P.M.S.Diesels reported in 374 ITR 562 in which on the same principle, the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed. No infirmity has been pointed out in the order of the Ld.CIT(A), therefore, the appeal of the assessee has no merit, the same is accordingly dismissed. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. The order is pronounced in the open court. (BHAVNESH SA…